Which are the best "current" 9/11 truth documentaries?

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 04:46 PM
link   
I'm a bit out of touch with the up to date 9/11 documentaries or brief short clips. I'm from the old school of Loose Change, September Clues, 911 Mysteries, etc.

I have a friend who is sort of the alpha male of this group of acquaintances of mine, he is a long time Mensa member, and completely cemented in to the 9/11 Official Story. He's well read, 100s of books on many subjects, but he has no real depth beyond those pages of his books. He lacks the ability to think outside of the box, or outside the books in his case.

We got into an argument about jet fuel taking down the towers, and he wouldn't even discuss building 7 with me. He thinks I'm "out there" because of the things I speak about, you know the type I'm talking about... "9/11 was totally an inside job"... cue eye roll


So I was wondering, since I'm out of the current 9/11 truth research loop, which are the best documentaries to link him to as of 2012?

Thanks in advance.




posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 04:58 PM
link   
I've found that "911: In Plane Site" is a decent movie to direct someone to watch. It was released in 2007 and can be found on Netflix or Youtube. It's an easier approach to the subject than say a film like "Loose Change" is.

Check it out.

edit on 17-3-2012 by TheLieWeLive because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by JibbyJedi
I'm a bit out of touch with the up to date 9/11 documentaries or brief short clips. I'm from the old school of Loose Change, September Clues, 911 Mysteries, etc.

I have a friend who is sort of the alpha male of this group of acquaintances of mine, he is a long time Mensa member, and completely cemented in to the 9/11 Official Story. He's well read, 100s of books on many subjects, but he has no real depth beyond those pages of his books. He lacks the ability to think outside of the box, or outside the books in his case.

We got into an argument about jet fuel taking down the towers, and he wouldn't even discuss building 7 with me. He thinks I'm "out there" because of the things I speak about, you know the type I'm talking about... "9/11 was totally an inside job"... cue eye roll


So I was wondering, since I'm out of the current 9/11 truth research loop, which are the best documentaries to link him to as of 2012?

Thanks in advance.



I think the 9/11 doco thing has run it's course.

Tell him to buy Dr. Judy Wood' book "Where Did The Towers Go", oh and buy yourself a copy while you at it.



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by downunderET
 


The book might be more appealing to him, he does love documentaries though. Mainstream documentaries though, History Channel, Discovery Channel, NASA bs, all the stuff they want us to soak up unquestionably.

I think the 9/11 documentaries have run their courses too, but a lot of people haven't even began their venture down the rabbit hole, so they may still be helpful to those people.



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 08:55 PM
link   
reply to post by JibbyJedi
 


Well.. just a reply as to how I have handled this sort of situation before with more than a few acquaintances along the lines as to which you speak over the years..

Simply put.. patience.

Ask right off the bat what their personal thresh hold of coincidences, governmental white lies, scientific precedents set, FAA regulations breached, investigative Federal Policies not followed, etc, etc.. tailor this to your friends foundation where ever the jump point is for believing the "official" story.. that your friend will call the glass ceiling & would at least concede an independent inquiry is justified..

Then proceed to have a weekly monthly exchange of idea's about the situation.. writing down facts, unknowns, conflicting stories, questionable government/military actions.. that can not be explained by the Commission Report, or other ABC agencies.. Science or else can not be verified at truth.

Even if your friend picks 300 things that were odd, coincidence, or required society to throw out precedence .. then laughs about it.. could be 500.. you will get there.. eventually the "well this is shaky" column will out stack all others.. and logically he or she will have to conclude, in his or her own time frame, that far too many "facts" about the "official" report are not so "factual" at all..if even mentioned "officially"..

all the war games..

the black boxes being destroyed...

Able Danger including Atta & the like.. then being erased..

on & on

you & your friend will go..

until he realizes its all a sham..

just an idea that has worked for me over the last 11 years..

peace & good luck



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 03:59 AM
link   
"9/11 blueprint for truth" has been the best presentation I have seen so far with the focus on how the WTC building fell.


Google Video Link


It presents a very strong case that is backed up by a lot of scientific research and investigation. It was put together by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 truth, www.ae911truth.org... A lot of peer review has been applied with serious concerns raised with the official story. I do consider the arguments presented to be strong enough to stand up in a court of law.



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 04:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by JibbyJedi
which are the best documentaries to link him to as of 2012?


screw loose change, truthaction.org...



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 04:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by kwakakev
I do consider the arguments presented to be strong enough to stand up in a court of law.


so you think this would stand up in court - So why havent they taken it to court....

edit on 18-3-2012 by spoor because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 05:11 AM
link   
reply to post by spoor
 


For the same reason that every other court case that touches on the 9/11 subject gets dismissed with extreme prejudice. Even a petition to the ICC about the Bush 6 torture policy contravening the Geneva Convention has failed. For whatever reason, the legal system is not ready to confront this.



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 12:55 PM
link   
I have yet to see anything that I regard as superior to 9/11 Mysteries.

Almost everything else goes into conspiracy theories with lots of speculation and merely circumstantial evidence.

When has Richard Gage discussed how the steel has to be distributed down a skyscraper? Shouldn't a MENSA member be able to figure out the importance of that in skyscrapers?

psik



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by JibbyJedi
I'm a bit out of touch with the up to date 9/11 documentaries or brief short clips. I'm from the old school of Loose Change, September Clues, 911 Mysteries, etc.

I have a friend who is sort of the alpha male of this group of acquaintances of mine, he is a long time Mensa member, and completely cemented in to the 9/11 Official Story. He's well read, 100s of books on many subjects, but he has no real depth beyond those pages of his books. He lacks the ability to think outside of the box, or outside the books in his case.

We got into an argument about jet fuel taking down the towers, and he wouldn't even discuss building 7 with me. He thinks I'm "out there" because of the things I speak about, you know the type I'm talking about... "9/11 was totally an inside job"... cue eye roll


So I was wondering, since I'm out of the current 9/11 truth research loop, which are the best documentaries to link him to as of 2012?


So let me get this straight...it's not enough that your friend can simply believe something different than you do. You're now devoting yourself to "teaching him the truth about the 9/11 attack" and you don't particularly care which conspiracy theory it happens to be. If you can find an excellent "lasers from outer space" flick that'll be just as good as a "hologram planes" book, just as long as it's better to use than Loose Change to throw at your friend in the hopes you can convert him.

You'll excuse me when I say this is the mindset of a religious zealot trying to convert others into your own faith, rather than simply being a genuine researcher. You've all but admitted you lost the discussion with your friend because you couldn't repeat these conspiracy claims using same sexy sounding rhetoric that was used to feed it to you.



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by kwakakev
reply to post by spoor
 


For the same reason that every other court case that touches on the 9/11 subject gets dismissed with extreme prejudice. Even a petition to the ICC about the Bush 6 torture policy contravening the Geneva Convention has failed. For whatever reason, the legal system is not ready to confront this.


OR, it's the same reason the Wizard of Oz told Dorothy to "pay no attention to that man behind the curtain". Richard Gage is uniquely qualified to conduct his own serious research as he has profesional architectural training, he has the blueprints to the towers, he has miles of video showign the exact progression of the collapse taken from every angle, he has the exact composition of these explosives as per Dr. Jones, he has all these "thousands of professionals" who are supposedly chomping at the bit to help him "find the truth", he has a mechanism to collect tens of thousands of dollars, and most importantly he's actively trying to "find out the truth" behind the 9/11 attack. It would be easy for someone like that to reverse engineer the collapse to irrefutably show they were brought down by controlled demolitions. Where they were planted, in what order they were set off, how much explosives were used, all of that, he could figure out in a month.

Yet, all he does is play with cardboard boxes like an eight year old and find new and exciting ways to ask people for more money in order to pay to create new and exciting ways to ask people for more money. Would you mind explaining why?



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 05:01 PM
link   
Have you ever had the opportunity to watch this;



from just befor the 1 hour mark to about 1hr 13 they speak with Lloyd England the cab driver who's taxi was "hit by a lightpole" outside the Pentagon

The entire film focuses on the Pentagon attack and the eye witness testimoney of people in the area that day including 2 police officers who were at the citgo (sp) gas station. Anyway LLoyds piece is by far the most interesting to me. Its not conclusive but worth a viewing.

NSA - Lloyd was much more candid when he didn't realise he was being recorded

Lloyd - Do you know what history is?
It's not the truth, it his story!
It has nothing to do with the truth its his story!
This is too big for me man this is a big thing
Man you know this is a world thing happeneing, I'm a small man
My life style is completely different to this
I'm not supposed to be involved in this
This is for other people. People who have money and all this kind of stuff
NSA - ..........."inaudible to me"?
Lloyd - Well I'm not supposed to be involved with this, I don't have nothing
NSA - The people who have all the money........
Lloyd - This is their thing
This is for them
Thats right
I'm not supposed to be in it
I'm in it
We came across that highway together
It was planned
One thing about it you gotta understand something
When people do things and get away with it, you eventually it going to come to me
And when it comes to me it's going to be so big I can't do nothing about it
So it has to be stopped in the beginning when it is small
You see to keep it from spreading..............

You need to watch the Link to get the context, but basically the documentor has questioned his story and inspite of photographic evidence that Lloyd is looking at, he has to stick to a story, his story, someones narrative.

Total run time 1hr 20 min and well worth a viewing.



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 07:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by psikeyhackr
I have yet to see anything that I regard as superior to 9/11 Mysteries.


Yes, doctoring footage like Sophia the producer did in this "documentary" makes it a great watch! Rick Siegel the owner of some of the footage was suing her (several years ago) for "adding fabricated explosions" to it.

great documentary, Truther!



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 07:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Six Sigma

Originally posted by psikeyhackr
I have yet to see anything that I regard as superior to 9/11 Mysteries.


Yes, doctoring footage like Sophia the producer did in this "documentary" makes it a great watch! Rick Siegel the owner of some of the footage was suing her (several years ago) for "adding fabricated explosions" to it.

great documentary, Truther!


It appears that the Idaho Observer does not quite support your position.



9/11 Eyewitness vs. 9/11 Mysteries

Rick Siegel sues Sofia Smallstorm in Federal Lawsuit

by The Idaho Observer

proliberty.com...


It appears that Rick Siegel seems to have forgotten the thesis of “911 Eyewitness” itself – the film created by his partner Dave Shaw to demonstrate the pre- and mid-collapse explosions caught by Siegel’s camera as the towers collapsed. Siegel has expressed outrage toward Smallstorm on the Internet and in public emails for using the word “collapsed” at all – insisting the towers “exploded.” Additionally, “911 Mysteries” does not contend who was behind 9/11 ... in fact, the film is famous for its neutral and evidence-based presentation.

The last two years have been spent exchanging letters between lawyers – with Smallstorm explaining as clearly as possible what transpired between her and Siegel’s partners, who were published joint copyright holders to the “911 Eyewitness” film. Six years after he shot his “Original Footage,” Siegel registered an official copyright with the U.S. Copyright Office, and also copyrighted “911 Eyewitness” in his name. He maintains today that his partners were never authorized to give anyone permission to use his footage.


That is the thing about 9/11. Endless misleading bullsh# and partial information. People spread partial information that misdirects people in the direction they prefer.

I don't know what was or was not changed. A couple of seconds of supposed explosions in the discussion of a skyscraper collapse is irrelevant. There are plenty of witnesses to explosions on 9/11.

Using Truther for name calling is so impressive when your accusation is so shallow and easily exposed.

psik
edit on 18-3-2012 by psikeyhackr because: bolding



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 09:19 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 




OR, it's the same reason the Wizard of Oz told Dorothy to "pay no attention to that man behind the curtain".


After reviewing Monarch, it sounds more like a case of "pay no attention to the facts behind the curtain". Tens of thousands of dollars is not a lot compared to the resources for the official story over the years, hell just the pay packet of some of the people putting together the official story far out strips this. With all the loose ends, holes and disregarded facts around the case it has not been good value for money on the investigative side.



Yet, all he does is play with cardboard boxes like an eight year old and find new and exciting ways to ask people for more money in order to pay to create new and exciting ways to ask people for more money. Would you mind explaining why?


Because once you can accept that a miscarriage of justice has taken place, the case for demolition is simple enough for an 8 year old to understand.



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 10:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Yet, all he does is play with cardboard boxes like an eight year old and find new and exciting ways to ask people for more money in order to pay to create new and exciting ways to ask people for more money. Would you mind explaining why?


Yeah, it is pretty absurd that he can't do better than cardboard boxes after all of these years.

psik



posted on Mar, 19 2012 @ 07:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by psikeyhackr


It appears that the Idaho Observer does not quite support your position.



Yes, and that's the same as saying Sophia "clickity clunk" Smallstorm doesn't support my position. The Idaho Observer is best known for supporting 9/11 Truthers, Holistic Medicine, and Anti-Vaccine advocates. Yes, a true reputable media source.





That is the thing about 9/11 truthers. Endless misleading bullsh# and partial information. Truthers spread partial information that misdirects people in the direction they prefer.


Fixed that for ya!


I don't know what was or was not changed. A couple of seconds of supposed explosions in the discussion of a skyscraper collapse is irrelevant.


Well, since all you cared to do was read the Idaho Observer, you will never know. That's a truther for you.. what was that again? "Misdirects people in the direction they prefer." Sort of like you telling the OP to watch a video you should have known had doctored footage in it.

Bad form, Truther.

edit on 19-3-2012 by Six Sigma because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 19 2012 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Six Sigma

Bad form, Truther.


YAWN!

Whether or not some sounds of explosions were added to a little segment of film has no effect on the conservation of momentum. I don't know and don't particularly care. You just know a suit was filed. You don't know if it was actually changed or not.

The NIST can spend 3 years and $20,000,000 to produce a 10,000 page report but they can't specify the total amount of concrete in the towers though they do it for the steel.

You regard that as good form no doubt but anybody that wants to can check it for themselves. They don't have to rely on the word of two people arguing with each other.

psik



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 08:19 AM
link   




Whether or not some sounds of explosions were added to a little segment of film has no effect on the conservation of momentum. I don't know and don't particularly care. You just know a suit was filed. You don't know if it was actually changed or not.



Sir, the topic of discussion is: "Which are the best "current" 9/11 truth documentaries?". Your suggestion was one that the producer; intentionally mislead viewers by inserting explosions into her documentary. Yes, I do know it was doctored. You, obviously unable to research this for yourself will ignore it and attempt to change the subject of this thread with your typical NIST rant. Have at it, truther. I will leave you with a great line from the producer of your suggested documentary Sophia:





Regardless, I tell people, these buildings fell in 10 seconds, they’re 110 stories. Now let’s just use our mouth to demonstrate this. If a pancake collapse can be described as “clunkity clunk” How many times can you say that in 10 seconds? And if one floor is “clunkity clunk clunkity clunk” you cannot say that 110 times in 10 seconds. So let’s even give it the benefit of the doubt, let’s just take off the “clunk”. Let’s just say “clunkity”. You can’t say that in 10 seconds, 110 times.




Yes, truthers, go watch 9/11 Mysteries - The Clunkity Cluck Version!





new topics




 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join