Some more 'Fuel to the fire' (no pun intended)

Found at:

http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2006...ers26jan06.htm


Some of the testimonies suggested that more than one explosion occurred in one tower or the other. FDNY Captain Dennis Tardio, speaking of the south tower, said: "I hear an explosion and I look up. It is as if the building is being imploded, from the top floor down, one after another, boom, boom, boom."10
In June of 2002, NBC television played segments from tapes recorded on 9/11. One segment contained the following exchange, which involved firefighters in the south tower:

Official: Battalion 3 to dispatch, we've just had another explosion.
Official: Battalion 3 to dispatch, we've had additional explosion.
Dispatcher: Received battalion command. Additional explosion.11

Firefighter Louie Cacchioli, after entering the north tower lobby and seeing elevator doors completely blown out and people being hit with debris, asked himself, “how could this be happening so quickly if a plane hit way above?” After he reached the 24th floor, he and another fireman “heard this huge explosion that sounded like a bomb [and] knocked off the lights and stalled the elevator.” After they pried themselves out of the elevator, “another huge explosion like the first one hits. This one hits about two minutes later . . . [and] I’m thinking, ‘Oh. My God, these bastards put bombs in here like they did in 1993!’”12
Multiple explosions were also reported by Teresa Veliz, who worked for a software development company in the north tower. She was on the 47th floor, she reported, when suddenly “the whole building shook. . . . [Shortly thereafter] the building shook again, this time even more violently." Then, while Veliz was making her way downstairs and outside: “There were explosions going off everywhere. I was convinced that there were bombs planted all over the place and someone was sitting at a control panel pushing detonator buttons. . . . There was another explosion. And another. I didn't know where to run."13
Steve Evans, a New York-based correspondent for the BBC, said: “I was at the base of the second tower . . . that was hit. . . . There was an explosion. . . . The base of the building shook. . . . [T]hen there was a series of explosions.”14
Sue Keane, an officer in the New Jersey Fire Police Department who was previously a sergeant in the U.S. Army, said in her account of the onset of the collapse of the south tower: “[I]t sounded like bombs going off. That's when the explosions happened. . . . I knew something was going to happen. . . . It started to get dark, then all of a sudden there was this massive explosion.” Then, discussing her experiences during the collapse of the north tower, she said: “[There was] another explosion. That sent me and the two firefighters down the stairs. . . . I can't tell you how many times I got banged around. Each one of those explosions picked me up and threw me. . . . There was another explosion, and I got thrown with two firefighters out onto the street.”15
Wall Street Journal reporter John Bussey, describing his observation of the collapse of the south tower from the ninth floor of the WSJ office building, said: “I . . . looked up out of the office window to see what seemed like perfectly synchronized explosions coming from each floor. . . . One after the other, from top to bottom, with a fraction of a second between, the floors blew to pieces.”16
Another Wall Street Journal reporter said that after seeing what appeared to be “individual floors, one after the other exploding outward,” he thought: “‘My God, they’re going to bring the building down.’ And they, whoever they are, HAD SET CHARGES. . . . I saw the explosions.”17
A similar perception was reported by Beth Fertig of WNYC Radio, who said: “It just descended like a timed explosion—like when they are deliberately bringing a building down. . . . It was coming down so perfectly that in one part of my brain I was thinking, 'They got everyone out, and they're bringing the building down because they have to.'”18
A more graphic testimony to this perception was provided on the film made by the Naudet brothers. In a clip from that film, one can watch two firemen describing their experiences to other firemen.

Fireman 1: “We made it outside, we made it about a block . . . .”
Fireman 2: “We made it at least two blocks and we started running.” He makes explosive sounds and then uses a chopping hand motion to emphasize his next point: “Floor by floor it started popping out . . . .”
Fireman 1: “It was as if they had detonated--as if they were planning to take down a building, boom boom boom boom boom . . . .”
Fireman 2: “All the way down. I was watching it and running. And then you just saw this cloud of shit chasing you down.”19

Interesting point that correlates to something I read a few weeks ago. Check out the story of John O'Neill.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_P._O'Neill

He was tasked with investigating the Kenya, Tanzania and USS Cole bombing. He reportedly fell out of favor with the powers that be. He then took on a job as Head of Security for the World Trade Center in August 2006. He was reported to be in his office at the top of one of the towers when the planes hit.

Coincidence?

You're right. Bush is but a mere pawn in all of this. Makes you wonder who (or, more accurately, what group) is really at the top.

Sadly, you're right. The exportation of the culture is everywhere - I am sick of seeing McDonalds and only hearing English-language music all around me.

But Islamic fundamentalism - that's an interesting issue here. Is this really what is behind any of this? I don't think so, really. Sure, there's a divide between Islamic extremists and fundamentalists and non-fundamentalists (muslim, christian, name your flavor). But there's also a divide between mormons and non-mormons, fundamentalist christians and average christians, etc. I think this is just fuel to the fire, and sure - some people get caught up in it and try to emulate what they're seeing in the news. But is Islamic fundamentalism really the driving force behind western-targeted terrorism? Probably not. Or maybe I'm just a jaded fool

Are things really so bad back there? That to speak out against the Patroit Act, illegal wiretapping, etc. etc. etc. causes you to be labeled "unpatriotic"?

It scares me, looking back at the US from a distance. I keep seeing 1984, the slow erosion of freedom of thought. Stockholm syndrome, in a weird way.

__________________

That's what made it good. A disturbing avatar is a good avatar!


Logical, yes. I think you are most likely right.

The big question is then - what happened to the people on this flight and the one that allegedly crashed in Pennsylvania?

It got a bit weird then, definitely. Diagrams of shuffling people, I kind of zoned a bit then as well.

But the calls - they *did* seem scripted. And like they said - who calls their mom and gives their last name?

I've seen quite a few references to shuffled people, etc. online - but who knows the validity of any of it. My biggest question is with that is: what happened to the people? They didn't just disappear, why aren't they speaking out? Killed? Brainwashed? Paid? Witness relocation program? That's the thing that keeps me from buying into the people shuffling idea.

The real patriots are those who question authority, question the status quo and what we're being told. Even those of us who aren't so keen on the country where they were born

__________________

I'd not heard of him by name before...interesting, very, very interesting.

Danke...and yes, I am!

Indeed, Cleveland is an ugly city on Lake Erie, but sometimes - just sometimes - I miss the smokestack that blows flames (from the steel plant).
The carpark frames don't show anything but that flash of silver that they mentioned earlier - something not generally related to airplane fires.

What could have taken out those light posts? Normal jets seem to crash the moment they hit something like that, but this one was able to hit the Pentagon with such precision - and pull the light posts off their platforms, not just knock them over or sever them? And then there's the small issue of that white marking, showing nearly the exact path of whatever it was that really did hit the Pentagon.

It is almost like that was a war game, played in real life.

__________________

The thing about America that is difficult for non-americans to understand is that America is a conglomeration of a multitude of different tribes. In most every other place in the world, there has always been a tradition of Lords and Serfs. America was founded by a group of individuals who rebelled against the feudalistic system of Europe. So while the common question of "Who is responsible at the top?" may be valid to ask of other nations, of America, the answer is often "No one in particular".

I often hear comments from Europeans that seem to imply that America is expected to have some sort of europeanized structure and are surprised when they see America behave otherwise. Perhaps this misconception is due to the fact that most of Americans are of European descent. But even so, it is made up of people many of whom are from Irish-Scott or German descent. And these are people who fled Europe in rejection of Europe. By and large, Americans hold Europe and Europeans with some level of disdain. Yes, the French are recognized for interesting cuisine, the Germans for great cars and the Italians for being charming, but left to their own, they have a history of slaughtering each other. As for the Swiss, hmmm, whenever I tell some Americans I am in Switzerland, many immediately ask if I speak Swedish.

A closer look and experience of American society might reveal something more interesting. It is actually structured much closer to how American Indian tribes are structured. Anyway, there is evidence that the American Constitituion was actually derived from the governing laws of the Iriqois Indians. Benjamin Franklin had spent quite a lot of time with the Iriqois and has also had a lot of say in the drafting of the Constitution.

The structure of American tribes are not necessarily along racial or cultural lines. It may also be along financial, political, artistic, intellectual, religious, regional or any other special interests. And these tribes, or groups as they are normally called, strive and eventually obtain a voice and a political power base.

As for who is responsible for 9/11, if it isn't really Islamo-Fascists, we just don't have any evidence to really know. We can only make conjectures and form theories for whatever reason, including personal entertainment. But which ever group executed it, it is clearly a sinister and shadowy one.

But if you ask "Who is benefitting from 9/11?", then you can start to form an understanding of why and how is America doing what it is doing. Every company that had a bad business plan leading up to 2001 found a scapegoat for their failure. The military-industrail complex saw opportunities for billion dollar projects. If you are in law enforcement, it means getting all the funding you need. Oil companies saw potential for ridiculous profit. Okay, Norway, but they probably had nothing to do it. But intriquingly, the driving force that continues unabated - the White American Male!

Prior to 9/11, a certain malaise had set into the psyche of the average white American male. This was written about and documented by many sociologists at the time. There was a certain loss of purpose in their lives that built up during the Clinton era. Men were getting layed off in large numbers. The WWII/Soldier Hero archetype was no longer respected. Corporate positions were being rewarded more and more to women. Women were starting to make more money than men. Men had a more difficult time getting their "mojo" on. But with 9/11, the Soldier/Hero was called back to duty and it brought him back to life. And now awakened, he is unlikely to go back to sleep if he can help it. Afterall, he sees a threat to confront.

As for why America does what it does, the decision making process is unlike that of feudlistic societies. It is not solely based on the decisions and point of view of an isolated few. Rather, it is based on political capitalism. Think of it like the stock market, but instead of investing money in a company's stock, participants are investing their political will into a particular action or agenda. Just as well, financial power is convertible to political power. Bush, who is at the fulcrum of the dynamics of this political upheaval, must cede to the pressures that come up from under him. And for him to do his job correctly, he must lie, be an a$$hole, kill innocent people, and try to cover it up by pretending to be dumb.

If it's of any hope, there are some positive signs on the horizon. It seems foreign policy is now at least taking in political capitalization from allies. The recent UN resolution is a new tact. Also, Americans are getting fed up with higher gas prices and seeing the failures in Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran and North Korea. There will be attempts to freak out the American psyche once again. But for the sake of the rest of the world, I just hope it does not succeed.

By the way, my tribe is American. And so are probably most of the brands that you vote for with your money. So God Bless America!

Interesting post, I have not tried or tested this theory of yours, so I cant prove you wrong, but I have worked abit with GSM Networking and you have pointed out some of the key functions of GSM. Firstly lets break down the handovers

Sector - Sector
BTS - BTS
BSC - BSC
MSC- MSC
GSM Network - PSTN

Now the handover between Sector or Cells takes 0.8 secs, BSC and MSC handovers are outside or behind the Cell handover so they dont affect the Call that much. The handover takes place between Sector/Cell when the signal strength is reduced and the next strongest signal snatchs it up, however the system is designed to hang on for a long as possible before handing over. The Handy does not need line of sight to function, as RF works on refraction and reflection, so unless the dimensioning is top banana you'll always have a dropped call ( have you heard the 'boing' in someones voice? thats the 'A' bit going on the signal frame between your handy and the Sector antenna).

On most Cell sites the Sectors run on a power set based on the dimensioning. So urban sites will function upto 3ks +/- and rural possibly upto 110ks +/-. By dimensioning we're talking traffic loading and surrounding Topoligy for Cell coverage. In a nutshell, the more population, the more handys, more calls, the more cells, although in difficult terrain with low pop, the cells are more powerful to cope, but the siting is based on Microwave LOS so you have workable transmission for the network connectivity.

Lets also remember a SIM is tied down to a network and will only function on the VLR, once you have, as Elvis would say " now left the building".

Now heres where it gets interesting, I'll phrase it outside the tech terms. I worked (as the teaboy) on a testing phase with a company to see how fast we could get the cells to handover, and the functionality (we were testing with the german ICE 3 train), and we got to a point in speed that the cells just lock down, the speed of the call is so quick that the handover sequence as explained in layman terms above, just freaks out and locks down. However the network I was on is a special private Network, so this problem was solved (I cant say how, I wish I could but Im bound by contract). But put it this way, the best way to understand the system you have invented is rather than wait for faults is too generate the fault and rectify.

Now sectorization is designed to work on refraction & relection, this means bouncing a signal of things (building etcs) to get coverage. The 'frezonal' signal is 'aimed' on an azimuth and tilt, that is calculated for best coverage. So with this in mind, you will also bounce the signal off the ionisphere. So in effect you have, against the technologys design ' Total coverage BABY'.

Now back to Gavs point, yes there is a problem with handovers, the process although fast does have its limitations, now a plane does 550kmh or whatever, but lets take into account the physical nature of the planes speed to the relevence of the earths surface .... er look up at a jet, does it go fast? no coz its just cruising along and looks slow, but its really doing the goose after burners pants.

So, Gavs got a good point, almost spot on to be precise

Gav, US has CDMA, we have TDMA, difference is the coding and timing. They always have to be different

I had a chat to my partner and asked if he saw the programme, it seems it was very popular and thought provoking.

Trying to continue the discussion I passed on the conspiricy theories to my brother, who told me he had been convinced it was ordained by some higher power and he had "Proof"!! (now this was said somewhat tongue in cheek, he really isnt part of the god squad)...

This is what he told me to do, in order to convince me his theory was the one and only...

Ok... follow the instructions...

Open Microsoft Word and do the following:

1. Type in capitals Q33 NY. This is the flight
number of the first plane to hit one of the Twin Towers.

2. Highlight the Q33 NY.

3. Change the font size to 48.

4. Change the actual font to the WINGDINGS

OK where is Mulder and Skully when you need them? Or should I burst my kid brothers bubble and tell him the flight was NOT Q33 NY? Awwww...
It was fun while it lasted eh?

This wingdings issue is pants. You can read about it at
http://www.snopes.com/rumors/wingdings.asp and http://tafkac.org/ulz/wingdings.html or do a google search.

In short: Q33NY is not a valid flight number. Q is not a valid airline code. Flight numbers don't include cities, for example NY. Indeed the planes that crashed were not scheduled to head to NY anyway. The six pointed star of David that corresponds in the wingdings character Y would normally be associated with Israel, a country which has nothing to do with Al Quaida.

=DM=

Just a small reminder folks - let's try to keep it on topic - been going quite well so far.

Just wanted to say that if there is anyone reading this thread who hasn't seen the film you can find a link to a version on google videos in Lob's original post at the top of this thread. If anyone is looking for a higher quality version (appox 700MB) just send me a PM.

I did some reading on that wikipedia link Lob linked above. It was very light on the conspiracy side, but did have some interesting material on the collapse of the towers. I'm not a structural engineer, but it does seem that a lot of folk have been investigating this, and the explanations seem plausible. However - it seems nobody has been able to come up with a credible explanation for the collapse of number 7. Even NIST said that the theory about the burning diesel tanks is highly unlikely and their investigation into it is ongoing.

Could it be that whoever planned these attacks wasn't expecting the towers to collapse (why would they expect them to collapse - it's never happened before) and that number 7 was going to be blamed on terrorists planting a bomb in the building. Then, when the towers collapsed it was easier to try and pass it off with a "debris from the twin towers" explanation. I checked the wikipedia entry for number 7 and it said that there were no casulties since the building was evacuated. The 9/11 report also failed to say anything about number 7. To me this is the single biggest mystery in the Manhattan part of this event - it sticks out like a sore thumb and begs questions to be asked about the other parts.

I also wanted to say that I'm very glad that this thread has received some intelligent posts, rather than a lot of hot air - let's keep the tradition alive...

Or should I burst my kid brothers bubble and tell him the flight was NOT Q33 NY? Awwww...It was fun while it lasted eh?[/QUOTE]


Yep DM I kind of said that too! But thanks for the reiteration!

<< Men in Black look

Thought it was time to go back and comment on some of the previous posts...

True, with hindsight it didn't turn out quite as well as GWB would have hoped. People are now starting to stand up to him - it's taken many years but a lot of that don't question the commander-in-chief rubbish is starting to wear off. Let's not forget that abuses like Guantanamo have been allowed to go on for years, and it's only very recently that the supreme court ruling went against them.

As for the economic interests - if there was someone behind this do you think that they would have had the broader interests of the American or world economies at heart? Or perhaps the narrower interests of the defence industry and all the other companies that stand to gain in such cases?

Think about how one might predict the effects BEFORE such an event happens, rather than what actually did happen. One must also take one's hat off to the neocons - if this is what they wanted they've had a hell of a run from it - even though they have lost some ground, could they have hoped that it would be any better for them?

Remember also that the current administration thought Iraq and Afgahnistan would be plain sailing - invade, remove dictator, everybody welcomes you with open arms, put in the government you want, rebuild the country with the companies of your choice (i.e. not French ones, but certainly lots for Haliburton et al), then sit back and enjoy all the new influence and friends you have in the middle east. So the reality was different, but we all know that they had something totally different in mind when they set the ball rolling...

It's all a question of splitting the work into 2 parts. 1: Planning and modeling, and 2: Placing the charges. The first part can be done extensively with computer modeling (I guess?) so not much in the way of physical access would be required. The second part is the harder part since you have to go into the building to place the charges. In reality this isn't that hard. There are many people who need to access the core of such buildings, and many access rooms on each floor. I've often been in such rooms and been able to look right down the risers into a seemly bottomless pit. Usually cable trays run up the sides of the risers to carry telephone, network, security connections. These fan out to distribution points on each floor.

If I were trying to lay charges and I had people helping me, this is how I would do it. You just need a company cleared to perform maintenance work, let's say on the telephone wiring. They need access to all of these distribution rooms on all levels to perform their work. Typically access to these rooms in a large building is controlled by a central access system - most of you probably work in offices where you have a pass to gain access to rooms, but your passes don't give you access to all those smaller rooms, and you don't know what is inside them. So getting access is simply a matter of an authorised person instructing the person who controls the access control system to issue a number of passes with the appropriate access. It gets keyed into the computer and the rest is then easy. The person who enters the instruction has no knowledge of the work being carried out or why, he simply grants access.

Now these rooms typically do not have any form of security cameras in them - they are small, and contain nothing except bare concrete, a light and some distribution boxes and sometimes some electrical equipment (termination of fiberoptic cables, transceivers etc). In other words once you have access to these rooms you can work for as long as you want without anybody disturbing you or questioning you. Now all you have to do is lay the charges. Easy. Just drill the holes you need into the support structure - nobody will care that you are drilling- you are just doing your job! Chances are nobody will hear the drilling anyway, and if they do - it will have been cleared.

Now insert the charges into the holes and install some sort of small lockable cabinet directly onto the wall were the charges sit. You can run the wiring out of the charge and directy the equipment (timer, radio, battery etc) which will detonate it. You can place the equipment inside the cabinet and lock it. The cabinet would be labeled with something important and possibly have some other cables running from it to the risers or out of the room. If any other maintenance person saw these cabinets they'd have no clue what they were and wouldn't question them - it's common to not know what the other gear is - you only have to work on your own stuff!

So now in a short space of time you can place your charges pretty much wherever you like without anyone noticing. The only hitch where things might possibly go wrong is if there was some sort of explosives check for materials (or people) coming in and out of the building - since you'd need to get the explosives in the first place. This is where dogs might cause a problem - they may lead people to these rooms and uncover your work...

Well that part wouldn't be difficult - you could hide a charge inside the post itself and have some degree of control of where it would fall. You could even set it off just a few seconds after the blast - nobody would notice lampposts falling by themselves and the charges going off when there is a much bigger explosion to be heard!

Sorry Mark... Point taken... To prove I can do more than hot air too, I would just like to add that it is worth baring in mind, irrespective of who started this conflict and for what ever reason, the implications are so far reaching... WHY?

I live close to the young disenfranchised young muslims who considered it appropriate to strap bombs to themselves and detonate them in London.

I have personally witnessed these lads change from just local youths, dressing no different to my 19 year old son, speaking with the same language as my son and sharing many interests, to coming back from religious gatherings totally brainwashed, with a full beard and wearing the dress code deemed appropriate for Islam. WHY?

It is all very sad and to bring this back to thread, I think that media coverage must be held accountable. All those lads made videos telling why they did it. Infact the would-be bombers, who were recently foiled, have had videos found (what they had made in advance of their expoits for showing on tv afterwards)... I wonder how popular doing such a deed would have been (for whoever did it) if footage was not going to be flashed around the world?

To me, those in the media are the main winners of this tragedy. They spread the poison, fuel the fire of hatred and fear and then make a film about it and make millions!

Conspiracy theory programmes are all well and good, some will even justify there making, in some ways it is good challenge or be suspicious and not believe all we see, hear or read. Seems to a more hot air type like me however, that it is all part of the media merry-go-round.

This film wasn't made by the media. Have you watched it? If not see Lob's note at the beginning and please watch it if you'd like to join the discussion.

Mark, I’m sorry you found what I said irritating but I do stand by it.

http://www.erichufschmid.net/Investi...uthSeekers.htm

This highlights my point as it shows we now can find conspiracies on the conspirators...

"Why would anybody want to investigate the three, wonderful young men (Korey Rowe, Dylan Avery, and Jason Bermas) who created Loose Change?

The reason is that the criminal network that staged the 9/11 attack may be promoting Loose Change in order to push aside more important people and videos.

From the criminal's point of view, there is a big advantage to promoting Loose Change rather than somebody like myself. The main advantage would be to create the illusion that they are exposing corruption.

Millions of people around the world are demanding that 9-11 be exposed. The media companies and the 9-11 truth groups are under pressure to expose it.

In order to create the illusion that they are trying to expose corruption, they are selecting the Loose Change video. This fools people into thinking they are trying to expose 9-11, when in reality they are hiding some of the most important information and people.

For example, in a news article, Korey Rowe implies that the 9-11 attack and the war in Iraq is for oil and President Bush:

The creators say it’s only more evidence of who is really responsible for the 9/11 attacks.

Film producer Korey Rowe says his experience serving the military for 12 months in Iraq and 6 months in Afghanistan, leads him to believe first hand that we are not fighting a war on terror. “If you ask any Iraqi, why we are there they will say Oil, and political power for President Bush and his administration to do anything they choose under the pretence of terror”

Korey Rowe did not risk his life in the Middle East for the oil companies, or for President Bush. The evidence shows that the conspiracy is much larger than that, and the criminal network is much larger than a few oil company executives and Bush family members. However, Korey Rowe will not tell you about Zionism or related issues.”

So… now if we search the Internet we have someone out there finding inconsistencies with Rowe's account.

Did Rowe and crew make this film for free? Did it do their credibility some good as a filmmaker? Of course it did! Anyone with the time and inclination can cherry pick an event and surmise from it. And yes… for this debate I succumb and watch the programme. ROWE, AVERY AND BERMA, the filmmakers as I suspected, made it, who is now famous and no doubt now laughing all the way to their banks. I wonder how much the Swiss TV Company paid them for the use of the film? I wonder if a man in an office is sat somewhere googling saying… Hey look it worked guys there are forums now talking about it… its working, we’ve got our ideas into another country… Quick lets get a book deal in there soon too!

The position I take is that I know these things go on; I try to think independently and am selective of what I read or watch. It’s too easy to fall into the media trap and loose sight of the human element. Like ignoring a petulant child who is throwing a tantrum, it is the only way that the true perpetrators lose.

So I applaud the fact that in the beginning of the thread we are reminded of how many died, as that is the critical fact, that someone, somewhere justified it, thought that for world power it was ok to kill, that it is ok that what they did turned decent lads into robotic killers in the name of their religion. How we stop the snowball affect of the catastrophy must be the paramount intention, not finding out who did what to who and why.

Here's an article in today's Daily Mail website about Flight 93:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1770

I do hope people keep talking about this and that it does not get filed away with conspiracy theory paranoia and UFOs.

I believe the original point of this thread was the raise interesting questions, not hold this film up as a beacon of truth. We all said we found parts in it which were difficult to understand, but if the aim was for people to start questioning the official version of events - is there something wrong with that? What's wrong with being prompted to do independant research? Or should we just do a character assassination on the filmmakers instead? I also note that you still haven't actually said whether you've watched the film or not.

Well if I read between the lines of what you've just said you are saying it that it's not important to "finding out who did what to who and why"? So instead we should just start up our very own jihad and go after the people we were TOLD did it, without stopping to think if we are barking up the wrong tree?

I believed about 20% of that film, but that 20% is enough to make me go off and do my own reading and research. If even a small fraction of that film is true - it creates an alarming situation for us to deal with.

I'd prefer to see this thread become more a discussion of the facts and what we do and don't know, who has experience and enlightening thoughts about some of the things presented to us in the film.

I would prefer NOT to see stuff which brings in comments about people of a particular religous background, and what they might get up to in their spare time, etc. Lob started this thread and he laid down the rules, so I guess he can decide which direction it wants to get steered in.

To all posters in this thread - please minimise copying and pasting from websites - not only is it a copyright issue, but it takes up space that we could save simply by clicking the link you provide. If you do want to insert limited content please use the quote blocks - that way it is easy to tell what is YOUR words and what is someone else's.

as I clearly posted, both Loose Change and Fahrenheit 911 are edited, certainly one-sided - but of course ought to provoke some thought.

The idea, as many have cottoned onto, is view at least one of the movies and then provide an interpretation - not take a summary from a website and say "I agree with this".

Certainly some of the claims made in the movies can easily be refuted, explained and rebuffed - but ALL? I don't think so.

After all, you can spray dog crap with perfume, put ribbons around it - but in the end, it's still crap....

I absolutely do not think we should start anything, infact I am a strict advocate of passive resistance in such cases. Nothing what so ever can be resolved by anyone barking up any tree... just because I dont think we can ever tell which one IS the right one. Such responses are exactly what who ever it was who did the act wants. The knock on effect of someone taking action was probably the sole reason the horrific actions were taken in the first place. I for one will not be joining any mindless jihad or any other religious bias organisation come to think if it.

It reminds me of an interview with a lady who was caught up in the bombing in Mumbai and who had lost a son in the bombing there. She said that she forgave the person who planted the bomb. That she had no anger, no hatred for them. She was directly affected yet by accepting what happened and not allowing it to break her, she transcended the reaction expected and therefore stopped any recrimination.

Some one somewhere has to be bigger than the emotive action/reaction.

Lob is so right, crap is crap is crap, so why keep standing in it?

That is exactly what such films/stories/discussions want us to do, go over and over, nit picking. It doesnt matter who did it, what matters is how we move on, how we can bring peace and harmony back into this world with the minimum loss of life.