Loose Change

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Didn't you hear? That's a proven method for enlarging your wee wee.

Too far?

Is "too far" some sort of slick double entendre?

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Is "too far" some sort of slick double entendre?

It wasn;t until you brought it up. Now...

[MTK]

Back on topic to the video if we can, I think it raises some interesting points that are worth discussing, and in the end I think the basic message is to question authority.

Personally I find the theory that United 93 was shot down to be very interesting. I dunno, the heroic story is nice for movies but I'm just not sure that I buy it.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Back on topic to the video if we can, I think it raises some interesting points that are worth discussing, and in the end I think the basic message is to question authority.

Personally I find the theory that United 93 was shot down to be very interesting. I dunno, the heroic story is nice for movies but I'm just not sure that I buy it.

It's interesting, but I think there is just too much evidence-even by the coroner who they "cite" (by chopping off portions of quotes of his), but never actually interview-to think there was some sort of conspiracy in play. I don't know maybe I'm just too close to this particular story to be very objective about it.

[cpayne5]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Back on topic to the video if we can, I think it raises some interesting points that are worth discussing, and in the end I think the basic message is to question authority.

Personally I find the theory that United 93 was shot down to be very interesting. I dunno, the heroic story is nice for movies but I'm just not sure that I buy it.

I think there is enough audio from both air traffic control communications and the phone calls the passengers were making to support the idea that the plane was not shot down.

The last article on this page is probably the best I've read, detailing the events that occurred on Flight 93.

September 11 News.com - Flight 93 - The Story of the Heroes of United Airlines Flight 93.

The heroes of Flight 93: Interviews with family and friends
detail the courage of everyday people.
By Kim Barker, Louise Kiernan, and Steve Mills © Chicago Tribune

[MTK]

Originally Posted by cpayne5

I think there is enough audio from both air traffic control communications and the phone calls the passengers were making to support the idea that the plane was not shot down.

The last article on this page is probably the best I've read, detailing the events that occurred on Flight 93.

September 11 News.com - Flight 93 - The Story of the Heroes of United Airlines Flight 93.

The heroes of Flight 93: Interviews with family and friends
detail the courage of everyday people.
By Kim Barker, Louise Kiernan, and Steve Mills © Chicago Tribune

good link but it really doesn't clear things up for me, I still think there are more questions than answers with what happened to United 93. There are some interesting questions raised here

[SmootSmack]

One thing I can't understand is why is there such a need to know? Why aren't the answers provided by the government, and other officials on site acceptable? I mean it just seems like some people are really pushing for some radical theory, but....Occam's Razor.

[SmootSmack]

I don't even know if Occam's Razor really applies there, I just like it.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

One thing I can't understand is why is there such a need to know? Why aren't the answers provided by the government, and other officials on site acceptable? I mean it just seems like some people are really pushing for some radical theory, but....Occam's Razor.

People will always (and should) challenge authority and isn't that the backbone of a democracy?

I'm not a fan of every wild theory associated with 9/11, but I do think there are some pretty significant questions out there that deserve to be discussed at the very least.

[70Chip]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I don't even know if Occam's Razor really applies there, I just like it.

Caveat Emptor, etc., etc.

In my new book, I will reveal that UA 93 was actually brought down by triangulated fire involving "Badgeman", Jack Ruby, and Clint Murchison, who is really still alive.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

People will always (and should) challenge authority and isn't that the backbone of a democracy?

I'm not a fan of every wild theory associated with 9/11, but I do think there are some pretty significant questions out there that deserve to be discussed at the very least.

Yeah, except I guess I don't think democracy means challenging and questioning for the sake of challenging and questioning. Which to me seems to largely be the case when it comes to many of the conspiracy theories tied to 9/11. It's like someone poses a question, an answer is given, and then that answer is never "good enough." And I just wonder what is "good enough?"

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Yeah, except I guess I don't think democracy means challenging and questioning for the sake of challenging and questioning. Which to me seems to largely be the case when it comes to many of the conspiracy theories tied to 9/11. It's like someone poses a question, an answer is given, and then that answer is never "good enough." And I just wonder what is "good enough?"

Yeah this is an excellent point, many conspiracy theorists are unwilling to listen to reason. They maintain a bias towards everything the government says, assuming it's all a lie. Based on this premise, it's pretty easy to keep circumventing what they say.

But a truly objective individual will keep an open mind to both wacky theories and dull government statements.

In the end, it comes down to the old adage: the simplest explanation is the most likely explanation.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Yeah, except I guess I don't think democracy means challenging and questioning for the sake of challenging and questioning. Which to me seems to largely be the case when it comes to many of the conspiracy theories tied to 9/11. It's like someone poses a question, an answer is given, and then that answer is never "good enough." And I just wonder what is "good enough?"

Are you 100% satisfied with the answers we've been given regarding 9/11?

Does the book on 9/11 deserve to be closed and never questioned?

If you think so more power to you. Personally I think there's more layers to peel back there.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Are you 100% satisfied with the answers we've been given regarding 9/11? If so more power to you. Personally I think there's more layers to peel back there.

I'm about to say some things to you that might get me banned!

No seriously though, I have some questions. But minor ones, and not nearly enough to believe this was an "inside job"

[MTK]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I'm about to say some things to you that might get me banned!

No seriously though, I have some questions. But minor ones, and not nearly enough to believe this was an "inside job"

I don't think that 9/11 was this mass gov't plot either, but it doesn't have to be in order to have some legitimate unanswered questions.