Did they have any interviews with professional demolition men in this film?

I just watched it a second time. It would be fascinating to read an IntentBlog discussion on this.

Dear Saira

Start here:

http://www.intentblog.com/archives/2006/04/911_conspiracy.html

then read Open Thread archives and discussions in other threads in the following days and weeks, to follow Intentblog's past discussion of this.

love, Heath

That thread was one year ago. This edit is a different, more coherent presentation of a set of facts (which, like in a court of law, doesn't necessarily mean anything one way or another)...but what is most impressive to me is that the facts and circumstances presented in this particular cut of this particular documentary are FAR FAR FAR more non-arbitrary than many of the issues of Jesus, thoughts, and religion being discussed on this blog.

Sincerely,
Saira

...moreover, many of the comments on the previous blog CLEARLY did not view the video I've seen. It's an hour-and-a-half long. It would take a committment...many comments previously are answered clearly and addressed in this cut.

Sincerely,
Saira

Dear Saira

The earlier discussions were fragmented and incomplete, I'm sure, and reflected the knowledge and thoughts of the time. They were very emotional. There's probably residual fatigue about the issue.

love, Heath

Hello Saira and Everyone,

I just had a moment earlier, when, on a better computer than my own, viewed the video, not completely, just kind of hurried through it, but it looks like all the same information that has been going around since the beginning of the conspiracy theory.

It looks to me like they just took all the conspiracy stuff and made a "nice little movie." Kudos to the movie directors. The problem is that it simply does not compare to the reality of the morning of September 11, 2001.

This video, far from making me numb, bores and saddens me. In the beginning of the movie there is a dedication to the victims of 9/11, but I think, really, it should just be dedicated to their own "movie making desires." I do not think it honors the victims, at all, when you deny the murderers of their intent and capability to murder and maim just so one can nurture a conspiracy.

just a thought, ruth

My firm belief is as follows: no arbitrary comments. If you haven't seen the 1.5 hour clip in question then, quite frankly, any comments regarding the clip-in-question are birdspeak to me.

Right now I could care less about silly conspiracies to while away the hours, I'm not numb, I'm outraged about what happened at the Virginia Tech campus today. Is it ok to be upset or do I need to heal immediately? Pray for the souls of the 31 murdered.

Steve

Now Steve, how does your post make sense when my post happened prior to the shootings?

Steve.. Im numb with shock about VTech... with a young son in college 400 miles away--it instills a fear in me, which wasn't there before. Kate has a daughter at college too... I wonder if she is feeling what I am too?

May all the families and friends of the deceased; be comforted somehow...

May all the physically wounded, heal completely.

May all the emotional/mental traumatization of this event... subside in short time for each one of you all....

with loving kindness,
North

Treasures of truth are always found, when digging is continued.... and in this case, and as Rosie O'Donnel says on her blog.. Bush is a mass-murderer; and the sooner Americans can accept that fact; the sooner things will change. Denial is not the answer.. it only prolongs time, kills more innocents, and defiles and degrades the memories of those killed in the mele's...of corruption, greed, power and perversion of power.

Saira, in a round-about way, Richards comments make perfect sense... as current tragedy, reflects Bush's influence over the US. This, is exactly what Bush wants, Saira!! Bush WANTS everything which is happening in Iraq.. to happen here. This is HOW Hitler came to power as well.

So, todays tragedy at the University; are a mirror-effect, of defunct policy in power in the administration.

After all, how else can we explain a President winning back-to-back illegal elections, and get away with it? How else, can we have a past-President like Clinton, lie bold-face, to the highest court in the US, and not get imprisoned; as a common man would, for the same actions?

Bush wants chaos in the US.. this is his goal; and, he merely paves the way for more loss's of rights and freedoms in the US.. which is his next, strategic move--which of course, the majority of US citizens seem to back his strategies up, with barely-palpable opposition; to the loss's of fundamental rights and freedoms, the US has embargoed on it's own people... : (

Hello Saira

Your post made me do a little research.

There is a sea of information over there on the Net and what the Loose Change Video contains is a drop. Literally!

Mother of all information on 911 Alternate theories:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_conspiracy_theories

Here's the one related to this post:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loose_Change_%28video%29

I prefer "text" to "video", which I find to be more efficient, and is convenient for further research.

An excerpt from the Wiki Page on Loose Chnage:

In response to some of these errors Korey Rowe, the producer of the "Second Edition"(Loose Change), claimed in an interview:

“ We know there are errors in the documentary, and we’ve actually left them in there so that people discredit us and do the research for themselves."

I managed to go through some of the information(which is huge)about Loose Change and the other 911 theories.

I feel Numb - out of exhaustion.

I Strongly suggest the material under "Criticism" in both the Wiki pages, the links for which I have posted above.

Thanks

I felt the video substantiated its claim with the closest thing to primary sources possible. This is more than any secondary source (and arbitrary) comments I've come across made on the video thus far. What I am after on this Blog, vis-a-vis the latest edition video is this: what are your thoughts given a proper weighing of the evidence as potrayed in the production while simultaneously considering both the quality and source of the evidence and case as laid out. Again: if you haven't seen this in its entirety: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7866929448192753501&q=loose+change+recut ...then I consider commets per this post to be the emitome of arbitrary birdspeak...which is a travesty of healthy discussion.

Saira,

I wasn't planning on investing much time commenting here anymore. I don't see that many want to really invest time to read and understand what is going on the world and investigating it. So why waste time commenting? One must take time to study if they are going to understand.

Like you said a lot of the talk is birdspeak and I will add ego chatter.

I watched this entire video and the other one that was linked to several weeks ago here and elsewhere and is along the same lines. When I watched the first one I felt as you did and it bothered me for several days because the apparent truth is hideous. This has nothing to do with some pre-chosen belief; it is a knowing that something is not right based on observable facts.

New information and insight regarding 911 is coming up constantly. If there was just one anomaly regarding 911 I would think it to just be that, but there are about 30+ of them which indicates there is more to the story.

There is a 16 foot wide hole in the Pentagon which was supposedly made by a huge jet many times wider slamming into the building. Yet there is no damage from the wings or engines and the wings and engines are no where in sight, outside or inside. We have visual evidence of this. Of course every first grader could tell you the wings and engines could not have gotten through a 16 ft. hole to get inside. The windows to the sides of the 16 ft hole are intact; imagine that and it is right there to be seen. There are dozens of experts that say the official story is not possible.

There should logically be a 100 ft wide area of damage unless of course it was a missile.

They finally provided 5 frames of the video supposedly showing the pentagon impact, but none of the frames contain a jet. The other videos have not been released and employees of the places that the FBI confiscated the tapes from were told not to talk about what they saw. Why would any piece of information related to this incident be kept from the public? Secrecy in government is all about hiding criminal activity. This in itself is an indictment, the fact that some individuals (we need to get their names and talk to them) decided the public should not know about something.

The 11 fold increase in put options on the airlines stock (betting the value would drop), with 2.5 million never claimed, what does this say? If you got the money honestly wouldn’t you claim it?

The people of the United States are under a spell where they have been induced to believe the government is their master this has allowed the creation of a criminal enterprise.

The other illusion is that the government decides anything. The government cannot think it is an organizational structure. The truth is a handful of people with names actually make the decisions. The government is not a thinking entity, it cannot act or do. Only real people do and they have names. This includes the use of all the other non-thinking entity labels that cannot actually be held responsible for things.

These people need to be put up on a stand and questioned by the citizens of this country because they work for us and we are the boss.

Secrecy in government is all about hiding criminal activity.
Secrecy in government is all about hiding criminal activity.
Secrecy in government is all about hiding criminal activity.

Secrecy in government allows billions of taxpayer dollars to be funneled into the hands of a few. We should create a law to ban government secrecy and all government activity should be monitored by citizens.

Yet it is not really the criminals that are to blame, it is the ignorance and laziness of the people which is what creates and allows the world to be as it is. It leads to things like the holocaust and contrived wars and conflict.

When will the people of this planet realize that a few people are the masters of the many, the indentured ignorant servitude?

The ironic thing is that the ignorance of the people really creates the justification for the smarter ones to manage things, yet they can’t seem to be trusted not to take advantage of the general population’s ignorance.

One last thing is that since congress and the media fail to at least investigate all the unanswered questions and logic failures is a self indictment of their ignorance and complicity. I would expect it is fear that keeps them quiet.

There is hope though, that some benevolent mysterious force is working behind the scenes and will eventually bring justice and truth to light and ego will create it’s own demise.

We the people need to get smart, wise, study, destroy the popular fictions with truth and organize. Turn off the news, sitcoms and indoctrination.

Question, Question, Question

of course this comment was probably a waste of my time, perhaps I should just join the criminal enterprise, flow with the system and practice non-resistance

I don't get enough support to do otherwise.

Screw Loose Change - Not Freakin' Again edition

This is a counter-video of the famous "Loose Change 2nd Edition". Using their own video and words, "Screw Loose Change" debunks the theories and statements made in Loose Change 2nd Edition.

This new edition features urls to sources, less bitching, and longer rebuttals.

Video Link:

www.lolloosechange.co.nr

For those interested in further research.

This critical information is from experts in 911 theories who have watched, analyzed and researched the Video in question:

Three different point-by-point critiques were prepared by 911research.wtc7.net, Internet Detectives and Mark Roberts. Two commenters run a blog called Screw Loose Change. Mark Iradian prepared an edited version of Loose Change, subtitled with criticisms drawing on work by Roberts, Screw Loose Change, and his own efforts. Mark Roberts also compiled a lengthy selection of interview quotes in which the Loose Change creators elaborate on the claims made in the film.[18]

Many of the critiques argue that Loose Change uses unreliable sources, oversimplified arguments and selective facts to claim that there are serious problems with official accounts of the events of September 11.

Loose Change cites the cover of FEMA's 1997 Emergency Response to Terrorism pamphlet as evidence of a governmental conspiracy as it depicts the World Trade Center on the cover. But it makes no mention that the World Trade Center was bombed February 26, 1993, which would suggest it was a potential target for terrorist attack.
Loose Change openly suggests a missile hit the Pentagon yet does not acknowledge the dozens of eye witnesses at the scene who reported seeing a large commercial jet.[19]
The lack of readily visible airplane debris and bodies in the Pentagon and Pennsylvania crashes is focused on by Loose Change and it uses other airline disasters as evidence there should be larger debris found. However, those crashes were accidents where pilots were trying to save their aircraft over terrain; rather than deliberately crashing them into the ground or buildings. A video of what happens to a fighter jet and its heavy engine when crashed into a concrete barrier provides a precedent for comparison.[20] Substantial amounts of debris and body parts were recovered from both crash sites as the recovery operations began.[21][22]
While some of the calls from Flight 93 were made with Airfones, the documentary asserts that other calls made with cell phones could not have happened from cruising altitudes. In the recent book "Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up to the Facts" by Popular Mechanics editors (ISBN 1-58816-635-X), the authors reply that Flight 93's altitude was lower and it was frequently over rural areas with powerful cell towers.[23] Commercial airlines are testing new cell phone systems as it is a cost effective replacement to the unpopular Airfone being phased out. Reception is also improved (cell calls were dropped on Flight 93), works over the ocean, decreases avionics interference and flight crews can disable the phones.[24][25]
Loose Change compares the Collapse of the World Trade Center to other notable high rise fires, but does not clarify differences in building design and size, structural damage and compromised fireproofing.[26] (However, not all the critiques agree on this point - 9-11 Research, for example, critiques Loose Change but supports the Controlled demolition hypothesis for the collapse of the World Trade Center). There is no exploration on the effect of fire on unprotected structural steel, which "loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F."[27] Kevin Ryan the "expert" source from Underwriters Laboratories for steel certification is actually a non-expert from a subsidiary for water testing,[3] Underwriters Laboratories does not certify structural steel,[26][3] and ASTM E119 certification involves intact fireproofing as conducted by Underwriters Laboratories for the NIST in 2004.[28] The NIST could find no record of any previous certification tests ever being conducted on the novel WTC floor system.[28] The NIST demonstrated the fireproofing was not intact by firing shotguns on fireproofed steel; critics find this unconvincing.[29]
The National Institute of Standards and Technology has released a point-by-point rebuttal of many common alternative theories of the WTC collapse, including theories which Loose Change used. On September 11, 2006, Democracy Now! conducted an exclusive discussion with Loose Change's creators and Popular Mechanics editors, where they debate various aspects of the documentary.[3] American humorist Maddox, author of the satirical humor website The Best Page In The Universe, wrote an article on his website that lampooned and criticized the video and its producers; he was particularly pointed in mentioning that, if the United States government had no trouble killing so many people in the attacks themselves, there was nothing to stop them bumping off one college student who thought he'd cracked the case.[30] Matt Taibbi of Rolling Stone has written that the 9/11 truth movement: "gives supporters of Bush an excuse to dismiss critics of this administration. I have no doubt that every time one of those Loose Change dickwads opens his mouth, a Republican somewhere picks up five votes."[31]

Critics also point out the documentary quote mines sources, uses unreliable or out of date sources and cherry picks interview footage. It quotes Danielle O'Brien commenting on how air traffic controllers thought Flight 77 was a military plane based on its maneuverability; but it leaves out the end of the statement, "... you don't fly a 757 in that manner. It's unsafe."[32] Loose Change quotes the coroner, Wally Miller, as seeing no bodies or blood the day of Flight 93's crash; over the next several weeks Miller goes on to identify 12 passengers "using mostly dental records."[33] There is an interview of chief flight instructor Marcel Bernard focusing on the weaknesses of Hani Hanjour's flying skills when he took lessons at Freeway Airport; it fails to clarify Bernard's expert opinion on Hanjour's ability to hit the Pentagon. "There's no doubt in my mind that once that [hijacked jet] got going, he could have pointed that plane at a building and hit it."[34]

In addition, many within the 9-11 research community point out the film's focus upon the Pentagon crash as a weakness. Chris Farrell, the Director of Investigations & Research at Judicial Watch, warned in an interview that his organization "could be the water carriers for a honey pot operation, in which the government attracts overwhelming attention to the Pentagon issue, making it the cornerstone of the 9/11 truth movement, and then blowing it out of the water by releasing clear footage of Flight 77."[35] He stated, "Let's just call it a baited trap, it draws somebody into a situation in which they're compromised."

In a debate against Mark Roberts, creator of the "Loose Change 2nd Edition Viewers Guide" and Ronald Wieck, contributor to the American Thinker, Dylan Avery stated that:

“ I would be the first to admit that our film definitely contained errors, it still does contain some dubious claims, and it does come to some conclusions that are not 100% backed up by the facts.”[36] ”

[edit] Corrections
The original release of Loose Change Second Edition had factual inaccuracies; some of these have been corrected (or removed) in the recut Second Edition.[37] The most notable are:

The New York's Empire State Building was not hit by a B-52 in 1945, but rather a B-25 Mitchell which is less than one-third the size of a B-52. (the first prototype B-52 would not fly for another seven years)
The suggestion that $167 billion in gold was stored in vaults beneath the World Trade Center was removed as it exceeded the entire amount of U.S. gold reserves by approximately $67 billion. The "$230 million in precious metals" stored at the WTC complex were in fact recovered.[38]
Loose Change implies 757's only have Pratt & Whitney engines made of steel and titanium alloy, when in fact the engines used in Flight 77 are Rolls-Royce engines.[39] Bollyn, an American Free Press reporter whom Loose Change references got the incorrect information from a factory in Indiana which makes engines for smaller aircraft; rather than the companies in Quebec and Derby that overhaul the 757 engines.
In response to some of these errors Korey Rowe, the producer of the "Second Edition", claimed in an interview:

“ We know there are errors in the documentary, and we’ve actually left them in there so that people discredit us and do the research for themselves.[40]

For the relevant links visit

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loose_Change_(video)

I don't understand why there is outrage about this shooting today, the medical industry is killing about 1500+ people a day, the conflict around the world and the hunger and poverty is killing large numbers as well where is the outrage here? The world’s biggest killers don’t kill with guns, they kill with a pen and policy, a slow death in many situations.

Many live a life full of fiction and so it is expected the truth will cause disruption in their minds and their lives.

Did you ever see someone respond to loving kindness with violence? What did some people do to piss this person off? This is where the focus should be, that and a system that protects those that commit injustice. Also the same system where you need to have money to get justice. So some people go get a gun and get their own justice.

I think we should stop creating injustice and this will put a stop to killings. I don't know if this applies to this incident but a world of loving kindness and a fair playing field will do a lot to end conflict.

Why is it that there is only outrage when those comfortable in there fictions are rudely awakened to a truth?

People may think they will get away with working for the industries of fear, death and greed and be allowed to live safe in their homes, what they don't realize is they are creating a monster they do not see until it seeks them out and they experience the consequences of living their fictions, the truth arrives at the door eventually.

I hear you Richard!

Yes, I have read about this stuff before Phoenician. Yeah . . .

Peace

I have also read some of the material that refutes the claims of the 911 conspiracy. They have no more credibility then the other side of the argument does and some of the explanations seem like fictions. That is why there needs to be an investigation allowing an open to all exercise to hash out the truth and put it to rest.

I don't know what in truth happened. I think it would be very hard to pull this off and keep it secret with the number of people that would need to be involved unless they kept it very compartmentalized, used fear of prison or death for speaking out, and integrated it with legitimate operations and justified it as a necessary evil to sacrifice some people for the good of the whole.

For all we know the 911 conspiracy advocates could be the devices of those working to create an atmosphere of paralyzing fear of the government, a sense of hopelessness and paranoia. Then again how does one explain all the explosions that were heard? There seems to be evidence to support multiple realities.

There are so many possibilities the truth could be a mix of what each side claims to have happened. They could have expected the attack, not initiated it, and prewired the building for demolition for safety reasons. Some may have known and allowed it to happen like Pearl Harbor, they might have thought better we lose these two buildings then wait and lose an entire city.

The wisdom might be that it is a waste of time, it is for me, now that I think about it, should focus on the positive solutions to creating a better present.

Anything which will reveal the truth, will be debated as false, by possible bought-out naysayers; anything which is false, will be forced as truth, by the liars.

this, is the new US.

Richard
Keep the faith.

Our planet and our society needs healing.
The proccess of healing is the same whether there are conspiracies or not.
There will always be smoke and mirrors where there are people living thier dysfunctional stories.

All the stories and theories and all the sides being taken are just a part of a self perpetuating fear machine. You are not obligated to participate.

Maybe you should take a break from all this and don't listen to any of it. All this chaos will go on without you for awhile, so will the healing.

I agree TURN OFF THE NEWS, IT'S NOT NEWS. IT'S SENSATIONALISM. IT'S JUNK FOOD. IT FEEDS THE WAR MACHINE, IT FEEDS FEAR AND APATHY!

If you want to know what is going on in the world sit quietly.
If you want to change the world sit quietly.
When you do you send waves of change.
This is the only way to untanggle this complex knot we humans have tied. Not by pulling on it but by relaxing the the strings feeding it.

peace comes from peace

derek

I think that is good advice Derek, thanks.

Saira
I don't have to watch this movie to know what it is about.
It feeds the war machine as much as the the other side.
It takes two to tango.
Read Patty's comment about the tribe in South Africa on Deepak's article "More News From Pandora's Box". That post speaks volumes.
If you want a fight to stop you have to stop fighting, not point fingers.

peace comes from peace

derek

Didn't I spamm you people? whatever, if it's good enough for a semi-/dutch maybe a turkish princesss, it's good enough..for a polish/russian, brazilian.. god,(ess) i shouldn't get into this argument, buzka, marek

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Wv0sGQXmnE

O.K. I have watched, read, etc. It could be easy to get sucked into believing this was an overt conspiracy. To me though it is just a multitude of individual decisions made by a multitude of individual people. Same reason, we allowed our country to get sucked into the war. Now we need somebody to blame to absolve ourselves of the responsibility.

If that same multitude of decisions by that same multitude of people were turned toward life sustaining decisions, well then think of the positive changes we could make.

Love

Bonnie

"I don't have to watch this movie to know what it is about."

Isn't this like commenting on Christianity without having read the Bible (which may or may not hold as many truths as the video)?

Saira, I guess it is.
I just can't bring myself to sit through another movie proving or disproving somebodies theory.

I really should not have commented.

derek

Read the Bible? You mean the whole thing?

Couldn't you just watch that Cameron documentry on the Discovery Channel?

I'd like to watch this Movie, but I have dial up.
I've read some about it. I'm sure I wouldn't make it through the whole thing.

But seriously, can anybody point me to a demolition company that has commented on 9/11?

Okay I watched the movie.
Facts and evidence can be interpreted in many ways.
This is the problem with the media which ever side they are on.

I personally agree with the movie but I have been fooled before.
I have learned not to believe something just because the presented evidence is so convincing.

I still believe this is more fuel for the fire.

Let me ask you this Saira, if this movies claims are true then what are we, the common working class people to do?
How about those celebrity elite give up some luxuries to stand against the real terrorists. They have resourses. I'm not going to hold my breath.

What will you do?

I will continue to promote peace. I feel sickened by this movie, for the possibility it is true and the helplessness in facing Goliath. I am not King David, just a soul in hope for peace.

After watching the movie I stand with my original comment #26.

If we want peace we must create it as a collective. It's as easy as flipping a switch and as hard as overcoming our fear of Goliath.

derek

Derek,
It is not about "knowing what it is about" or not. It is about the non-arbitrary consideration of a case, where you are the judge and jury of the evidence as it is presented to you. Your responsibility under such a circumstance would be to consider the quality of the evidence and the quality of the source...and whether both support the claims being made or not.

But to comment without having seen ANY particular case has a word: prejudice. Believing that it is enough to be familar with the "consipricy theories already" would be like judging a trial based on a case as it might have been presented in a lower court. This particular video is a new presentation and must be taken in wholly within its own context for consideration.

That said, I had a few problems with some claims being made. Such as Bin Laden being lefty but eating with his right hand. Doesn't the writer know that its Muslim custom eat with the right hand?

Richard, you are one of the most prolific contributors on this blog and, I must say, most times you give out a lot of information, and I am unable to go through everything. However, many times you present information concisely and very accurately, like on this topic above, and discussions without your comments will be poorer. So, I hope you keep enriching us with your knowledgeable posts and never call it quits.

Saira;

It's easy to be seduced by films like Loose Change.

But what I would urge you to do is read the following articles by somebody who I regard as having a more balanced and insightful view of the world.

This might save you some time and angst and help you to fast-forward to a more settling view yourself:

http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2007/02/12/short-changed/

http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2007/02/20/bayoneting-a-scarecrow/

cheers,

Luke

Appreciate the links Luke.

The video is one opinion and not necessarily my own. Hopefully, you are not too presumptuous on that point. Your link provides another's opinion to consider. Always good. Although Mr. Monbiot is certainly accomplished with his thoughts, his opinion on the matter is no more qualified than any of ours given he is not what I would consider an "expert witness".

My comments have never centered on the content of the video. Not one. The initial post was a bit...hmmm how shall I say...calculated to draw readers into a discussion. Throughout this post, I was curious on how many would feel free to pass judgment without the consideration of the video...without seeing it at all. If you have read carefully, I have been far more passionate about the passing of arbitrary, prejudicial opinions than anything else. It is something I truly loath. This tendency for people to "rush to judgment" (because they don't have the time, or whatever) causes a lot of problems in debate, discussion, and ultimately civil society. This video, which is full of shit itself, provides the perfect opportunity to catch a glimps just how prolific such behavior might be across the broad-based community here. ...and if this expression, my expression, comes across as 'dissettling', then I am sorry.

That said, let me offer a link to the most qualified videos on the subject of the Twin Towers I believe to be currently available...these videos offer more qualified opinions than probably any of our opinions...including Mr. Monboit.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/

Saira;

If that's the case then you've chosen an interesting way to make a very good point. And I confess to a certain degree of presumption.

Thanks for coming clean.

Luke.

So I have to watch or experience everything or not comment on it?

What if I have a great track record, personally, of knowing crap when I see it, or hear a summery of it. Not in a braggy way, but I just know, for myself.

I know propaganda. I know bullshit.

Can't you tell by previews that a movie sucks? You might comment on it, with out even seeing it. Your comment might be, 'No, I don't want to see that'. You're making a judgment. Judgment isn't bad.

Are you supposed to watch, read, do everything before commenting on it?

At some point in your life you have to use your intuition. You should get different takes, not be closed minded, but you use that same intuition to filter out which different takes are worth your time. I looked at this web site, and my intuition told me it is not worth my time, that I've seen it before, heard it before, read it before.

And when reading comments on the movie nothing stood out to say, 'Oh, maybe this one is different...I better check it out'.

Hello Saira and Everyone,

just reading through comments above. Would like to clarify that while viewing the video I did fast forward, not unlike what I do when watching any movie that takes a turn for the worse and becomes tedious to watch instead presenting new and interesting material with a different perspective to offer, this particular viewer. So, maybe my perspective is discounted because I did not watch every single frame of the old conjecture(please do not call it factual)just because I recognized it for what it is and what it, only is, conjecture, not factual, presented in a new and improved video format.

Last I looked this was a discussion blog not a court of law, there are lots of different opinions, arguments, perspectives, all pretty casual and pretty much taken that way by most of the participants, I think, and I think all the contributors, here, contribute to draw readers into discussions for whatever reasons and we have decided to play along for whatever reasons, all pretty casual.

anyway not sure where I am going with this so I will end now, this has taken much to long to write, have a great day everyone, ruth

"So I have to watch or experience everything or not comment on it?"
---How can you comment on something you have never experienced? How do you even know that your "something" thus exists?

"What if I have a great track record, personally, of knowing crap when I see it, or hear a summery of it. Not in a braggy way, but I just know, for myself."
---This is the antithesis of what you just said. You are in this case commenting from direct and previous experience.

"I know propaganda. I know bullshit."
---Come on. All of us have been embarrassingly fooled at one time or another.

"Can't you tell by previews that a movie sucks?"
---Per the above comment, haven't you ever been pleasantly surprised at the movies under this exact scenario? I have. Isn't this very scenario how we learn NOT to use our minds?

"Are you supposed to watch, read, do everything before commenting on it?"
---'Everything' seems a bit extreme...but I would say that any opinion absent direct observation or experience is the precise definition of an arbitrary opinion. Let's just put it this way: your opinions ought to be rightfully disregarded by your interlocetur...literally dismissed.

"At some point in your life you have to use your intuition."
---Occasionally we get lucky by simply backing the right beliefs. 'Luck' is the operable word here.

"And when reading comments on the movie nothing stood out to say, 'Oh, maybe this one is different...I better check it out'."
---Ummm...I said to "check it out"...and it was up to you to either do so or simply move on.

...by the way, tone-of-voice REALLY doesn't come across very well in these blogs. If my last post seemed a bit bitchy, I speak with a smile...I always speak with a smile. : )

That's a real problem with these blogs.

No need to worry. You just sound like a very playful dog with a big juicy bone.

An Afghan Wolf Hound perhaps :)

Believe me...I prefer talking about Love and kids.

I seem to have that effect on women.

:o

; )

Yo Saira
My point about the movie was not whether it was right or wrong, but the energy it creates. Movies like this and 911 create fear and heplessness outrage and anger. look how it affected this blog.

This movie struck a deep nerve in you. That energy can be channeled into very open discussions. I appreciate the fact that you are willing to be a part of the discussion.

It has always seemed common sense to me that 10 or 12 people play Monopoly with our lives. That resonates with my soul but does not cause fear. This has just always been. The elite rule the masses. It's not easy trying to run the world. Those 10 or 12 people have a tough job and they are only human.
If this is ever going to change the people have to take the responsibilty from these unfortunate elite and make sure all of our needs are taken care of.

Think of the difficulties just managing this blog, then imagine trying to manage 6 billion different people. Yo

I asked in for jucier questions in the weekly intent question thing, thank you Saria for providing such a juicy bone.

peace comes from peace

derek

yo! :)

Freedom and Responsibility are like Siamese twins.
They die if they are parted (1)
----Lillian Smith

If the people will lead, eventually the leaders will follow.(1)
-----Florence Robinson

(1) Quotes compliments of David Hackett Fischer, Brandeis Professor, Liberty and Freedom pg 706. Chapter titled America Attacked.

Love
Bonnie

I read your original post. I looked at the web site. i said to myself this is another 9/11 movie. I then responded with the question about profession demolition.

I don't have to sit and watch one and half hours of crap.

And I can still respond.

1)The content of the video made you go "numb"(Ref. Blog entry)

2)The content of the video made you judge that the video is full of shit.(Ref. Post 36)

3)You say that your comments are not centered on the content of the video.(Post #36)

5) Post #5 you say ..moreover, many of the comments on the previous blog CLEARLY did not view the video I've seen. It's an hour-and-a-half long. It would take a committment...

4) In Post #15 you make your intentions clear: What I am after on this Blog, vis-a-vis the latest edition video is this: what are your thoughts given a proper weighing of the evidence as potrayed in the production while simultaneously considering both the quality and source of the evidence and case as laid out.

To address your point in #4, I would say, one to not only watch the one-and-half-hour video but it also means a lot of commitment than that - to do further research to verify facts, to see counter arguments, to see what the experts in different have said, to use your analytical and logical skills and much more.

I won't be surprised if most people call it "crap" without watching it completely, as did many here.

As for me I did an internet research of about 3 hours to further enlighten myself with knowledge to what I accumulated already.

At the end of the day, any 911 theory(including the official one) can only be judge on the basis of probability o its accuracy given that all facts are not known.

If the probability of a certain theory is less than 1 % I might call it crap.

But if a theory/ sub-theory within a theory is say kind of 5% probable, we should give it a serious thought.

What I understand is that most of the 911 conspiracy/alternate theories are crap.

Michael Shermer, writing in Scientific American, said:

"The mistaken belief that a handful of unexplained anomalies can undermine a well-established theory lies at the heart of all conspiratorial thinking (as well as Holocaust denial and the various crank theories of physics). All the "evidence" for a 9/11 conspiracy falls under the rubric of this fallacy. Such notions are easily refuted by noting that scientific theories are not built on single facts alone but on a convergence of evidence assembled from multiple lines of inquiry."

Why the 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Won't Go Away

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1531304-1,00.html

"There are psychological explanations for why conspiracy theories are so seductive. Academics who study them argue that they meet a basic human need: to have the magnitude of any given effect be balanced by the magnitude of the cause behind it. A world in which tiny causes can have huge consequences feels scary and unreliable. Therefore a grand disaster like Sept. 11 needs a grand conspiracy behind it. 'We tend to associate major events--a President or princess dying--with major causes,' says Patrick Leman, a lecturer in psychology at Royal Holloway University of London, who has conducted studies on conspiracy belief. 'If we think big events like a President being assassinated can happen at the hands of a minor individual, that points to the unpredictability and randomness of life and unsettles us.' In that sense, the idea that there is a malevolent controlling force orchestrating global events is, in a perverse way, comforting."

Bobby, it's called judging a book by its cover. ...and yes...you are free to respond to the contrary notwithstanding.

If you watch a well laid out Video, how can you judge it as "crap" if say one doesn't have much prior knowledge of the circumstantial evidence and if one doesn't do further research?

Point is: Watching the movie is not "enough" or "necessary" to to be able to accurately judge a video.

Have you followed up on each and every reference made in the Video and verified its factual accuracy? Have you researched the logical fallacies in the arguments? That needs far more commitment than watching the video itself.

Since this is difficult for a layman, he can use his accumulated knowledge and follow up on the attributes and the nature of the Video, without watching it completely, to make a judgment. This doesn't make your "judgment" any more well reasoned than those who did not actually watch the video.

This dialogue looks like a pointless waste of time ...

Here's something which might interest you:

"Loose Change."

Did the U.S. government plan and execute the 9/11 attacks?

Does one internet video hold the shocking evidence?

Find out...

If you own a computer, odds are you have seen Loose Change, a slickly-produced viral internet video making the case that the U.S. government planned and executed the 9/11 attacks. No, I don't know why it's called "Loose Change."

If you haven't seen it yet, you will soon. The Loose Changers will make sure of it. They sell this thing like they're getting a commission. In a single day I had four different people on four different forums try to get me to watch it.

How viral videos are spread

And most of the people who watch it, come away convinced.

The film is a rapid-fire collection of video clips set to techno music, attempting to prove that:

1. No plane hit the Pentagon - it was a cruise missile;

2. The hijacked planes didn't bring down the World Trade Center, the buildings were wired with explosives ahead of time;

3. Flight 93 didn't crash in Pennsylvania and in fact landed safely elsewhere. The passengers were in on the conspiracy.

They've sold more than 100,000 copies of this thing on DVD. It's been downloaded millions of times.

But is it bullshit?

There are basically two views on the subject, and I intend to provide both equally. You can make up your own mind.

For the rest of the story, visit:

http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/911truth.html

This post could take a very interesting turn: how does this conspiracy theory discussion ultimately differ from the myriad discussions on the other said conspiracy talked about quite prolifically here: the Biblical version of events?

Saira

After slogging through those "conspiracy" threads on IB, and yours, I am still not convinced, it is an overt conspiracy---simply like I said earlier a multitude of individual decisions/actions by a multitude of individuals.

Now I have really got to go. Enjoyed this.

Bonnie

"This post could take a very interesting turn: how does this conspiracy theory discussion ultimately differ from the myriad discussions on the other said conspiracy talked about quite prolifically here: the Biblical version of events?"

It would be interesting to apply Skepticism to biblical tales but it would be more interesting if you apply the same scrutiny to pseudo-sciences like ESP, faith healing and Life After Death etc which are discussed even more prolifically at Inetntblog. Actually these pseudo-sciences form the heart of IntentBlog.

I wonder where you stand.

Dear Saira

All day yesterday, I sat on my fingers so I wouldn't type "so should I salute, now?" to you, after I read your #8. Now you have your dialogue, and I can write my tongue-in-cheek quip without disturbing its possibility.

love, Heath

It would be nice to hear your “review” on the video that you have watched at least twice.

What I can make out from your comments is that you have gone “numb” watching the video for the first time.

And that you have found the Video to be “crap” probably after watching it twice.

“going numb” can be interpreted in many ways.

1)You can go numb by the real possibility of a huge conspiracy behind 911 as shown indicated Video.

2) You can go numb by finding the misrepresentation of facts and logical fallacies in the arguments were so deftly handled in the Video that the plot looks believable.

Many people who have commented in the initial stages of this thread assumed the first possibility.

Since you said that you find “Loose Change” to be crappy in post #36, it can be understood that the second possibility is your real reason to go numb.

It would be nice of you to tell us your “reasons” why you find the theory in “Loose Change” to be a piece of “crap”.

Dear Siara

Re. Post 53

Not many people who visit Intentblog would agree that the Bible creation stories are based on factual evidence.

It would be interesting to know your views on the series of posts made by Deepak Chopra at Intentblog, on his book “Life after Death: Burden of Proof”, in which it is claimed that “Reincarnation” is a true phenomena and that it is based on Scientific Evidence.

To add to my previous post…I wonder if you have the courage to take a stand.

I wonder if you would call a theory “crap” if you find it to be crap, even if it means that you might hurt the feelings of the people who may be friends with you.

It is convenient to take on Bible creation stories since your opinion is the prevailing opinion here and is inline with the position of the hosts of this blog.

I wonder if you speak your true feelings and air your objective views on any issue.

I'd like to comment on the Bible thing but I never read the whole thing.

And as A.J. has confirmed in #52 part of the movie was about wiring the buildings for demoltion. So the first post, asking about demolition, says that I judged this book by it's cover pretty well. Not bragging, but smiling.

I suggest United 93 for a movie of 9/11. Perhaps some of the passangers played themselves.

"This video, which is full of shit itself, " ~Saira

Is that the same one that made you numb?

When I watched this movie it raised questions not really opnions. Someone could answer them.

Who is Mr. Monboit, did I miss something? and what was his opinion?

How did the video affect me? Upon reflection, my reaction to it was the one probably intended by the production: to question...to question...to question. I have always believed that the hallmark of an evolved mind has the same cornerstone definition: to question. Did the film raise some interesting questions? Yes. Did the film manipulate circumstantial evidence? Unconscionably so.

Discussions (such as this) aid in what I believe to be our most important process-of-thought: asking the right questions. Education is thus so important because it helps people with uncovering the most EFFICIENT way to seek the most plausible answers currently known to man at the time the questions are being asked. (Can't study a 10th planet if we thought there were only 9). What is so enjoyable about this particular blog is that participants who question receive particularly important feedback to the very process of questioning itself...and helping us all to hone in on what should matter to us intellectually: are we asking the right questions?

As for myself, I find that I am constantly asking questions and therefore tend to surround myself with people who can provide thoughtful answers. Although as I get older, my questions seem to be far less innocent than they used to be. I find myself asking questions that are not only heavy, but are ones that I barely understand myself...such as why did the Fed hide the M3 measure of liquidity from the public? Is it so that the stock market can be "propped up" when need be without anyone being able to know precisely when this is happening? On this point, I have been privy to conversations (passionate ones) on both sides of this argument. But the question still remains: why does the Government hide M3 from the public? Bernanke told Congress, that his March 24th, 2006 decision to stop reporting the M3 money supply measure (the rate which the Government prints dollar bills) "was designed to save the US taxpayer’s money". Sorry, but I think that's bullshit.

That said, I am a well traveled girl. One thing that I have come to accept and understand is that ALL governments lie to their people. It has always been and will always be so. Most lies that governments tell have a common thread: they are lies intending to preserve culture for the "betterment" of the greater collective...NOT to anger individuals. With that said, I find that the ability to have this discussion at all to be one of the most beautiful "rights" Americans have going. To put it another way, if the servers of this blog were sitting in any other social system, they would have been shut down long ago.

Darling Richard,
Missed your post...and it sparked a continuation...

Some of the questions that I found myself asking were indeed numbing. While the video is indeed full of circumstantial facts spun into whatever, there were some extremely provocative questions that were raised in my mind. Period. This post, for me is not about the video, which by now has got to be clear to those who have carefully followed, is about the defense of the right way to form an opinion vs. the wrong way.

I am of the belief that no concept we form is meaningful unless we successfully integrate it into the sum of our existing knowledge and beliefs in a way that doesn't contradict the knowledge and beliefs that we've already acquired. What I mean by 'sum' is everything we know, or could know, or believe that we know. (Hey, I'm proven incorrect about stuff all the time!) Essentially, why I feel so privileged to be a part of IntentBlog, is that this forum facilitates the integration process of what we perceive in the world...aiding the formation of new concepts and, if we're lucky, new beliefs.

I feel that the preservation of the integrity of this process is really important in life, which is why I seem to be getting my panties in a knot over the formation opinions (in this case a video irrespective of what those opinions might ultimately be) WITHOUT THE PERCEPTION OF THE VIDEO IN THE FIRST PLACE. Such a thing goes against my deepest definition of "reasonable". I react strongly becuase, for me, it's a conversational crime. That's it. The video has really served as a conduit to this discussion: a commentary on a way...a methodology of forming opinions that are acceptable vs. unacceptable. What is unacceptable? Hmmmm....let me think of some dirty words: 'arbitrary', 'fallacy'... Those are just a few loaded concepts that come to mind that ultimately serve to raise confusion rather than clarity.

"This post, for me is not about the video, which by now has got to be clear to those who have carefully followed, is about the defense of the right way to form an opinion vs. the wrong way."

Your original post:

Title: Numb

"I just watched something that left me completely numb..."
Loose Change(WIth a linked Video)

You could have made your intentions clear in your original post. That could have allowed for a more focussed discussion. Unless you claim that this is all part of your plan. If so it certainly seems to be working as this thread has attracted far more number of comments than one might have expected.

"The initial post was a bit...hmmm how shall I say...calculated to draw readers into a discussion."

You need to sharpen your ways of engaging your audience in a reasonable dialogue.

"You could have made your intentions clear in your original post."

I had no idea what my intentions were aside from attempting to grab some interest. 100% of my comments have been pure reactions to the subsequent comments that followed...such as yours. Need I say that at the time of my very first post, I had no idea what those ensuing commets would be?

"You need to sharpen your ways of engaging your audience in a reasonable dialogue."

'Need' seems a bit severe don't you think? Moreover, if there are any comments that I have made that seem unreasonable, please do point them out...because when presented with better information than what I am currently am working off of (usually imperfect), I have always been a girl who has been prepared to reconsider her staunchest beliefs on a dime. I think it's called an 'open mind'.

The Tower 7 implosion (out of nowhere it seems) and the total blackout of video evidence of the Pentagon strike are the two most important events that fuel conspiracy theories (in my mind at least). I will continue to be extremely skeptical of the official version unless the government produces evidence that convinces me (and many others) that those events happened as the government says they happened.

"I am of the belief that no concept we form is meaningful unless we successfully integrate it into the sum of our existing knowledge and beliefs in a way that doesn't contradict the knowledge and beliefs that we've already acquired."

This says to me that we should protect our existing beliefs from new ideas if they don't fit.

I know this is not what you're trying to say Saira; perhaps you need to be more succinct when generalising.

Certainly what you've highlighted is that 'how' we learn is fundamental to 'what' we learn.

And not just from a cognitive perspective: our learning strategy. But from a philosophical perspective: our methods of reasoning.

Smell that fresh air folks. Suck it into your lungs as deep as you can before the next stagnant mist descends.

Ahhhhhhh. Rejuvenating.
:)

If new information doesn't contradict old then it should be considered knowledge

not before

Saira
I agree that this blog site provides a wonderful play ground for growth and new ideas. IB provides a place where everyone can put in thier two cents.
I feel very fortunate to be able to have a place where I can speak my mind. I have grown in many ways as a direct result from participating here.

One thing I learned from this video experience was people using thier intuition. One person went to the site but did not watch the video. I felt the same way. I said that I just could not sit through another such video. Then for the sake of the post I watched it. I made me feel helpless outraged and physicaly ill.

like a lot of people I'm so over slick films and conspiracy theories, sensational news, and all shit we have to filter through.

Eventualy it comes back to intuition. What does your gut tell you? I love disscusion and exploring new ideas, but I feel we can over think things and get caught up in cycles of unanswerable questions. That's when we need intuition to guide us through the tangled theories.

I am also amazed how much I can sense other people's energy over the internet. I usually can get a pretty good feel for people's intentions as well. This is the first blog I have participated in and I find it quite surprising how much of this I feel through my computer. This is something I have contiplated more even than the specifics of a post.

There has been a lot of ground covered in this thread partly because of you willingness to flow with the discusion and not get stuck on your ego. And partly because of the foundation of the creators of the site.

yo

derek

Concise. Pertinent. Crisp.

It's like diving into clear water.

I exalt you. And your knotted panties.

Saira,

I think you have a fascinating mind. This is a very interesting thread.

I think the theme is to not hold fictions as truth in our mind and to see through appearances.

There is wisdom in entertaining every possibility regardless of expectation or suspected probability, without prejudice or assumption.

What we want to believe or find as truth should never be allowed to distort our ability to discern the truth.

We should be careful not to adopt the potential fictions of others as a truth because it is convenient.

And I stood before the throne at the end of the day, and a voice permeated my head space.

Did you live the truth today or did you support the worlds fictions?

Evil is a fiction born of fiction.

The truth is I am and so are you, seperate we are not, as one I AM and everyone.

"The truth is I am and so are you, seperate we are not, as one I AM and everyone"

Let's all make love ; )

Well ... just got curious about why all the replies on this topic, so I read them and really have no comment.

However, I wanted to say to Saira that I just checked out the pictures on your website and you are a very beautiful woman. You look like my little sister in her hay day who is now 45 1/2, but she did not do as many covers that you have. My sister now has two very beautiful babies, one ~7 year old boy and a 10 mo. old girl and she is loving being a mom.

That's all I wanted to say. And thanks for sharing as you are bright as well. Take care.

Love, Char

Comfortably.

Class for today:
English version
Conjugation of the verb to be-present tense:
I Am
You Are
We Are..........( )
fill in the blank

They Are ( )
fill in the blank
Hint: Do not immediately sniff the ink on this copy of your test.

Reminder for #76

At the end of the test, you are allowed to compute your own scores.
After you finish the test you are also allowed to make paper airplanes out of your test papers and fly them around the room but you have to pick them up before you leave class.

Next Period is Lunch:

Reminder: Dipping your straws in the applesauce
and sticking the wrappers on the ceiling is strictly forbidden.