permalink for this thread : http://search.catflaporama.com/post/browse/529342092


craig_pancrack Posted on 2/5 11:03
911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
After a 100 million downloads, LOOSE CHANGE the 911 inside job documentary is amzingly to be shown on Virgin airlines!

Link: inflight irony

guyb Posted on 2/5 11:33
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
it's an interesting film. Complete cobblers but interesting nonetheless.

moxzin87 Posted on 2/5 11:47
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
Apart from anything else, surely its ill-advised to be showing a film containing lots of planes crashing into American buildings on a Virgin Atlantic flight?

BigHorace Posted on 2/5 12:08
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
what's the website that pretty much debunks the whole film ?

BossHogg Posted on 2/5 12:12
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
I watched World Trade Center on a very recent flight to Atlanta. What's the problem, it's up to the individual to decide what to watch! Isn't it?

craig_pancrack Posted on 3/5 13:19
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
GUY B - "Interesting but complete cobbblers"...is the official 911 commission report more convincing? The cheif of the enquiry Hamilton even admitted they were set up to fail, repeatedly obstructed by the Bush govt. and given too little funding. BIG HORACE - Its called Screw Loose Change and there is a response to that called 'Debunking 911 Debunking' by David Ray Griffin. Loose Change isnt the best of them but a new edition is coming v. soon - bankrolled with millions by the owner of some baseball team and to be distributed in cinemas across the US. Watch '911 Revisited' or '911 Mysteries' on google video and I defy anyone to come away without thinknig there is something fishy about the US govt's 'official conspiracy theory'...

Link: 911 Revisited

trodbitch Posted on 3/5 13:22
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
It's the same "owner of some baseball team" who said the film was a load of cobblers HIMSELF. Anyway, get your foil hat back on craig....!

craig_pancrack Posted on 3/5 13:27
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
TB - where can i get one, from the tin foil blinkers shop?!!

BoroMutt Posted on 3/5 13:27
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
The BBC did a considered examination of the myths propounded in Loose Change and basically nothing in it stands up, nothing. It appeals to people who cling to the belief that we can control the world that badshit happens for a reason. Sometimes bad stuff happens. It's not a conspiracy it's a cock up.

moxzin87 Posted on 3/5 13:29
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
I suppose 9/11 conspiracists are harmless enough in this country, but in America there's just too many of them who think they have the right to show up at memorials and wave their signs at Ground Zero. I wish they'd just fck off. They're not prepared to listen to any evidence and insist that anyone who has better evidence and analysis than they do (Popular Mechanics) is all part of the conspiracy too. I suppose you just have to have faith that reason and the facts will win through in the end. I do know though that if I'd known anyone who died that day I'd be furious if anyone hijacked (excuse the pun) their death for their black helicopters wingnuttery.

Stepper_T Posted on 3/5 13:30
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
Maybe that Trodbitch was part of the conspiracy. He often talks about his great days on the grassy knoll. --- Post edited by Stepper_T on 3/5 13:35 ---

BoroMutt Posted on 3/5 13:31
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
Pah, Trodders IS the "Lone Gunman"

craig_pancrack Posted on 3/5 13:43
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
BoroMutt - Loose Change being produced by a couple of students has its flaws no question. But that BBC programme was tabloid entertainment more about the cult of conspiracy theorists than a serious considered explanation of 911. I've stood on top of the south tower, the scale of it is impossible to imagine til youre actually there. I do not believe they collapsed in the way did, straight down and pulverised to dust, after just half an hour from fire. And the same for Building 7 which wasnt hit by a plane nor was it an inferno. I dont buy it for a second. There's a lot of questions and a lot of whacko theories but more worryingly a lot of people who seem to automatically trust the official story...

onthemap Posted on 3/5 13:46
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
Flying doesn't bother me but if it did, and whenever I looked up it showed a plane hitting a big building, then I would guess that would be pretty annoying.

Stepper_T Posted on 3/5 13:48
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
So who blew them up and why?

BoroMutt Posted on 3/5 13:52
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
I've read the government report and the rantings of students and other whackos. We've had this conversation before and my position is that. 1. The attack on the twin towers and the pentagon did happen (it was not a cloaked missile or whatever) 2. The US government was guilty of several slip ups which led to the attack taking place but to say that they abetted or aided the attacks in order to justify a foreign land/oil grab is bollox 3. The US government is definitely guilty of seizing on the attack as justification of an unnecessary war (this is not the same as 2) this is simply political opportunism. 4. The US military has been without a credible opponent to justify it's spending levels since the collapse of the Soviet Union and this has given them a lovely big blank cheque thanks to the paranoia generated by the attack. In short, cock up not cover up would seem to cover it for me.

trodbitch Posted on 3/5 13:54
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
I'm sorry craig but standing on a building does not give you insight into the variables and properties that govern how a building would collapse. Saying you need to be able to stand on top of a building which is no longer there to be able to understand it is very convenient.

guyb Posted on 3/5 14:01
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
I know that the most corrupt, morally bankrupt administration in US history seized 9/11 and used it for propogating their own agenda but the idea that even they would devise, execute or otherwise turn a blind eye to the events is beyond monstrous. I have seen Loose Change while admiring the film, I don't subscribe to their conclusions. My friend is an airline pilot and he is adamant that 9/11 took military training to pull off. To hit a target that size at that speed; My wife believes that the Levees in New Orleans were blown up to save white neighbourhoods; If true, they lead us somewhere I truly don't want to go. I also believe that United 93 was shot down by US fighter jets after it was hijacked but the reason for this is easy to believe and justify than the others.

Jolival_LHD Posted on 3/5 14:11
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
What have the BBC said about their own news footage showing the woman talking about the collapse of WTC-7, whilst it is still visible in shot?

trodbitch Posted on 3/5 14:15
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
Nothing Jo, as I suspect no such thing happened.

Stepper_T Posted on 3/5 14:17
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
Is that like the debris from Flight 93 landing in a site 8 miles away proving it didn't crash, when in reality the site was only 1.5 miles away?

Jolival_LHD Posted on 3/5 15:18
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
Here is the news footage, the 4 minutes that you need to see. The break up on the live feed is just too convenient. Apparently the woman presenting it has not been available for comment since.

Link: BBC Report WTC7 Collapse 20 mins early

craig_pancrack Posted on 3/5 15:23
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
Only a fool would believe the govt conspiracy theory or the alternative theories without looking into it. The truth about 911 is that we dont know the truth. I've done a bit of digging and personally I believe it was an inside job that was made to happen or allowed to happen or a mixture of the two. There seems to me to be way too much stink for the official story to stand up. Do I know for sure? Of course not. STEPPER T - who blew them up and why?- elements of the US govt. as a pre-text for war in the gulf and securing the oil, trillions in profits at stake and the entire American economy/infrastructure which would collapse without oil? Repression of domestic civil liberties? Boro Mutt - "1. The attack on the twin towers and the pentagon did happen (it was not a cloaked missile or whatever)" I BELIEVE THAT PLANES DID HIT THE TOWERS. I AM NOT CONVINCED BY THE PENTAGON. HOW DO YOU KNOW IT WASNT A MISSILE OR OTHER AIRCRAFT? WHERE WERE THE WINGS AND TAIL? 84 OUT OF 89 PEOPLE WERE INDENTIFIED BUT THE PLANE 'EVAPORATED' IN THE FIRE? TO ME THAT SOUNDS FAR FETCHED. "2. The US government was guilty of several slip ups which led to the attack taking place but to say that they abetted or aided the attacks in order to justify a foreign land/oil grab is bollox" TRILLIONS PROFIT...saving the infrastructure of 300 Million US citizens in exchange for 3000 lives and a couple of buildings? "3. The US government is definitely guilty of seizing on the attack as justification of an unnecessary war (this is not the same as 2) this is simply political opportunism". I AGREE - AND WAS PART OF THE PLAN..? "4. The US military has been without a credible opponent to justify it's spending levels since the collapse of the Soviet Union and this has given them a lovely big blank cheque thanks to the paranoia generated by the attack". I AGREE - ALSO PART OF THE PLAN? AMERICA NEEDED A BOGUS ENEMY / BOGEYMAN. Enter ex-CIA operative BIN LADEN trained by the US in the 80s? Too many coincidences for a simple cock up for me. TRODBITCH - I am no structural engineer obviously...but there are many who are and believe it so. Why did the official report state that there were no central core columns but the architects claim there were 47? Check out the film online 'IMPROBABLE COLLAPSE'. I dont understand how the floors above impact had the force to crush the much greater number straight down, to powder and at free fall speed? GUYB - I agree that the idea of them doing it is a lot to get your head around but the more you look into it the more it seems possible. google the blueprint for a similar plan 'Operation Northwoods' from 1962. Also Pilots for 911 Truth has detailed info on the incredulous flight patterns of Flight 77 into the Pentagon. As for the levees i don't know but if it was a rich prosperous financial centre then I'm sure Bush and co. would have been all over it. JOLIVAL - The BBC reported Building 7's collapse apparently 23 mins beforehand. The reporter talks to camera with 7 in background. The BBC website states that they werent told beforehand that any buildings were coming down and do not have those newsreels recorded to check - they didnt record these events what?!! So its all a big fishy mystery - i only hope the truth comes out in our lifetime...

Link: BBC Building 7 early clip

trodbitch Posted on 3/5 15:31
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
JOL, why would government conspirators bother giving press releases to the BBC about buildings falling when they would just see it themselves? So now the BBC are involved? Sorry, I'm NOT buying it, this whole house of cards conspiracy relies on a LOT of people ( and we are talking tens of thousands here ) not uttering ONE word in the 6 YEARS since the event. Pretty amazing when you consider they managed to release the building 7 'press release' too early by accident. I wonder how such incompetents could manage to destroy a building like that in broad daylight with a missile and/or tnt and manage to slip up on something so trivial.

trodbitch Posted on 3/5 15:35
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
"I dont understand how the floors above impact had the force to crush the much greater number straight down, to powder and at free fall speed?" Are you kidding? I'm not a structural engineer either but it's obvious by just looking at it that the collapse starts a few floors down from the top and one floor goes. So what, maybe 10 floors crushed one floor? I can believe that easily. So if that couldn't have happened are you suggesting that they drilled and fitted tnt to the building on each and every floor?

deganya Posted on 3/5 15:50
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
if its true then the twin towers and building 7, would be the first ever such buildings in the history to collapse due to fire. It just doesnt happen. The fire was not strong enough to melt steel several inches thick, the aviation fuel only burned for a relatively short time then it was things like carpets, computers desks etc that were burning and creating black smoke which is a low grade fire and not capable of melting or even weaknening steel that thick. Then they are the photos of molten metal taken several days after the buildings collapsed. impossible to be steel but, according to experts could possibly be thermite, used in demolition of buildings. Conspricy or not there is a lot of questions that have gone unanswered.

Bernard_Samson Posted on 3/5 15:54
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
All this talk of the fire not being able to bring the buildings down, maybe not but a fire and a big frigging plane crashing through a building and blowing out a couple of floors would.

Jolival_LHD Posted on 3/5 15:56
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
Trod, Surely the "trivial slip up" you mention is there to see? The woman is saying the building has collapsed, but it is still in view! Also, I believe the WTC-7 building was where the documents on the Enron scandal were stored.

craig_pancrack Posted on 3/5 16:11
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
And Building 7 housed the Secret Service and incredibly Rudolph Guiliani's emergency command center - something set up exactly for emergency disasters like that. And not forgetting WTC owner Larry Silverstein who fortunately had a dentist's appointment that day and lived to collect his premium of billions from the policies he took out against terrorist attack just 6 weeks before? What about the thermate/pools of moten iron in the basements of all 3 buildings? What about the big power downs in the days before? And the put options on United and American airlines ONLY in the days leading up to 911? Don't underestimate the gall of this rogue administration - it denied having secret prison camps for terrorist suspects outside the US and was proven wrong. What about the torture/water boarding/abuse of prisoners sanctioned by Cheney and Rumsfeld? What about Bush and Blair's little plan to paint a US warplane with UN colours and shoot it down over Iraq - this was in 2003 and made public! They have some front no?

Link: Improbable Collapse film

Buddy Posted on 3/5 16:13
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
Jolival - in that case the collapse was severely delayed, as Enron didn't file for bankruptcy until November 2001.

Bernard_Samson Posted on 3/5 16:14
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
"Also, I believe the WTC-7 building was where the documents on the Enron scandal were stored." Investigations into Enron started late January 2002.

trodbitch Posted on 3/5 16:15
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
Jo, my point is, IF they were going to bring this building down, the press would have seen it anyway, why on earth they think the bbc would need a press release????? Do you think the bbc get to places as stuff happens and wait to be told by 'officials' what to put out? Or do they try to piece together what is happening in the chaos. The fact that you want to believe this insane theory rather thatn accept the possibility that they reported a building in danger of collapsing as a building that had collapsed. deganya: "f its true then the twin towers and building 7, would be the first ever such buildings in the history to collapse due to fire" Where you going to clarify that it was the first steel structured building to do so? And also that this was the first steel structured building to have two jet airliners laden with fuel flown into it at high speed? No-one has ever said that the steel melted, it's always been said that if you heat steel to the temperatures it was heated to then it would have HALF the strength it did.

BoroMutt Posted on 3/5 16:16
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
I would say that the fact that the secret prison camps were found shows how difficult it is to keep something embarrassing secret. Wouldn't you?

trodbitch Posted on 3/5 16:19
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
Craig, you are seriously in danger of all credibility you had as a film-maker the more you continue with this paranoid drivel.

craig_pancrack Posted on 3/5 17:00
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
Regarding the BBC's broadcast befpore the fact - that was surely the chaos of the day and the BBC getting the word that the fire chiefs had evacuated the building and sealed off the area. How did the fire cheifs know when it was wasn't an inferno? As for the twin towers, if the fire weakened the beams of the floors above, as hot air rises, then why didn't it not buckle and fall over. The great bulk of the building wasn't ablaze or heated? Trod - how the flip am i paranoid = how??? It is a strange world my friend, 650,000 have been killed in Iraq in 4 years and Blair is asking us to vote today...stranger than fiction.

moxzin87 Posted on 3/5 17:03
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
"Conspricy or not there is a lot of questions that have gone unanswered." THEY HAVE BEEN ANSWERED BUT YOU ARE NOT PREPARED TO LISTEN. None of the conspiracy stands up to any serious scrutiny. Some of it is plain contradictory. Why, if it was an inside job, was Flight 93 brought down by the government? Why, if it was for war in Afghanistan and Iraq, were no Afghans or Iraqis planted on the planes? Why were the hijackers from incredibly inconvenient countries like Egypt, Yemen and Saudi Arabia (ffs)? Why do you demand video evidence of the plane hitting the Pentagon when 45 different angles of the planes hitting the World Trade Centre doesn't convince you? Moreover, why do you dismiss the claims of scientists and structural engineers based on the video of some drop-out kid and some anti-government survivalist demagogue?

trodbitch Posted on 3/5 17:06
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
You're paranoid because no matter what facts you put forward that are ruled out, you then pick up on something else. You accept the bbc could have simply just broadcast the wrong thing but then go on to say there's no way the firemen could have known building was in danger? These are firemen, after all. "As for the twin towers, if the fire weakened the beams of the floors above, as hot air rises, then why didn't it not buckle and fall over. The great bulk of the building wasn't ablaze or heated?" Are we living in cartoon world, or what? Buckle and fall over? What? As if it was hinged, or something? Why do you assume that would happen? Hot air does tend to rise, but it doesn't mean there would be no heat below the fire. If a support column on one floor collapses, it really doesn't matter what direction the heat is moving.

craig_pancrack Posted on 3/5 17:55
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
MOXSIN - i'm not sure if you are addressing me or Deganya..but anyhow, some good points raised, regarding country of origin of the hijackers and what happened to F77 if it didnt hit the pentagon. It doesnt add up but I never said it all did. Was it deliberate for that reason? As you brought up the lack of cctv footage of the pentagon hit, why was it all confiscated and never released? it would surely aid their cause to show it right? But you ask me to accept the 2 planes hitting the wtc as evidence that a plane hit another building 300 miles away that just so happened to be the epicentre of the most defended airspace on the planet? Also, my questions arent based entirely on Loose Change or Alex Jones. TROD - I'm not paranoid, I was bringing up various relative questions /aspects on the subject. How did the fireman know indeed? There is definitely room for a serious independent investigation to make up for the dubious attempt the first time...which stated that Building 7 'it is unknown why this building collapsed' and then failed to look any deeper. As for the collpse of the towers, you say "If a support column on one floor collapses, it really doesn't matter what direction the heat is moving" Surely the plane's impact didnt weaken the entire floor evenly? The towers collapsed so symmetrically and so soon after impact. Right its been interesting but our mam's just shouted us in for me tea. Or was i hearing voices.....

trodbitch Posted on 3/5 18:15
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
Craig, it was a huge building as you know. As soon as one vertical support beam would go, the weight it was holding up would have been transferred to the other beams. Maybe our instincts tell us it shouldn't have happened like that but there were incredible forces at play here and it happened quickly. I wouldn't have believed a plane would have been absorbed by the building until I had seen it with my own eyes. I honestly though it would have sheared the top of the building off. Regarding the cctv footage, we've been over this a lot just on this site. It is normal in criminal investigations to take all private cctv footage as evidence. It isn't normal for them to then have to prove that there really was a crime after all. So people ask where the footage is and they say there's nothing to see, they release it and get lambasted for it again - they can't win.

moxzin87 Posted on 3/5 18:33
re: 911 LOOSE CHANGE MOVIE on Virgin Flights!
If anything, WTC 7 is one of the weakest of the weak points made by the conspiracists. It had just suffered a rain of tonnes of debris from a huge skyscraper falling nearby, and was home to the Emergency Response Centre for New York City. Giuliani was criticised for placing it in a large building like WTC 7 because, as being the main command centre in the event of a cataclysmic event, it had back-up electricity generators powered by large amounts of diesel. I would have been astonished, stunned, if a building so small relative to the collapsing building nearby, packed with fuel, HADN'T collapsed as the debris rained in and the fires started burning. But all this aspect to the conspiracy is based on is a confused report from the BBC (if you had also watched the BBC coverage that day, the attack was initially blamed on Communists and there were said to be up to 10 more planes on the loose - it was an incredibly confusing day) and the time it took to fall? Very, very weak. How slow can buildings fall? How strong are buildings made to withstand tonnes of falling iron and glass and stone and blazing diesel fires? The thing is, every aspect of the conspiracy could be taken on point by point and disproven, but it'd be a long document and lots of people have done it. But it does nothing to change your mind does it? I laugh when 9/11 conspiracists claim to 'not know everything but just asking questions'. Its as if they have open minds, when really, there's are the most closed of the lot.