Loose Change, 2nd Edition

[Greg]

I don't believe that the U.S. government directly brought down the towers. I do, however, believe that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice deliberately ignored warnings, such as the "bin Laden determined to stirke" memo, in the hopes that something would happen that they could then exploit; and, in their minds, they hit the jackpot with 9-11.

[Big Magilla]

It is a scientific fact hat the towers fell because of the buckling of the steel due to the intense heat caused by the explosions of the nearly full fuel tanks in the planes.

Fuel in airplanes is kerosene which cannot melt steel. This is a scientific fact.

Guys,

All your points are valid but the documentary answers everyone of your questions. See if you can download this film from off the net. It is bound to put serious doubts in your head about 9/11.

I'm sure these guys have answers for everything. The truth is easier to bend than steel. I'd rather wait for the 9/11 Commission Report, out on DVD September 5th.

[dws1982]

It is a scientific fact hat the towers fell because of the buckling of the steel due to the intense heat caused by the explosions of the nearly full fuel tanks in the planes.

Fuel in airplanes is kerosene which cannot melt steel. This is a scientific fact.

Actually...no. Fuel in airplanes is kerosene based, but it contains several additives and is much more than just kerosene. Theoretically speaking, the fires could've weakened the steel if it had burned long enough and hot enough, but everything I've read indicated that most of the fuel from the airplanes was burned away on initial impact.

There are some relevant scientific/historical facts about the WTC collapse:
- Fire alone has never (before or since) caused steel framed high rises to collapse.
- The buildings fell in about ten seconds which is only slightly slower than the free-falling object in a vacuum.
- The buildings collapsed into their own footprint.

Basically, for it to have fallen exactly as the WTC commission said it did would have been in violation of the laws of physics. I don't believe that 9/11 was some kind of an inside job (like Damien mentioned below, I don't think the Bush administration is smart enough to pull it off), but I also don't think that it's too far out to suggest that there was a controlled demolition that made the towers fall the way they did.

I don't understand why no one has ever made an issue out of Sakher "Rocky" Hammad--a man who had a pass to work in the lower levels of the WTC buildings less than a week before the attacks, supposedly working on the sprinkler system for a company called Denko Mechanical. The only problem is that the Port Authority was in charge of the Fire Protection of the buildings, and Port Authority had no records of ever employing Denko Mechanical. (It also would've been illegal for a company that wasn't a licensed fire protection contractor to be working on the sprinkler system of a building.) That's probably because Denko Mechanical wasn't a real business--everything traced back to residential addresses--and there were no records of it ever being a licensed fire protection contractor in NYC.

Rocky Hammad had a--tangential--connection to one of the alleged hijackers, through a lady named Katharine Smith, who was involved in getting fake Tennessee drivers licenses for Hammad and four other men. She was a witness in a case involving fake IDs that were obtained for two of the alleged hijackers. She was covered in gasoline and set on fire in her car. I don't think that her murder has ever been solved; the coroner in her case received several death threats soon after he did her autopsy.

[Reza]

It is a scientific fact hat the towers fell because of the buckling of the steel due to the intense heat caused by the explosions of the nearly full fuel tanks in the planes.

Fuel in airplanes is kerosene which cannot melt steel. This is a scientific fact.

Guys,

All your points are valid but the documentary answers everyone of your questions. See if you can download this film from off the net. It is bound to put serious doubts in your head about 9/11.

[Sonic Youth]

The other theory he had, which I'm not sure on the science is that above a certain altitude cell phones don't work and that these individuals could not have placed calls to their loved ones in that instance (again, don't know the science behind this one)

Then it's a good thing these planes were flying at low altitudes for much of the flight.

And since most of the calls were made on plane phones with credit cards, the whole argument is something of a distraction.

[dws1982]

It is a scientific fact hat the towers fell because of the buckling of the steel due to the intense heat caused by the explosions of the nearly full fuel tanks in the planes.

Actually...no. It's just a theory.

Another point: if that flight didn't exist, then what happened to all the people, including a few famous ones, who were allegedly on board and haven't been heard from since?

There's actually a theory that Flights 11, 175, and 77 were grounded at Air Force bases shortly after their transponders went off. Flight 93 was grounded at the same air base, and everyone from Flights 11, 175, and 77 were shuffled over onto Flight 93, which was only at about 20% capacity. Decoy military jets were flown (via remote control) into the WTC and Pentagon, while the actual Airplanes were flown (via remote control again) into locations over the Atlantic Ocean. Flight 93 was then shot down over Pennsylvania. Of course this theory is complete nonsense, since remains from Flights 11 and 175 were found at Ground Zero.

I think there are lots of unanswered questions that the 9/11 commission never dealt with, but those have more to do with intelligence failures than it actually being an inside job.

[OscarGuy]

Someone I spoke to in a chat room put for this theory:

The flight that rammed into the pentagon was actually shot down by a missile and a rogue missile is what had hit the pentagon, hence why no photos. Certainly more plausible than no plane at all hitting.

The other theory he had, which I'm not sure on the science is that above a certain altitude cell phones don't work and that these individuals could not have placed calls to their loved ones in that instance (again, don't know the science behind this one)

[Big Magilla]

Yep, exceopt Flight 93 is the one that was brought down over Pennsylvania. It was another flight that rammed the Pentagon. Another point: if that flight didn't exist, then what happened to all the people, including a few famous ones, who were allegedly on board and haven't been heard from since?

[Damien]

As has been pointed out frequently, if that was not Flight 93 that crashed into the Pentagon, then what happened to Flight 93? Did it end up in the Bermuda Triangle?

Richard Clarke, the former counter-terrorism chied was on Bill Maher a couple months ago and the topic of a Bush administration conspiracy being behind 9/11 came up. He derisively dismissed the idea because 1) the Bush people have shown they would not have had the competence to pull such a thing off and 2) people in government can't keep secrets so somebody would ahve revealed such a conspiracy at some point.

This theory is so absurd that I doubt even Greg would buy it.

[Big Magilla]

I never heard of it, but I did look it up on the imdb where a blurb tells us:

"A Documentary following the misinformation of the attacks of Sept 11, 2001. Research journalism at its best, and better than Micheal Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11. Worth every minute, just to listen to the ideas of this documentary. Must see this movie, order the DVD from these guys to support them."

Support whom? Why should we make some crackpot rich by sending him money for a homemade documentary? That the U.S. government lies to us every day is a given. That the Congress spent $40 million on its investigation of Bill Clinton's sex practices and just $600 thousand on the 9/11 investigation is a given. However, to take those two facts and leap to the coclusion that the U.S. government, even one as venal as the one led by Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld,would plot to kill thousands of people from 87 countries working in two buildings in NYC on a beautiful summer day is ludicrous in the extreme. It is a scientific fact hat the towers fell because of the buckling of the steel due to the intense heat caused by the explosions of the nearly full fuel tanks in the planes.

[Reza]

I know the ULTIMATE sin a person could commit would be to issue a statement denying the holocaust. Apparently on and off people keep doing just that. However, there was/is ample proof to the contrary. Yes the holocaust did take place.

Ever since 9/11 happened the American public (in general) have almost started treating this event as great a horror as the holocaust. It was an event that rallied the American people together not unlike Pearl Harbor during WWII.

Anyway, I watched a facinating documentary today called Loose Change, 2nd Edition (Dylan Avery, 2006), which calls 9/11 a huge hoax - a viewpoint that the September 11, 2001 attacks were planned by the United States government.

Has anybody watched this? The director's theories about Flight 93 and the other flight that supposedly rammed into the Pentagon (where no photographic details of airplane debris or bodies appeared in the news) is quite startling. Also the fact that the twin towers could not have collapsed the way they did because of the planes colliding. He claims they could only have come down through explosives detonating in strategically placed areas inside the buildings. Anyway, true or false it certainly raises questions!