Thursday, July 27, 2006

I will leave this work up to the public or Government (who SHOULD and have EVERY OBLIGATION to ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS). I have nothing more to say as I know and believe only what I can see.

* WTC 1,2 & 7. I CANNOT see ANY of the 3 towers falling at nearly FREE FALL speed without explosives inside the buildings, set off in a timed and controlled demolition style NO MATTER IF 20 PLANES HIT THEM OR NO PLANES AT ALL. Also, EXPLAIN if you can PLEASE (because this bothers me A LOT) how any of the events of that morning can cause thousands upon thousands of CONCRETE to be PULVERIZED in DUST! - So if you can provide answers for these IMPORTANT ISSUES, do it and show me the proof. I have no proof to offer, and the 911 Commission's Report does nothing to address these concerns.

* The Pentagon. I CANNOT understand how a HUGE COMMERCIAL AIRLINER that Air Traffic Control and the US MILLITARY was looking for nearly an hour after it went OFF RADAR can:

A. Possibly execute the maneuvers as recorded by ATC (500+ MPH decent while executing a nearly complete circle).

B. Flew at VERY LOW ALTITUDES over trees and cars WITHOUT damaging anything, including itself.

C. Crashed through 3 to 4 meters of STEEL REINFORCED CONCRETE without causing any damage to the windows next to the 16 Foot in Diameter Hole.

D. Disintegrate completely on IMPACT, To Include 2 engines that were 9 feet, made of Titanium and Steel, and weigh several tons.

E. Where are the victims of Flight 77 and the others? That's a good question. Answer it. Also tell me why the coroners' reports from all 4 flights don't mention any of the alleged terrorists as being recovered at the crash sights.

F. Probably one of my most painful questions concerning the Pentagon is also the most obvious, if you are an American - Why was there no interceptors there to shoot the plane down? Didn't two hijacked planes just crash into the WTC buildings over an hour before the suspicious plane was tracked heading towards DC? I'm not 100% sure, but hasn't people always told me since I was a little kid that if a plane (even friendly) came within 20 miles of the Pentagon, Fighter Jets from the very close by Andrews Air Force base would intercept and shoot the plane down? Included in this speculative folk tale is Surface to Air missle installations around the Pentagon as a "final precaution" against attack? I dunno, but gee, I think this needs to be answered.

G. The last Pentagon question for today is one that everyone can agree on, right? The Pentagon releaced a Second version of the first video that they releaced in order to prove that it was a Commercial Jetliner. WRONG. There is no sign of a plane in that video, as well as the video before it. In fact, there is absolutely no evidence (despite the bullshit that dubunkers of Loose Change sworm around like flies on dung) that any kind of Jet Airliner hit the Pentagon. So here is my question: Why not show the public the videos from the cameras at the gas station, or the ones from the highway, or the one from the Hotel - but easiest of all, I would guess, would be from any of the HUNDREDS of cameras in and around the Pentagon? P.S. - Don't tell me that there aren't hundreds of cameras in and around the Pentagon. That IS NOT the answer.

* Building 7. Larry Silverstien said Pull it. Quit trying to debunk that PBS special where he said "Pull it," quit acting like he meant "Pull the firemen out" - he said "Pull IT" NOT "PULL THEM" or "PULL YOUR PEOPLE OUT" and why would he? All the firemen said was that they couldn't contain the fire. Who cares? They would normally prevent the fire from spreading beyond the building itself, and then keep water on it and attempt to put it out from the outside. If that eventually fails, the firemen let it burn out, then "PULL" THE BUILDING or remains of the structure. Mostly, quit ignoring the way it came down. If the so called fires and damage on the south side brought it down, why didn't it fall towards the damage? This building wasn't a 4 story apartment complex, it was a MASSIVE 47 story steel and concrete GIANT that probably makes most buildings in your hometown look like toys.

So my question to the debunker's is this: HOW CAN SILVERSTIEN & CO. PULL A BUILDING ON COMMAND? Was it wired for demolition already? Certainly Controlled Demolition Inc. didn't enter a building with fires on 2 floors and do a two to six week job in a matter of hours, DID THEY? NO. Please explain.

That's the questions that have been bothering me today. Have at them, and please help me understand why I am a complete idiot for asking them, rather than just to tell me to shut up and that I am an idiot, because this is not kindergarten, we are not children, and we, as adults, need to keep an open mind, which means to get ALL the INFORMATION before creating such garbage as SCREWLOOSECHANGE.COM.

73 Comments:

Blogger SHUTEMDOWN said...

Here is the only thing I can add to the questions I posed, from the NIST's website concerning the investigation into the collapses of the WTC towers:

"In the course of its Investigation into the collapse of the World Trade Center Towers, NIST has not found any evidence that well-tied buildings performed unfavorably (or collapse earlier) than buildings that are not well-tied. In fact NIST has found that, had the major structural subsystems of the WTC towers not been tied together, the core of the towers would have collapsed earlier. The hat-truss tied the core to the perimeter walls of the towers, and thus allowed the building to withstand the effects of the aircraft impact and subsequent fires for a much longer time enabling large numbers of building occupants to evacuate safely."

See it for YOURSELF

12:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh sweet Jesus. Your 757 questions are borderline retarded. I don't have much time, so I'll get to the obvious:

"C. Crashed through 3 to 4 meters of STEEL REINFORCED CONCRETE without causing any damage to the windows next to the 16 Foot in Diameter Hole."
Do you even realize the forces behind such a collision? This a 270,000 pound vehicle travelling at 500 mph. With fuel. Lots of it, every drop volitile.

"D. Disintegrate completely on IMPACT, To Include 2 engines that were 9 feet, made of Titanium and Steel, and weigh several tons."
What the fuck? Were you expecting nothing more than a few scrathes on the paint? This fucking plane hit the fucking building AT 500 fucking MPH!!!!! DON"T FORGET THE 11,400 GALLONS OF HIGHLY FLAMMABLE FUEL. And the windows: It's a highly concentrated collision. Think about it, does shooting a wooden door damage the whole door. No, only the hole and immediate area around it.

"E. Where are the victims of Flight 77 and the others? That's a good question. Answer it. Also tell me why the coroners' reports from all 4 flights don't mention any of the alleged terrorists as being recovered at the crash sights."
There isn't usually much left of ailine crash victims, especially the hijackers who WERE IN THE PART OF THE PLANE THAT HIT THE GROUND (AT 500MPH) FIRST WITH THE REST OF THE PLANE FOLLOWING IT TO THE SAME SPOT.

One final though:
OMG!!1 ANOTHER SITES OFFREING ANOTHER POINT OF VIEW OPPOSITE OF MY OWN!! SHUT IT DOWN PLEASE!!11 OMGWTFBBQ!!!

4:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The guy above me seems angry that the creator of this site just wants to ask questions. He resorts to anonymity at first, then admits he runs Screwloosechange. With childish methods, he does nothing more than weaken his side of this debate and offers no solid evidence or facts, just sideline gibberish.

3:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

White lettering on a black background is hard to read. Please change it.

I see so little resort to science in Screw Loose Change. A lot of name-calling.

11:15 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes, Yes!!!

Fight the fascist US government!!

Block opposing views!!

10:18 AM  
Blogger MarkyX said...

Just the fact that you say 16 feet hole proves you are a low level nut.

10:59 AM  
Blogger Pepik said...

This is the 9.11 questions movement, not the 911 answers movement. They are looking for questions, not looking for answers.

Which explains why a list of questions which has been answered OVER AND OVER AGAIN keeps getting repeated.

11:01 AM  
Blogger Zach said...

The creators of Loose Change have often said they're just asking questions. Are those with different views not allowed to do the same?

11:14 AM  
Anonymous Nutbar said...

So what is this, a blog or just a statement?

12:11 PM  
Blogger Avery Dylan said...

Like, wow man I wish I knew what was going on here.

I mean, like boxcutters, hahahahaha

12:16 PM  
Blogger Avery Dylan said...

A. Possibly execute the maneuvers as recorded by ATC (500+ MPH decent while executing a nearly complete circle).


Like hey man, you know if he wasn't careful, he might have crashed that plane or something.

I mean, I've never flown a plane, or anything, so I couldn't do it, so I like see your point.

Loose Change man, like airtight, that's why we're making it again.

12:19 PM  
Blogger default.xbe said...

WTC 1,2 & 7. I CANNOT see ANY of the 3 towers falling at nearly FREE FALL speed without explosives inside the buildings

just because you can't understand it doesnt mean it didnt happen

C. Crashed through 3 to 4 meters of STEEL REINFORCED CONCRETE without causing any damage to the windows next to the 16 Foot in Diameter Hole.

ever heard of blast-resistant windows?

D. Disintegrate completely on IMPACT, To Include 2 engines that were 9 feet, made of Titanium and Steel, and weigh several tons.

strawman, it didn't disintegrate completely on impact

Here is one of
those engines that disintegrated


E. Where are the victims of Flight 77 and the others? That's a good question. Answer it. Also tell me why the coroners' reports from all 4 flights don't mention any of the alleged terrorists as being recovered at the crash sights (sic)

i know at least one crash (i believe 77) they recovered the remains of all 5 hijackers, but they could not be identified. the identification process involved comparing DNA of the victims families to the remains found at the scene, when they were done they have 5 unique samples that did not match any victims families, hence you have your hijackers

Why was there no interceptors there to shoot the plane down?

so your saying if the US military had shot down a civilian commercial airliner you wouldn't be outraged?

there is absolutely no evidence (despite the bullshit that dubunkers of Loose Change sworm around like flies on dung) that any kind of Jet Airliner hit the Pentagon.


If you call all of this BS i don't think theres any hope for you


why didn't it fall towards the damage? This building wasn't a 4 story apartment complex, it was a MASSIVE 47 story steel and concrete GIANT

you just answered your own question, gravity exerts a much greater force (in the straight-down direction) on heavier things

So my question to the debunker's is this: HOW CAN SILVERSTIEN & CO. PULL A BUILDING ON COMMAND?

my question to you is why would silverstein tell a firefighter to demolish a building, then admit it on TV? why would his insurance pay out the claim if its so obviously fraud?




BTW that first anonymous commenter does not run SLC, im fairly certain neither james nor pat woul dpost anonymously nor use that language

1:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm the first Anonymous poster.
"The guy above me seems angry that the creator of this site just wants to ask questions. He resorts to anonymity at first, then admits he runs Screwloosechange. With childish methods, he does nothing more than weaken his side of this debate and offers no solid evidence or facts, just sideline gibberish."

Wow. First off, you critisize me of hiding nehind anonymity, yet you do the exact same.
Secondly, yes, I was quite angry when I wrote my comment, and I apologize for the language. I did it in a rush, so I didn't have bulletproof arguments. Need sources and concrete points?
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html
http://www.ccdominoes.com/lc/LooseChangeGuide.html
Even Wikipedia's article on Loose Change offers much debunking: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loose_Change_%28video%29

Thirdly, I never said I was the creator of Screw Loose Change. You were making an assumption.

Fourthly, have you even ever watched Screw Loose Change? There is a lot of fact, using reliable sources. Besides, did Dylan ever think to talk to any structural engineers, explosives experts, firefighters, or even eyewitnesses himself? No, he takes a few of them filmed on the news at the time when no-one knew what the hell happened and draws conclusions. He uses events that have no relevance to 9/11, such as the 757 test crash (which was done to test an experimantal duel) and the Greek 737 crash (different plane, different speed, differnt collision). He did not offer any new insight, just slapped togther other POVs using old footage amd documents available to the public.
I'm sorry there's just too much misinformation, speculation, assumption, and strawmen too considr Loose Change even remotely plausible.

1:45 PM  
Blogger undense said...

Hey. Good job at promoting fascism on this site, because that's exactly what you're doing. Though, I suppose that if you didn't see SLC as such a threat to the Looser movement you wouldn't have bothered to do this in the first place. So I would imagine Pat and James should be rather flattered that they are having such an impact and causing people like you to seriously jerk their legs into their chin, rattle your brains (what's left of them) and act like little Hitlers on the internet.

Congrats on your new fascist blog. It says volumes about the 9/11 deniers.

3:26 PM  
Anonymous Democrat said...

Nice set of deniers over here. Any thougths about NORAD's total stand down and the Mineta testimony?

3:38 PM  
Blogger undense said...

Nice set of deniers over here. Any thougths about NORAD's total stand down and the Mineta testimony?

Yes. They've both been discussed to death already and have been shot down as any sort of tangential proof that 9/11 was an inside job.

3:54 PM  
Blogger Simon Lazarus said...

How fucking retarded do you imbeciles have to be? 9/11 was about TERRORISTS attacking the United States.

Bin Laden has admitted he was behind it - hell, even Zawahiri appeared the other day with a picture of the burning WTC towers behind him.

Not one tiny ounce of any of your hallucinations are true. We all saw 9/11 happen on tv - so go out and find a new story to make yourselves look silly on. Because for God's sake you sound like whatever meds you used to be on are truly not working.

Get a fucking life, for God's sake.

4:27 PM  
Blogger shawn said...

hahah 16 foot hole! Oh man, you Einsteins never quit.

5:53 PM  
Blogger shawn said...

In fact, there is absolutely no evidence (despite the bullshit that dubunkers of Loose Change sworm around like flies on dung) that any kind of Jet Airliner hit the Pentagon

How many times can you be wrong in one post?

NO witness saw anything BUT an airliner crash into the Pentagon. There were pieces everywhere. Engine and wheel parts were recovered within, and remains were as well.

5:59 PM  
Blogger shawn said...

Hmm terrible grammar and spelling, repeating debunked points...I think this guy is a kidder.

6:00 PM  
Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

Ok, I will do my best, with some limited time, to seriously address your questions.

WTC 1,2,7 Questions:
1. A panel of MIT structural engineers have no problem with the speed the buildings fell.
http://web.mit.edu/civenv/wtc/

2. As to whether they actually fell at freefall or not is still contested, and some video from "9/11 eyewitness part 2 of 3, may actually show that the north tower took up to 20 seconds or more to completely collapse.

3. I do not know enough about concrete to answer your question on pulversiation, but I am researching it.

Pentagon Questions:
1. Fact, outer (impact) hole = 75-90feet wide. Inner hole (after passing through the ring = 16 feet.

2. Hani's own instructor testified, that even with his poor flying skills, he would likely have no problem hitting the pentagon once the plane was up and running.
http://www.pentagonresearch.com/Newsday_com.htm

Disintigrate was probably a term not ment to be taken the way it was. There is photographic proof that the plane didnt completely disintigrate, but rather, split into many smaller peices. Engine parts were found, amongst other wreckage.

(contd in next post)

6:13 PM  
Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

The victims of all the flights, and most of the collateral victims were ided by DNA. A lack of comparative DNA sample for the hijackers initially prohibited direct identification, so those DNA samples left unidentified (five unique specimens) were by process of elimination deduced to be those of the hijackers of flight 77.

The passenger manifests, were not released. In error, many CTers quote a compiled, partial list of plane passenger as the "manifests" CNN admits the list is (a) compiled, and (b) partial. The boston globe provided a seating plan of flight 11 based on data obtained from the airline, and in it are all the hijackers and where they sat.
http://graphics.boston.com/news/packages/underattack/images/aa_flight_11_manifest.gif

NORAD "Standdown". To shoot down a jet full of passengers is not an easy decision. ALot of "asking upstairs" took place that day, causing some delays. The jets you suggest should have bene up and ready, were on standby like you think. they didnt have their engines running, ready to go. It took time to get them up. Then there was a mis identification of AA 77 as AA 11, which resulted in a misdirection of f16s.
Finally, it took jets 80 minutes to come within 8 miles of Payne Stuarts flight, the only other american airspace flight to be approached by military jets in that fashion.

(cont next thread)

6:21 PM  
Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

Larry Silverstein was talking to a fire chief. The term "Pull It" for a fireman, is the word to pull the operation and/or team from a fire event.

The building DID fall towards the damage. The firemen stated that there was a 15-20 storey gauge out of the center of the south side of the building. When the building fell, it collapsed towards its center.

6:24 PM  
Blogger Rowe_Korey said...

Dylan,

Is that you?

7:38 PM  
Blogger default.xbe said...

TAM: the passenger manifests were released to an author, who forwarded them to 911myths, here are some scans of them

8:27 PM  
Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

Actually, I have seen the 911myth lists. While I believe them to authentic and reliable, they do not appear to be official passenger manifests, nor does 911myths say they are. They appear to be print outs of passengers booked to fly, or something. They were obtained from Mr. McDermott who got them from the FBI while researching his book.

8:38 PM  
Blogger default.xbe said...

they do not appear to be official passenger manifests, nor does 911myths say they are.

true, but they do dispell the myth that the hijackers were not booked or should not have been on the flights

11:27 PM  
Blogger Andrew said...

I'm going to do a point-by-point debunk of this. Do some research before cluttering up the internet with idiocy, please.

"I will leave this work up to the public or Government (who SHOULD and have EVERY OBLIGATION to ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS). I have nothing more to say as I know and believe only what I can see."

When there's still a criminal case under examination, they have absolutely zero obligation to publicize details of the case, let lone to a random internet blooger. There are reports published by FEMA and NIST. Read them.

"* WTC 1,2 & 7. I CANNOT see ANY of the 3 towers falling at nearly FREE FALL speed without explosives inside the buildings, set off in a timed and controlled demolition style NO MATTER IF 20 PLANES HIT THEM OR NO PLANES AT ALL."

If you watched the video as closely as you'd like to have us believe, you'd notice that they are not falling at free-fall speed. The debris freefalling next to it? That's what's called freefall speed. Note how much faster it's falling. Also, since I'm sure the fact will come up, I'm going to point out that you need to remember that a plan did hit each of the buildings, other than WTC 7, of course, which ONLY had WTC 2 fall on top of it. No biggy, eh?

"Also, EXPLAIN if you can PLEASE (because this bothers me A LOT) how any of the events of that morning can cause thousands upon thousands of CONCRETE to be PULVERIZED in DUST!"

Airplanes punching large [conveniently airplane-sized] holes in the side of the building will pulverize a lot of concrete. So will FALLING HUNDREDS OF FEET. Drop an egg from your shoulder. That's about what happens to concrete from the height it fell from.

"So if you can provide answers for these IMPORTANT ISSUES, do it and show me the proof. I have no proof to offer, and the 911 Commission's Report does nothing to address these concerns."

Done, and done. Included are two things you can do for yourself to prove for your own benefit what happened -- one is as simple as watching the video. First-hand proof is the best kind of proof, no? Also, liberal amounts of sarcasm and false friendliness.

Even if you did have proof to offer, you wouldn't, obviously. And the Repoort does not, in fact, adress these concerns. The first, about the 'freefall speed', is disproved through watching the video, and the second is common sense.

"* The Pentagon. I CANNOT understand how a HUGE COMMERCIAL AIRLINER that Air Traffic Control and the US MILLITARY was looking for nearly an hour after it went OFF RADAR can:"

I highly doubt it went off radar, considering it stayed above ladn the entire time. Not entirely sure about this, I'll admit.

"A. Possibly execute the maneuvers as recorded by ATC (500+ MPH decent while executing a nearly complete circle)."

Huh, it's almost as if he were a trained pilot in that specific type of aircraft. Go figure. [In case you can't read through sarcasm, that's exactly what he was.]

"B. Flew at VERY LOW ALTITUDES over trees and cars WITHOUT damaging anything, including itself."

"Very low" is subjective. For a toddler, it's a foot, for an adult, it could be three feet above ground. For an airplane, a thousand feet above ground is preety damned low. Even, say, fifty feet - high enough to bypass even the mightiest of cars - is doable, with a trained pilot at the helm.

"C. Crashed through 3 to 4 meters of STEEL REINFORCED CONCRETE without causing any damage to the windows next to the 16 Foot in Diameter Hole."

Misleading. The outer layer was the only one which was steel-reinforced. The area it crashed into was reinforced not too long before the attack, and so had storm-proof windows installed.

Also, you're complaining about no damage aside from a 16-foot hole. Do you realize how stupid you sound?

"D. Disintegrate completely on IMPACT, To Include 2 engines that were 9 feet, made of Titanium and Steel, and weigh several tons."

Uh, it didn't disintegrate completely. It was torn to shreds, sure, but those shreds weren't dust. They were visible. In fact, visible enough to be featured in part of Loose Change, in the background. The debris is more than liekly about half plane. The 'disintegration' which did happen was at least partially due to the large explosion and impact of metal on concrete, combined with volatile jet fuel. Might want to look into that.

"E. Where are the victims of Flight 77 and the others? That's a good question. Answer it."

Uh, dead?

"Also tell me why the coroners' reports from all 4 flights don't mention any of the alleged terrorists as being recovered at the crash sights."

As was discussed in a comment previous to mine, they mentioned them through the proccess of elimination. Let's say there are 20 peoplein a plane crash, adn you know there was at least one terrorist. You can't match DNA of three people to anyone known to live in the US, s it's assumed, through lack of a better reason, that they are the terrorists.

"F. Probably one of my most painful questions concerning the Pentagon is also the most obvious, if you are an American - Why was there no interceptors there to shoot the plane down? Didn't two hijacked planes just crash into the WTC buildings over an hour before the suspicious plane was tracked heading towards DC?"

I'm not American, so forgive me if I get a couple details wrong on this question, but it seems simple enough, if you're not blinded by your quest for 'the truth'.

They're not going to shoot a large commercial airline down, unless it's definitely been hijacked -- and evne then, they'd likely attempt to do something else first. They don't want to kill hundreds of innocents, as I'm sure we can all agr-- Oh, wait.

"I'm not 100% sure, but hasn't people always told me since I was a little kid that if a plane (even friendly) came within 20 miles of the Pentagon, Fighter Jets from the very close by Andrews Air Force base would intercept and shoot the plane down?"

Not even the American Government would send 'Fighter Jets' against a large commercial airplane.

Plus, they weren't expecting an attack on Washington. If Toronto is attacked, Montréal doesn't ready for an attack immediately, and neither would Vancouver. They'd be more wary, sure, but they wouldn't be outright expecting one.

Also, if this plane had been 'out of radar', as you say, then it could have remained that way until it was too late to do anything about it.

Again, a reminder that I am not American and know very little about the defenses at Arlington.

"Included in this speculative folk tale is Surface to Air missle installations around the Pentagon as a "final precaution" against attack? I dunno, but gee, I think this needs to be answered."

'Speculative folk tale', eh? Not going to answer this. I'm sure that there is an explanation that is beyond my limited knowledge of Arlington and the Pentagon, but, as I said, my knowledge is limited.

"G. The last Pentagon question for today is one that everyone can agree on, right? The Pentagon releaced a Second version of the first video that they releaced in order to prove that it was a Commercial Jetliner. WRONG. There is no sign of a plane in that video, as well as the video before it."

The camera with which it was taken was a bad one, at a bad angle. But would you expect them to release crucial evidence, such as an unwilling accomplice's name, from a murder trial?

"In fact, there is absolutely no evidence (despite the bullshit that dubunkers of Loose Change sworm around like flies on dung) that any kind of Jet Airliner hit the Pentagon."

This 'bullshit', as you call it, is 'swarmed around' because it's factual proof. We're not going to go around specualting, contradicting ourselves, and outright lying -- why bother? We have actual proof.

"So here is my question: Why not show the public the videos from the cameras at the gas station, or the ones from the highway, or the one from the Hotel - but easiest of all, I would guess, would be from any of the HUNDREDS of cameras in and around the Pentagon? P.S. - Don't tell me that there aren't hundreds of cameras in and around the Pentagon. That IS NOT the answer."

See previous answer. As to the last part, I'd like to point out that there's very little knowledge to be gained form the footage of the camera on the opposite side pointing a completely different angle, or any of the other hundereds of cameras that didn't capture that moment.

"Building 7. Larry Silverstien said Pull it. Quit trying to debunk that PBS special where he said "Pull it," quit acting like he meant "Pull the firemen out" - he said "Pull IT" NOT "PULL THEM" or "PULL YOUR PEOPLE OUT" and why would he? All the firemen said was that they couldn't contain the fire. Who cares? They would normally prevent the fire from spreading beyond the building itself, and then keep water on it and attempt to put it out from the outside. If that eventually fails, the firemen let it burn out, then "PULL" THE BUILDING or remains of the structure. Mostly, quit ignoring the way it came down. If the so called fires and damage on the south side brought it down, why didn't it fall towards the damage? This building wasn't a 4 story apartment complex, it was a MASSIVE 47 story steel and concrete GIANT that probably makes most buildings in your hometown look like toys."

The part where you said 'All the firemen said was that they couldn't contain the fire. Who cares?' made me hope you were joking. when they say that they can't contain the fire, it doesn't mean that they're going to stop trying.

Also to use one of your phrases, quit acting like he's trying to say 'pull the building'. It's a demoltion term, but it was said to a fireman. Also, with a bit of research, I found that it does indeed mean 'pull the building down' to a demolition engineer --- who knows what it would mean to a fireman? Especially when heard in context, which changes the meaning a bit away from what you're trying to insinuate.

Quote: I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."

Found here.

He was worried about the firefighters. Pull the operation, pull the team, whatever. He was thinking of teh loss of life, not of the controlled demolition he'd secretly been planning with teh government over the last 8 months.

"So my question to the debunker's is this: HOW CAN SILVERSTIEN & CO. PULL A BUILDING ON COMMAND? Was it wired for demolition already? Certainly Controlled Demolition Inc. didn't enter a building with fires on 2 floors and do a two to six week job in a matter of hours, DID THEY? NO. Please explain."

See above.

"That's the questions that have been bothering me today. Have at them, and please help me understand why I am a complete idiot for asking them, rather than just to tell me to shut up and that I am an idiot, because this is not kindergarten, we are not children, and we, as adults, need to keep an open mind, which means to get ALL the INFORMATION before creating such garbage as SCREWLOOSECHANGE.COM."

Aaah, you almost managed a full paragraph without illogic. If you hadn't resoprted to ad hominem attacks, you would have made it. So sorry.

""SHUTEMDOWN said...

Here is the only thing I can add to the questions I posed, from the NIST's website concerning the investigation into the collapses of the WTC towers:

"In the course of its Investigation into the collapse of the World Trade Center Towers, NIST has not found any evidence that well-tied buildings performed unfavorably (or collapse earlier) than buildings that are not well-tied. In fact NIST has found that, had the major structural subsystems of the WTC towers not been tied together, the core of the towers would have collapsed earlier. The hat-truss tied the core to the perimeter walls of the towers, and thus allowed the building to withstand the effects of the aircraft impact and subsequent fires for a much longer time enabling large numbers of building occupants to evacuate safely."

See it for YOURSELF
"

Um, I see absolutely nothing there that doesn't suggest that there was anything done to WTC. It says that becuase of the way they were constructed, they stood longer. If you don't believe me, and had simply misread it, here's a sentence that on its own says that.

"In fact NIST has found that, had the major structural subsystems of the WTC towers not been tied together, the core of the towers would have collapsed earlier."

Seems pretty spiffy-keen to me. Hope this cleared your head a bit -- and in case you're wondering where I happened upon all this lovely info, since I hadn't been quoting my sources, all of my evidence was either gleaned from here, a great read -- funny, too -- if extremely long. Its sourced are well-cited, however. I'm just borrowing them in its stead.

I've done my research; you seem to be listeing to a single Google video and complaining that we've all been brainwashed by the media. Last I checked, CNN was the more reliable of the two 'networks' we're getting our information from...

2:02 AM  
Blogger Conspiracy Smasher said...

SHUT DOWN SCREW LOOSE CHANGE
Screwloosechange is a joke and a farce. Shut it down now!


What is it about you conspiradroids that you want all opposing views to be censored?

5:35 AM  
Blogger Avery Dylan said...

What is it about you conspiradroids that you want all opposing views to be censored?

Like hey man, because like then we have to do reading and stuff - watching videos is cool.

Like that stuff from Universal Screeed.

6:35 AM  
Blogger default.xbe said...

"I'm not 100% sure, but hasn't people always told me since I was a little kid that if a plane (even friendly) came within 20 miles of the Pentagon, Fighter Jets from the very close by Andrews Air Force base would intercept and shoot the plane down?"

hmm, i didnt see that comment before...

http://www.hofberichterstatter.com/bilder/28/28_41.jpg

thats the pentagon (obviously) and behind it (with the white arrow pointing to it) is the runway for reagan national airport

quite obviously they wouldnt be shooting down any plane "within 20 miles" or else theyd shoot down anyone taking off or landing at reagan airport

1:56 PM  
Blogger default.xbe said...

Why not show the public the videos from the cameras at the gas station, or the ones from the highway, or the one from the Hotel - but easiest of all, I would guess, would be from any of the HUNDREDS of cameras in and around the Pentagon? P.S. - Don't tell me that there aren't hundreds of cameras in and around the Pentagon. That IS NOT the answer.

the govt doesnt have the rights to release the gas station or hotel cameras, as they dont own the tapes (although itas doubtful they show anything, why would the gas station owner have his camera pointing at the pentagon and not his own property?)

the highway camera may not have caught anythign either, highway cameras frequently have very low frame rates, and its possible the entire event occured between frames

and do you have a source saying there are hundreds of cameras around the pentagon? is it the same source that says planes within 20 miles would be shot down?

most cameras would likely be interior cameras, 90% of which would be in areas nowhere near the impact, and the few that would be in the areas currently under renovation liekly didnt capture anythign before being destroyed by the impact

3:13 PM  
Blogger default.xbe said...

well i guess this blopg is pretty much shut down, lol

5:04 PM  
Blogger ConspiraciesR4Morons said...

You are insane. Seriously insane.

Bush can't even speak English properly. Yet somehow he's a criminal mastermind?

Do you know how many people would have to keep a secret for this supposed conspiracy to stay under wraps? Hundreds, if not thousands. Is this seriously possible in a place like Washington, D.C. where we see a new leak ever other day?

The simplest explanation is always the best. Osama has taken credit for this time and time again--of course, he's either a government stooge, or the films are fabrications, right?

I wonder what it's like for you to walk around in society like this. You must be miserable. Seriously, get some psychiatric help. You are deranged.

And why aren't the government goons knocking down your door to send you off to a concealed location if you're threatening to blow the lid off of this thing? You know why? Because you're just an insane person that knows how to use a computer, that's why.

Get a girlfriend, douchebag. And some medication.

5:48 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I wish the Loose Change losers were the only victims on 9/11. Then at least the whole situation would've been tolerable. Other than that debating with David Koresh wannabes like Dylan Avery is a complete waste of time. Do us a favor leave America it's not for you...try the Anbar province in Iraq.

4:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here are some links that I believe will be interested

5:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Screw Loose sucks don't believe a word not that you could because you would have to stop laughing first to hear the anti-American rhetoric spewing from the trolls. Still think Screw Loose SUCKS, you bet! Nutso, wacko, losers still stuck in the basement, I would say parent's basement but no parent would have this scum in their house. Long Live America!!!! We rule you suck!

6:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Loose Change and it's various incarnations is a terrible waste of time with incredible distortions,lies, and pure hatred of America and what it stands for. Stand up against Loose Change and all of the nutso losers who hate America, freedom, and decent living. Anything posted after this is not from this anonymous.

7:41 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey, dumbfuck, learn to SPELL before you even ATTEMPT to create a counter-point blog. I mean, oh my fucking god. You are mocking the victims of this tradgedy, you sick bastard.

9:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your are Excellent. And so is your site! Keep up the good work. Bookmarked.
»

5:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It turns out Loose Change and Al Qaida sympathizer Dylan Avery is being sued for illegally using footage! LOL the karma police are on the job. Can't wait for the IRS to start sniffing around and soon after the FBI. I have the plot for the next loose change. Dylan Avery is arrested for fronting the propaganda terror cell in the US for Osama. Don't laugh the only thing that's missing is payoff from Al Qaida but then they realize stupidity comes cheap. There is something you can do if you're pissed off about Avery, write your senator's and congressman about terrorist sympathizers and how they affect your safety. Specifically mention this character and let's get the shit stopped.

8:28 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The New American agenda could not have been carried out at least with the fall of the towers. The towers had to fall to maximize the psychogical impact and jusitfy the invasion of afganistan[UNOCAL PIPELINE, OPIUM etc}the invasion of Iraq{easily exractable oil reserves } and regime change in Iran to a regime thats more friendly to the US similar the the era of the SHAH. To me its a forgone conclusion that the attacks were carried out by our own government. Similar to the assasination of JFK so that the direction of the country could take a fundamental change to a new course. To me to see the pentagon pictures of the top rim still intact after supposedly a 757 flew into it is like watching the Zapdruder film and saying that that lee harvey oswald was the lone gunman.

To the people that can not beleive that their government could do such a thing, they are ignorant of the decades of dastardly deeds of the CIA , special ops workers, government plans like operation northwoods, and other plans carried out here in the US and in all parts of the world..

Look at how the attacks have been expoited, look at what has been acomplished and justified after 9/11.....

Just some more food for thought to add to the list of inconsistincies:

1. While Bush was sitting in the classroom on 9/11 ...why did they not follow protocol and immediatly remove hime form his known location...if anything else than to protect the children.
2. Why after every plane crash in the world there is an investigation where they gather all the debris form the plane and painstakingly put things back together over a period of years...why has there been no investigation of this sort???

Some other thoughts.....I am the only one that believes that Osama Bin Laden still works for the US, we gave him tons of support during the afgan war with russia...when did he stop working with us???? Hollwood could not have created a better bogeyman...look how useful he is to this admin.....Intelligence services abroad say that to coodinate a four plane attack take a level of sofistication far beyond osama bin laden in a cave in afganistan.

12:03 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

LOL Now it's Michael Myers! Contact your Representatives people Loose Change is going down!

4:56 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It turns out Loose Change and Al Qaida sympathizer Dylan Avery is being sued for illegally using footage! LOL the karma police are on the job. Can't wait for the IRS to start sniffing around and soon after the FBI. I have the plot for the next loose change. Dylan Avery is arrested for fronting the propaganda terror cell in the US for Osama. Don't laugh the only thing that's missing is payoff from Al Qaida but then they realize stupidity comes cheap. There is something you can do if you're pissed off about Avery, write your senator's and congressman about terrorist sympathizers and how they affect your safety. Specifically mention this character and let's get the shit stopped.

8:43 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I love your website. It has a lot of great pictures and is very informative.
»

11:20 PM  
Anonymous Ted Heitmeyer said...

Another hypothesis;
I have a very interesting idea that is separate from any political or clandestine motives. I has to do with the money aspect of liability of the insurer of tall buildings. What if the insurer required a system that would limit the amount of liability. The liability is in the form of very tall buildings toppling or rotating down onto many other buildings. What if that system were required to be installed during construction or before being occupied in order to be insured. This system would gaurentee that, if the building sustained structural failure at the core, it would collapse on its own footprint. This would explain the consistency of building behaviors of the three tall buildings and the quick removal of the evidence. This hypothesis is what I call "thinking like a new world CEO".

So the question is, how many other tall buildings are there that have this system? Maybe those buildings that are insured by the same insurance company that WTC was could inspected for this system.

I don't go into sky-scrapers anymore!

3:48 PM  
Anonymous Disconn3ct said...

Heh, you think people care about what you have to say. Makes it funny.

Oh, and, you realise pretty much all of the US airforce was engaged in an exercise at the time, right?

1:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes, I agree with the ideas presented in Loose Change, but come on now. Just because somebody doesn't agree with you doesn't mean you can shut them down. I know the far right can get away with it, but we're just gentle democrats. I may not agree with what screwloosechange has to say, in fact i find it quite unintelligent, but i will defend their right to an opinion. To do otherwise would be complete hypocracy, understand?

10:37 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ted Heitmeyer, you raise an interesting question. It seems to me that after the 1993 attack, anyone who owned property near the WTC would have been perfectly reasonable to worry about the possibility of the WTC falling on top of them in the event of a collapse-inducing attack. In that context, it would not surprise me at all to learn that the WTC had been wired with demolition charges at some point as a safety measure. If the buildings have been attacked and appear structurally unstable, it's obviously far preferable to collapse them in a controlled manner onto their own footprints than to allow them to fall over and crush lower Manhattan. Thus, the attack and the subsequent demolition are not neccessarily part of the same plan; rather, the demolition is intended to contain the damage from the attack. This would also go a long way toward explaining how such an operation could be kept a secret: if the towers were about to collapse in an uncontrolled manner, and demolishing them would limit the damage (and save lives in the area around the WTC), pulling the switch is obviously the right thing to do. But who is going to admit that they did so? A hard choice was made for the public good, and publicizing it will just make victims' families feel worse than they already do.
Another consideration is that the towers were filled with asbestos, which the EPA required be removed. Estimates of abatement costs ran into the hundreds of millions. Since the towers were outdated, it made more sense to replace them than to remediate the asbestos. The problem, though, was that to replace the buildings would require de-constructing them (ie, with scaffolding and floor-by floor removal), because the asbestos itself precluded controlled collapse (for environmental and liability reasons). The scaffolding alone for such a project would cost several billion dollars. All of which simply suggests that the collapse of the towers was very good news to certain people.
Finally, in relation to the "pull it" debate, the claim that Silverstein was referring to the firefighters rather than the building doesn't make sense, since all firefighters had evacuated WTC 7 as of about 11:00 am, six hours before Silverstein's comment.

11:54 AM  
Blogger Lying_Dylan said...

GOD DAMN THIS BLOG IS A HUGE GATHERING OF TIN FOIL HAT DOUCHEBAGS!!!

7:47 PM  
Blogger Simon Lazarus said...

Here's a concept a moron like you might have a tad bit of trouble with:

It is called FREE SPEECH.

How about we shut you down? After all, it is the conspiratorialist nutjobs like yourself who are posting lies and disinformation.

8:49 PM  
Anonymous PSC 2455 said...

Ted, your idea about pre-rigged buildings makes little sense and is silly. There were other buildings near the WTC that also sustained a large amount of damage that compromised their structure, but they didn't collapse. According to your theory, " they " would have recognized the potential for collapse and detonated those buildings. I am referring to the Millenium Hotel Building, Bankers Trust building, 30 West Broadway, and One Liberty Plaza.

In fact, little has been made of the fact that the Bankers Trust building is being demolished right as we speak, BECAUSE of its instability, however, if we adhere to your theory, it should have 'collapsed' on 9-11 due to the hidden charges planted in the core.

http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2/wtc/WTC_ch7.htm

It is also interesting that the buildings CTers so often claim were 'abstent' of any damage from the collapse are often the Verizon Building or 90 West street offices. However, look at those buildings. They weren't the modern steel skyscapers in the sense we think of them, but rather had concrete and masonry all over the outer walls in the style of that time period.

In other words, the buildings cited as 'mysteriously taking no damage' were hit, they just rolled with it. Modern glass and steel 'scrapers were less up to the challenge of having a 110 story building fall on them.

10:02 PM  
Blogger Bubbers said...

Why do the CTers just not get it? The front page of this site is a joke. All these people do is take facts and turn it into bullshit. If you're not blind or deaf, watching Loose Change should be an absolute insult. To think that they think that we are that stupid. Wonder if any CTer has EVER seen an ACTUAL CONTROLLED DEMOLITION. It's not possible cause if they had they would shut the fuck up about it. And like Tam said ACTUAL engineers at MIT have no problem with the speed the buildings fell at. Are you an MIT engineer shutemdown? Cause I'm sure not and I'll take REAL EXPERT opinion over the word of Alex Jones or Dylan Avery anyday. See dipshit, we do think for ourselves. That's why we're not so gullible as to watch a documentary with a total of 426 errors and counting(thanks for keeping track Gravy), and get right up and say "Holy shit! the government did it. I have to call everyone who doesn't believe so a sheep so I can feel cool. Maybe even a robot! Then I can accuse everyone who disagrees with me of working for/with the government! I'm so smart, even though my IQ is most likely in borderline retarded range! I don't need to do research or listen to what real experts say when I have this video made by Dylan Avery and the opinion of Alex Jones backin me up!" God you CTists are pathetic. It's smart to question, just plain stupid to ignore expert opinion and a shitload of evidence against your case, in favor of the words of Alex Jones. Not to mention you people are so disrespectful towards the victims and their families it's literally disgusting.

6:17 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm pretty sure I'm gonna die, so I'll talk to an operator for three minutes.

7:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well I've read a majority of this blog/comment page and notice a pattern emerge. 9/11 what happened, what didn't? Saying "who cares" to this is too cruel and unjustified. I instead want to point out the most obvious thing to come from 9/11. This country is being split based on ideas that come from a lack of information and a lot of gray areas in which to assume. The sad part is we don't need a smoking gun to know we're in bad shape , at least that much we can all agree. But this kind of tragedy has some how jarred the idea loose that we live and fight for our democracy but instead choose to argue amongst ourselves and placing blame where it can't be placed...and not in ourselves.

Please stop focusing on the things we cannot change and start focusing on what we can. I want the truth as much as you do but we're going to have to make a lot more effort than arguing. Start tallying what it is we know to be true about our current state of affairs. Our greatest disadvantage is that we are such a large country and as such most of us have lost our sense of community or more commonly known as our voice. I do know that allowing such an administration to stay in power after all that has happened ,regardless of it's depth of involvement, we have taught our future politicians how to use us to their advantage. We have shown cowardice to our leaders and allowed them to manipulate us using that fear against us(through media mainly). That has become our undoing. I do however dare to dream as many who believe in justice and freedom. That we can still change this however slow it's just a matter of finding our voice again. I encourage all of you to voice your concerns not to limit them to screen names and blogs. I'm sorry I was unable to answer any questions I'm sure if things become better in our country the truth will present itself...But I honestly feel if we can turn things around that the truth we were looking for would not have satisfied us the way saving our country will. I wish you all the best.

1:20 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

nuff said really

4:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

screw loose change is just like the main stream media,dont waste your time arguing with these no nothing people go to the independent professionals.911 truth destroys screw loose change,we will succeed,freedom shall prevail.

2:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

our cia created taliban you ignorant peice of crap,sorry for the name calling but jesus,type in goverment created osama,and bushs grandfather helped hitler,they probably set that up,thats how the bushs got rich,theres way to many coincidenses ,stop denying everything and acting like you know it all some ofyou,you act like cointelpro,99.5 percent of governments turn tyrannical so slow down think,research.dont be a slave anymore

2:10 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

uhm.... you do know that you are gay and have a small penis, do you?
you're one of those guys who go to ground zero at the september eleventh and protest while not realizing that they just mourn for their friends and family members they lost.

one final thought : you're pathetic

6:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

@ Blogger default.xbe and company. How can you be so close minded?
How would you speculate that cameras that have been confiscated and kept secret will be showing scenes from an empty room or yard? If your brain is ticking anytime you should be able to perhaps stop to think that if you dont want to show something, there must be something to hide. I mean, How simpler could it be? If my mother wants to check my drawers and I dont have weed in them I would say "Go ahead mom" right? I would let her see them. And is not only that. We are all shown to appreciate science and math because they are the basic rules that apply to our planet and physics rules that are not to be broken. So just the number of coincidences and the possibilities of one of them happening and let alone all together is just 2 great. First 3 buildings to collapse by fire, put options 600% higher than normal, 3.5 Billion lease on the towers for specifically plane attacts just prior the hijacks. The money wire for 100,000 dollards, the pentagon and "the order still holds", the "pull it" the lack of evidence in the planes in the pentagon and pen, and many other synchronized coincidences. You think if we think they killed all those people that they are going to care about not releasing a video because of law infringement? are you kidding me?
They just mass murdered 3000 of their own americans and you think they are worried about that?
How about the gold from the towers?
the osama bin laden not linked in the fbi for the twin towers for lack of evidence?
The evacuations in the building weeks prior the attacts where they heard construction workers allegedly planting the charges?
Answers need questions. If we dont ask them we are not going to clear this once and for all. I dont want to believe this but god danm Im not stupid. Im not being partidisian of any of the sides, is just that if i DECIDED to back up the story as they tell it i WOULD go agains Einstein and everybody else and cheering up for bush. Is easier to defend the inside job theory then the official story and why is this?
Answer me the questions and I shall shit up about this intriguing argument

12:04 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The questions have all been answered.

The fact that ignorant people, with vast paranoia believe otherwise is a tribute only to stupidity.

People believe in UFOs too, but it isn't reality.

1:42 PM  
Anonymous The Creator of this Blog is a Dumb Fuck said...

Wow, you love to prohibit the free speech that you CTs love to use to spout your garbage. Since you're a hypocrite therein, there's no way any of your arguments is remotely true. After all, it could be (and most likely is) and extension of your hypocrisy.

2:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey,
I am sorry that you are so frustrated and confused over these questions and I would be more and happy to help think through some of your questions, that are indeed valid and should be addressed.
E. Where are the victims of Flight 77 and the others? That's a good question. Answer it. Also tell me why the coroners' reports from all 4 flights don't mention any of the alleged terrorists as being recovered at the crash sites.
You will be happy to know that the many of the victims of flight 77 were identified through DNA provided by the families of the victims. None of the terrorists were identified because neither their families nor Al Qaida would provide a DNA samples for the Hi-jackers.

F. I'm not 100% sure, but hasn't people always told me since I was a little kid that if a plane (even friendly) came within 20 miles of the Pentagon, Fighter Jets from the very close by Andrews Air Force base would intercept and shoot the plane down?
I am not sure what people you have been talking to since you were a kid, but a simple search on google maps shows that the Pentagon is just 1 mile away from the landing strip of Regan National Airport (which is a major national airport). I have eaten lunch in the little park between the Pentagon and the airport many times and the decent path for planes to land often put them a few hundred meters from the Pentagon 24 hours a day 7 days a week. At any given time there are numerous incoming/outgoing planes and planes in holding patterns right above the Pentagon. If the Pentagon were to shoot down every plane that came within 20 miles (or even 200 meters) there would be a crash about every 5 min.

I would guess, would be from any of the HUNDREDS of cameras in and around the Pentagon?
There are visible cameras posted outside the Pentagon, however they are place at entrances and positioned down towards people coming and going. I do not work at the Pentagon so I can’t speak to if they have secret cameras, but unless there is a some record of them having secret cameras facing outwards at non entry points in the large empty grass areas that surround most of the building I would not see why there is any reason to think they would need or want something like that. I understand that it is easy to assume that the Pentagon must have all these super high tech devices and iron clad defensives , but just like the assumptions that “Any plane to get within 20 miles of the pentagon would be shot down” the truth is often much more simple and boring than our imaginations.

Hopes this helps put some of your worries to rest. Take comfort that the truth is out there and it is much more simple (and boring) than these concerns you have.

10:33 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey,
I am sorry that you are so frustrated and confused over these questions and I would be more and happy to help think through some of your questions, that are indeed valid and should be addressed.
E. Where are the victims of Flight 77 and the others? That's a good question. Answer it. Also tell me why the coroners' reports from all 4 flights don't mention any of the alleged terrorists as being recovered at the crash sites.
You will be happy to know that the many of the victims of flight 77 were identified through DNA provided by the families of the victims. None of the terrorists were identified because neither their families nor Al Qaida would provide a DNA samples for the Hi-jackers.

10:33 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

F. I'm not 100% sure, but hasn't people always told me since I was a little kid that if a plane (even friendly) came within 20 miles of the Pentagon, Fighter Jets from the very close by Andrews Air Force base would intercept and shoot the plane down?
I am not sure what people you have been talking to since you were a kid, but a simple search on google maps shows that the Pentagon is just 1 mile away from the landing strip of Regan National Airport (which is a major national airport). I have eaten lunch in the little park between the Pentagon and the airport many times and the decent path for planes to land often put them a few hundred meters from the Pentagon 24 hours a day 7 days a week. At any given time there are numerous incoming/outgoing planes and planes in holding patterns right above the Pentagon. If the Pentagon were to shoot down every plane that came within 20 miles (or even 200 meters) there would be a crash about every 5 min.

10:34 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I would guess, would be from any of the HUNDREDS of cameras in and around the Pentagon?
There are visible cameras posted outside the Pentagon, however they are place at entrances and positioned down towards people coming and going. I do not work at the Pentagon so I can’t speak to if they have secret cameras, but unless there is a some record of them having secret cameras facing outwards at non entry points in the large empty grass areas that surround most of the building I would not see why there is any reason to think they would need or want something like that. I understand that it is easy to assume that the Pentagon must have all these super high tech devices and iron clad defensives , but just like the assumptions that “Any plane to get within 20 miles of the pentagon would be shot down” the truth is often much more simple and boring than our imaginations.

Hopes this helps put some of your worries to rest. Take comfort that the truth is out there and it is much more simple (and boring) than these concerns you have.

10:34 AM  
Blogger Gusbus said...

Not to sound gay but your my hero!!!!!

1:22 AM  
Blogger Gusbus said...

Your my hero!!!!! Have the balls to stand for the truth.

1:24 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

As a Canadian who believes as you do, why isn't the American public in revolt and why isn't the bulk of congress, the Bushes, Clintons, Rockefellers, Rothschilds, Kissingers, C.E.O.'s of GE, Exxon, etc. and the "American" war machine behind bars? Free country my ass, the U.S.A. is one of the most restricted, oppressive countries on this planet.....wake up before it's too late, y'all! You have the federal reserve bank which is privately owned, a token president who isn't even a natural born U.S. citizen.....WTF??????!!!!!!!!!

7:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I feel for the intelligent people of the U.S. after viewing some of the comments on here, maybe the majority is getting what they deserve....rule by idiots for idiots! Only in the U.S.A. would a person be STUPID enough to still argue with irrefutable evidence. I happened to be watching the news the day 911 happened, up here in Canada, and ALL the initial OBJECTIVE reporting was squashed almost immediately. The U.S. IS NOT THE CENTRE OF THE UNIVERSE....get your heads out of your asses.....if there is NOTHING TO HIDE, THERE IS NO NEED TO NOT DISCLOSE EVERYTHING!!! Being from another country, and after having lived in the U.S. ,I KNOW HOW BIASED YOUR MEDIA IS! Wake the fukkk up!

7:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And yes there are hidden cameras at the pentagon, as well as ground sensors in ever direction for sure, or else you could just tunnel in, its the penagon not walmart in radcliff. If its a security measurement the pentagon has and uses it.

5:39 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Saying everyone who believes in these theories is crazy or stupid makes you just as unintelligent. Lets be honest there are tons and tons of things our government does that are completely unethical and hyprocratic. What we don't know don't hurt us, its out there

5:48 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

For me, I think of "Remember the Maine," False flag, Pearl harbor FDR had reports that Japan had made a grid of Pearl Harbor (Bomb Plot Message) and let it happen, Gulf of Tonkin incident, let alone Germany's Reichstag Fire False flag, Japan's Mukden Incident...

9:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home