|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
64.136.194.53
In Reply to: Internet film documentary on 9/11 posted by RGA on December 23, 2006 at 19:04:06:
NT
Follow Ups:
He is saying things like why is there no direct link from the De Classified files about the government planning a plane switchout in the film -- but there is later. This shows intent - a clear plan that the government could see planes being used as terrorist attacks. Government officials kept saying "we could never have seen this coming." I agree dates should have been used but in the statements - Michael Moore is a lot bette rabout that. Nevertheless the quotes were clearly after 9/11 and really taht is all that matters for the particular quotes in question.I'll try and watch on but it seems to be 3 hours. As for why there are several cuts -- plenty of directors cut things to shorten the film due to uneccessary length or to add things in to make points stronger. That is no reason to try and IMPLY that there is something shady going on. Implications so far into this film is all Iradian is offerring up. I hope it gets better soon.
In his own inimitable words: "When you try to label the government for being a butcher and slaughtering 3000 of his own people, you better provide concrete evidence to back that up."OK...
But then: "When did the Truth require a Second Edition or a Final Cut?" LOL! Answer: Many, many times after the main episode, as the government got its act together. Watching the shifting, whispering sands is one of the delights of a 9/11 researcher.
Thanks for introducing us to this screwy guy, who appears to be for hire cheap.
clark
based upon your apparent propensity to believe many conspiracy theories, at any rate, people can watch both videos and decide for themselves which make sense to them. The rebuttal makes the most sense to me.
...do *you* believe about the events of 9/11?
Yes but the rebuttal is filled with outright lies and I am not even 15 minutes into it. I am definitely on your side that you can;t just take the initial documentary on face value but at the same tim eif the rebuttal film has obvious outright lies then you have a serious problem.This for example
"11:05 into the film. Iradian tries to minimize the fact that Mayor Willie Brown of San Francisco was warned 8 hours before the 9/11 that "Americans should be cautious about their air travel."
Iradian goes on to lie by stating that the Mayor took the flight anyway. [and then suggestes the makers of Loose Change are liars of omission and cannot be trusted] This is false. The mayor instead went to City Hall, and on the way made phone calls to close down all city buildings and schools.
Another lie by Mark Iradian.
Article here:
[link to www.sfgate.com]"I read the article and I don't see where Iradian can make his claim?
It's not a conspiracy theory when the facts are on video - conspiracy facts should not be relegated to theory - the Big Bang and evolution are only theories but pretty much all of science back them.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: