ABC News Vs. Loose Change

If you watch the latest "Loose Change" video, they state that Obama Bin Laden had been treated by a U.S. military hospital, and he may have still been in that hospital on 9/11/01, when the WTC was struck.

Anyone who isn't listening to the information that keeps coming out and isn't actively questioning the official report has their head buried deep into something.

Most of what I heard in this video I have already researched, and they are dead on with the facts. You have recordings of the events at the time, and interviews which clearly show that the opportunity to rig the buildings to blow was there, the reports of numerous bombs going off to take the buildings down, covered up evidence, on and on, not to mention historical evidence that shows buildings like this don't fall from these fires, or plane impacts. The science demonstrates that these building should not have fallen, anyone who has read the reports knows this.

reply to post by Doc Velocity


Doc to just assume you know what hundreds of thousand of people will think as a result of something that hasn't happened, isn't really denying ignorance now is it? And theories and questions are two totally different things. Theories arise from questions. So to address the issues, you must address the questions. The theories are just people trying to answer questions that have yet to be answered. And if they have been answered, please re-answer some because I must have missed it. I notice you didn't actually address any issues, just made up some story in your mind and posted it to label a whole group of people that you don't even know.

All I know about you is these characteristics, but why would I think your opinion is more valuable when you offered nothing but a slanderous post based on an imaginary situation .. complete with you deciding how everyone was going to respond?

I know I'm not qualified to read the 9/11 Commission Report, but I have questions lying within it. My questions aren't my theories. Obviously being a truther, you see me a little slow, but I will ask you one question. Why was Norman Mineta's testimony omitted from the Commission Report? If you aren't familiar with Mr Mineta, Mineta testified that he arrived at the PEOC at 9:20 a.m. and that Vice President Cheney was already present with his staff. The 9/11 Commission Report states that Cheney himself arrived at the PEOC at 9:58, a stunning 38 minute contradiction to Mineta's testimony.

He also says Mrs Cheney was there, too, And he's the one that told the story of Cheney being briefed by an unnamed man saying "the plane is 50 miiles out, 40 miles out, 30 ... when he got to 10 he asked "Do the orders still stand?" Ad cheney said yes the orders still stand. Weird, huh? According to the Commission Report, Cheney wasn't even in the room until 9:58a. Mineat's story is pretty descriptive to just be a total lie. Don't you think Cheney would remember where he was when the plane hit? So, when you get that answer, I would like to hear it. No theory, no explosives ... just a question.

Smartest thing those guys did (Dylan and Korey) was have their own film crew present to capture the whole thing, so when their words are taken out of context, they'll have some back up.

Great post Eagle790, and this is in no way meant to detract from that.
However, I'm not so sure the BBC is better than any of the others.
Here's a report some members may not have seen. The BBC reporting of building 7's collapse BEFORE it happened.

funny how they lost the satellite link huh

www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by Eagle790
Today's news is more one sided. The best source of news currently is the BBC. BBC Americas covers both sides of issues.

Look at there coverage of the 9/11 attacks and subsequent 9/11 truth challenges.

[edit on 9-3-2010 by ppk55]

This interview couldn't have come at a better time. When the media is scrambling to portray truthers as the mentally ill, crazed gun toting, right wing conspirator who are out to cause violence.

We have two young men, that are not only intelligent and well spoken, but very cool headed and gave well-thought responses to the reporter's questions.

Thanks to this, it puts a dent in the recent image of truthers that the media has been attempting to build up for days.

Here it is guys ABC Nightline Chris Bury (as in Bury the truth) the story.

ABC News Interview

The piece begins with an introduction of the story depicting John Bedell the penatagon attacker as a "truther". Then, as predicted, the story began with the reporter framing the story by defining the "truther movement" as "largely discredited". Watch the abc video and compare it with the video shot by the "truthers".



added video..


[edit on 9-3-2010 by Leo Strauss]

A great example of the duplicity and agenda of ABC News is the brief snippet of Sander Hicks. Hicks is manipulated into discrediting himself by claiming he is a scientist which is easily proved false. This is done so that the viewer of the report will identify with the interviewer’s point of view. The interviewer’s point of view is that this man is misguided or even crazy and the come away will be that this movement is filled with the “lunatic fringe” that the reporter continually mentions

However, what ABC News does NOT mention is that within the very room where this report is filed there are credentialed professionals, engineers, scientists, etc who question the 9/11 events. These degreed professionals are not interviewed. Why?

reply to post by Leo Strauss


Yeah, this video is a prime example of why I don't bother with mainstream media news anymore. They show the most negative images they can find of the people they are out to discredit. They repeat their lies over and over so that those watching the show, who do not want to know the truth, can keep their heads buried.

There are so many people out there who simply do not want to know the truth.

Originally posted by poet1b
If you watch the latest "Loose Change" video, they state that Obama Bin Laden had been treated by a U.S. military hospital, and he may have still been in that hospital on 9/11/01, when the WTC was struck.

...and you you listen to the claim closely, you'll notice it came from "undisclosed reports" from "anonymous sources", just like every OTHER screwball claim being used by those damned fool conspiracy web sites. They do this becuase it's utterly impossible to corroborate, so it gives them an easy out to make any ridiculous conspiracy claim they want.

I myself go by the Bin Laden interview by Pakistani journalist Hamid mir, who interviewed Bin Laden only weeks after the 9/11 attack. the whole reason Bin Laden supposedly went to that hospital is becuase of his supposed kidney problems, so Hamid Mir specifically asked bin Laden about his kidneys. Bin Laden laughed and said his kidneys are fine.

Therefore, no kidney problems = no hospital visit, particularly a hospital visit that would require a patient with critical kidney issues to stay and miss an interview with a Pakistani journalist shortly thereafter. Dylan Avery is grasping at any ridiculous straw he can to get people all paranoid over shadows, here.

Anyone who isn't listening to the information that keeps coming out and isn't actively questioning the official report has their head buried deep into something.

...and anyone who is actively quoting the horse [censored] that con artist Dylan Avery is putting out without looking to see if it's even true is either gullible as all hell, or they want to believe it's true becuase they have an emotional need to believe some secret conspiracies are real. No amount of cute "we all have our heads buried into something" slogans is going to change the fact that you're only making yourself look bad from drinking Loose Change Kool Aid, not us or anyone else.


[edit on 9-3-2010 by GoodOlDave]

Fifteen years ago, mainstream was calling the internet a fad - that would just go away. Now, a good portion of that mainstream establishment is... going out of business. Funny. I remember hearing that in 1995 - 1996... and all the way up to least 2001.

It seems like the number of people asking questions about 911 are growing at similar rate.

Ha. I find it funny as all hell. Pretty sure the trends are quite comparable.

ABC = Another Bureau Closed.

These two young guys are just amazing. Thanks for sharing the videos, instant favourites.

reply to post by Leo Strauss

Same conference, different news organisation – completely different coverage. Watch this video from RT. I also get the impression, that the RT correspondent Marina Portnaya looks a bit shaken. She is very earnest. I don't know if this is her normal behaviour, or if she has learned something on the conference which has disenchanted her world view.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


No, it did not come from undisclosed sources.

www.globalresearch.ca...

The CIA met Bin Laden while undergoing treatment at an American Hospital last July in Dubai

by Alexandra Richard
Translated courtesy of Tiphaine Dickson

Le Figaro, 11 October 2001
Posted at globalresearch.ca 2 November 2001

Dubai, one of the seven emirates of the Federation of the United Arab Emirates, North-East of Abi-Dhabi. This city, population 350,000, was the backdrop of a secret meeting between Osama bin Laden and the local CIA agent in July. A partner of the administration of the American Hospital in Dubai claims that public enemy number one stayed at this hospital between the 4th and 14th of July.

Having taken off from the Quetta airport in Pakistan, bin Laden was transferred to the hospital upon his arrival at Dubai airport. He was accompanied by his personal physician and faithful lieutenant, who could be Ayman al-Zawahari--but on this sources are not entirely certain--, four bodyguards, as well as a male Algerian nurse, and admitted to the American Hospital, a glass and marble building situated between the Al-Garhoud and Al-Maktoum bridges.

So according to you. all the firefighters who were interviewed as all a bunch of liars?

All the structural engineers, scientist, and other professional who have publicly stated that the towers could not been brought down by the resulting fires are all a bunch of liars?

The NIST study is garbage, and even Popular Science came up with some expanding metal nonsense that certainly wouldn't have resulted in the free fall demolition of the towers we see in the film footage.

All the witnesses interviewed who refute the official story, and yet you refuse to doubt the Official Story?

This stuff isn't hard to look up and confirm.

The best point made in their entire interview was that ABC news and other of the alphabet soup TV news have covered 9/11 truth more in the days after the pentagon shooting than in the 7 years previously. They finally have a way to portray 9/11 truthers as the 'lunatic fringe'.
For the emotion Dylan showed: I think that will be the only thing put on the news, having said that it was reasonable considering some of the reporters questions. Especially when it was obvious he was just going for a quick soundbite, he was probably just hoping to run the 'So, you believe the government slaughtered their own people on 9/11?' ...'yes' garbage. The reporter threw in words with heavy connotations like lunatic, slaughtered, etc. to try and get an emotional response to put on the news but didn't get what he was hoping for.
If ABC ran the interview in full they would look horrible. Their points were refuted and observations disproved by a student in college and a guy making music videos for a living.

Hard to win an argument when the facts aren't on your side.

reply to post by Drunkenshrew


Thanks for the video!

Isn't it amazing that Russia Today seems to be the only news organization willing to simply report on 9/11 truth. I found the story by RT to be fairly accurate and not necessarily supportive or critical of 9/11 truth. Just the facts about what facets of the "truth movement" believe and how they are being ignored by the MSM. On the other hand we have ABC editorializing from the beginning of their report with the "largely discredited" line and "lunatic fringe" comments.

In fact ABC News would not have come to this conference if John Bedell had not attacked the Pentagon. It is obvious they were there to smear 9/11 truth with the "dangerous lunatics" brush.

Originally posted by davec0021

Originally posted by T0by
reply to post by davec0021

 

Wouldn't that apply more-so to the debunkers?

As people have pointed out it's both. I can admit it can everyone else here?

I know I certainly can admit there are cultish truthers out there.
Because it's a fact, there are. On both sides. I love facts.
It's the truth so I embrace it.

The very nature of the 'alternative' standpoint on 9/11 just begs for 'alternative' types of people to join the ranks.

The media, and the general public shouldn't be concerned in the slightest as to what kinds of people are truthers.
The only thing that matters is facts.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by poet1b
If you watch the latest "Loose Change" video, they state that Obama Bin Laden had been treated by a U.S. military hospital, and he may have still been in that hospital on 9/11/01, when the WTC was struck.

...and you you listen to the claim closely, you'll notice it came from "undisclosed reports" from "anonymous sources", just like every OTHER screwball claim being used by those damned fool conspiracy web sites. They do this becuase it's utterly impossible to corroborate, so it gives them an easy out to make any ridiculous conspiracy claim they want.

I myself go by the Bin Laden interview by Pakistani journalist Hamid mir, who interviewed Bin Laden only weeks after the 9/11 attack. the whole reason Bin Laden supposedly went to that hospital is becuase of his supposed kidney problems, so Hamid Mir specifically asked bin Laden about his kidneys. Bin Laden laughed and said his kidneys are fine.

Therefore, no kidney problems = no hospital visit, particularly a hospital visit that would require a patient with critical kidney issues to stay and miss an interview with a Pakistani journalist shortly thereafter. Dylan Avery is grasping at any ridiculous straw he can to get people all paranoid over shadows, here.

Anyone who isn't listening to the information that keeps coming out and isn't actively questioning the official report has their head buried deep into something.

...and anyone who is actively quoting the horse [censored] that con artist Dylan Avery is putting out without looking to see if it's even true is either gullible as all hell, or they want to believe it's true becuase they have an emotional need to believe some secret conspiracies are real. No amount of cute "we all have our heads buried into something" slogans is going to change the fact that you're only making yourself look bad from drinking Loose Change Kool Aid, not us or anyone else.


[edit on 9-3-2010 by GoodOlDave]

Man, you are pretty WEAK as a "debunker" there, champ. You are grabbing onto one thread of the story and saying that PROVES that the two boys are 100 PERCENT WRONG. Therefore, any ONE of the other points in their movie is enough to prove the OS 100 PERCENT WRONG. So which is it? You are weak at your job. If I was your boss I would fire you and get someone a little smarter to try to debunk all these threads, because you are not fooling anybody. Tell em to call me.

reply to post by Drunkenshrew


Thanks for the clip. I really liked that news story, it was alot more balanced. Isn't the contrast between the two news stations absolutely amazing?

Respect for those guys

What I don't get is why it looks like this is an American problem !

I live in the Netherlands ( Europe ) and that bloody attack dragged us in the same crap you all found yourself ended up in.

Dutch cabinet fell recently over the deployment of troops to Afghanistan on an next/extended mission.
They should have walked away a few weeks before ! An investigation ruled the war in Iraq IS an illegal war. I heard Tony Blair said it, following with the words he will do it again if he would to do it all again.

The problem is, we are all in this crap together and the evidence is there to put all politicians who served that time period on death row.
But No ! They only say sorry but... to comfort you I'll do it again.

And people do nothing ???

You can't even begin to imagine how much effort I need to stop myself not going berserk when I read you all arguing about such a small thing but at the same time we're all still getting screwed from behind. No ! scratch that you people know. What did the guy say criminal negligence?

We are just as guilty ! Shame on you !:shk:

Nice post by the way. S&F

reply to post by Leo Strauss


The story also claims that the jet fuel did indeed "melt" the steel. Now I cannot find one debunker here yet that has not insisted that no steel was melted. Why would ABC's own narrator claim that it was and not by lengthy office fires but just the jet fuel?