99% Undeniable Conclusive Evidence That 9/11 was a Terror Attack

Good evening,

Lets debunk someone who is trying to debunk something with short, quick statements and providing absolutely no connection to the events described. Loose Change and it's follow up's with extended footage were first released in 2005. Since then, it has become a bible for those who feel the government, with clandestine projects, theoretical weapons and deciding it was best to kill 3000 citizens pulled off 9/11.

From FEMA handbooks to UAV's to hand picked eye witnesses Loose Change paints one picture but it is not necessarily true. You be the judge.

I offer this video as a conuter to Loose Change to let people easily see two sides of a story and not just one. When you are not given a comparison and are spoon fed information it is easy to lead someone to a conclusion. Just ask a good lawyer. You draw them in and can make them believe anything.

Google Video Link

Please, do not simply disregard and take to time to watch this to make an informed decision. One movie may have changed your mind so why not try another?

The other thread you discussed contains massive amounts of information along
with that video. All i'm seeing in your thread is one video with no other supporting
information. So i'm supposed to believe your thread is correct compared to a thread
which includes many facts that took place that day and the days/weeks/months afterwards?

I think not.

Duh! of course it was a terror attack, that was the point. If the people weren't terrified they wouldn't have agreed to go into Afghanistan (for oil and opium) and they wouldn't have agreed to the eroding of our rights through the implementation of the Patriot Act.

Of the fact that it was a terror attack there is no doubt. Nor is there doubt about the fact that Osama bin Laden was a CIA asset, the fact that the CIA armed and trained All CIA'duh as the Mujahadeen in the 80's, the fact that terrorists did not benefit from the attack but the rising police state certainly did, the fact that a Bush (Marvin) was a principal in the company that provided security for the WTC, the fact that there were all sorts of Put options on the stock market in the days prior to the attack.

There is 100% conclusive evidence that 9/11 was a terror attack. As to who the actual terrorists that were involved in it are...

The question really is.. who were the real terrorists?

you are correct. It was terror.. but it was governmental, elite, military, political terrorism.

Thanks for starting the thread.

Of course it was a terror attack. People got scared under attack and it caused them to be terrified. Job done.

It was also a financial fraud, the worlds greatest ever robbery, the smartest ever demolition to avoid costly asbestos removal from a crumbling building and above all the greatest ever propaganda coup to get the people behind all these wars killing brown people for their countries assets.

So what was 9-11? it was the single boldest criminal and political act in mankinds history - so much accomplished by doing so little.


All my opinion of course - however the events since 9-11 the 'new pearl harbour' speaks volumes.

War On Terra. uh huh its certainly that.

reply to post by esdad71


Sigh, at least people on both sides are using "99%" instead of "100%" now. While I will have to agree that there is a possibility that (at least some of) the official story is correct, it is my opinion that the evidence leans heavily to something other than what the 9/11 commission reported. There were several insinuations in the documentary "Loose Change" that were too far-fetched for me to believe. However, there were several other points that your documentary couldn't cover without being 20 hours long, such as: at the VERY least, that members of our government seemed to have had prior knowledge of the attacks, if not directly orchestrating them. Beyond that, "Loose Change" is hardly the definitive expose on alternative theories about the attacks on 9/11. There are so many more loose ends to tie up with the official story that this issue will never be solved in its entirety. We do need to make an effort though, by allowing there to be an officially sanctioned, independent review of what little evidence remains. There are millions of Americans who deserve to have their valid concerns addressed.
Edit to add: is anyone else having trouble with the link? I actually want to watch this if it indeed has any points to make so that I can be more informed on an issue that I believe to be very important, and don't wish to spread any disinformation.

And after watching the above, you can watch the rebuttal to the above video here:

Part 1:
www.youtube.com...

Part 2:
www.youtube.com...

Part 3:
www.youtube.com...

Part 4:
www.youtube.com...

Part 5:
www.youtube.com...

Part 6:
www.youtube.com...

Part 7:
www.youtube.com...


Just so we can keep it all nice and rounded.

Originally posted by Q:1984A:1776
Edit to add: is anyone else having trouble with the link? I actually want to watch this if it indeed has any points to make so that I can be more informed on an issue that I believe to be very important, and don't wish to spread any disinformation.

Here's the fixed link:

Google Video Link

reply to post by Q:1984A:1776


Well said, friend.

I think what drives me most crazy about the whole thing is the ridiculous amount of shadiness that took place on the "official story" side. I'm willing to assume that I could be wrong in my view that the attack may have been carried out by someone inside the american government/power structures, but so many things keep cropping up.

These are honest questions, BTW, not arguments - if any are misunderstood on my part or anyone can answer, I'd appreciate:

Why did Bush effectively refuse to set up a commission to investigate for so long?

Why did Bush and Cheney refuse to testify without conditions - not under oath, not alone, etc.?

There are cameras ALL OVER the pentagon, and around it, and multiple tapes were seized by the FBI, etc., within minutes of the attack - yet years later, we finally get what, 5 frames released - why not release all the tapes as surely some of them must have recorded the plane coming in as well as the strike itself?

Why obstruct and effectively lie to the 9/11 Commission itself? I believe some members of the commission are now on record stating things were constantly hindering them and that they were willfully misled by the administration, et al. - why?

Why, despite the nature of the attacks themselves and destruction of so many other involved items do we have such "smoking gun" evidence, which makes no sense, turning up conveniently? Hijacker luggage containing all sorts of incriminating evidence that they wouldn't even need to take on such one-way flights, undamaged IDs miraculously showing up at attacks sites...seriously?

So so many more questions along these lines have cropped up in what little bit I've looked into this over the years - maybe someone can direct me to the answers if they're out there, as I haven't come across them myself, but when there's basically a mountain of such, I'm forced to wonder if a conspiracy by 3rd-worlders or a conspiracy by the well-connected and ambitious in our own midst makes more sense.

Especially when the response by our leaders seems to have been contrived immediately - looking for reasons to blame and go after Saddam...almost immediately announcing bin Laden as the perpetrator (as far as I'm aware, the FBI STILL officially hasn't acknowledged any evidence linking him to 9/11, hence never charging him)...if to this point there is still no evidence, why finger him IMMEDIATELY after the attack? And then, why oh why would we do exactly what one of his purported videos claimed he wanted us to do - get embroiled and mired down overseas and work toward bankrupting ourselves?

Ugh, enough. I'm getting upset now. Take care.

reply to post by Myendica


lol you beat me to it,

so let me roll with it

what's with all the flood of posts promoting the official version,lately?

i'm gonna go out on a limb here [adjusts tinfoil]:

preparing us for the Sep 11,2011 false flag maybe?

here is an old site that dissects the loose change movies..
emptv.com...

reply to post by pccat


I'm not sure why everybody picks the Loose Change movies for arguments. There have been at least 4 or 5 other films on the 9/11 anomalies that, in my opinion were much better, but guess what...they still question the OS.