9/11 predicted by the film "The Long Kiss Goodnight", 5 years ago before it actually happened

reply to post by Sherlock Holmes


My comment was concerning 'The Lone Gunmen', not 'The Long Kiss Goodnight'... and to answer you question, yes it's sillier to think that, because the timeline of events couldn't have worked the way LukeT0116 was speculating. Therefore, we know it has to be the case that 'bin Laden' didn't get his idea from 'The Lone Gunmen'

reply to post by Sherlock Holmes


... hard to know what could have motivated the writers of 'The Long Kiss Goodnight' to make it that way, but I'm leaving open the possibility of coincidence... however I'm MUCH less inclined to attribute mere coincidence to 'The Lone Gunmen' pilot script.

Originally posted by OrganicAnagram33
My comment was concerning 'The Lone Gunmen', not 'The Long Kiss Goodnight'... and to answer you question, yes it's sillier to think that, because the timeline of events couldn't have worked the way LukeT0116 was speculating. Therefore, we know it has to be the case that 'bin Laden' didn't get his idea from 'The Lone Gunmen'.

I think that LukeT0116 was replying to the video in the OP ( The Long Kiss Goodnight ), rather than your video of ''The Lone Gunmen'' pilot.

reply to post by Sherlock Holmes


Well, if that was the case I'm sorry for responding as if it were about 'The Lone Gunmen'. However, in regards to his post if he was actually responding to 'The Long Kiss Goodnight', what could the terrorists glean from that film in terms of ideas? It really seemed like he was referring to 'The Lone Gunmen'.

Originally posted by OrganicAnagram33
Well, if that was the case I'm sorry for responding as if it were about 'The Lone Gunmen'. However, in regards to his post if he was actually responding to 'The Long Kiss Goodnight', what could the terrorists glean from that film in terms of ideas? It really seemed like he was referring to 'The Lone Gunmen'.

No problem. I guess the element of confusion for both of us arose because of the fact that there were two different excerpts from films/TV shows that have been posted in this thread.

However, I'd still like to know why people would think that hints and clues to the 11th September attacks would be put in films and TV shows - hardly memorable blockbusters - many years before !

reply to post by Sherlock Holmes


That's a good question... and a few potential answers come to mind.

For one, this could be someone's way of warning us, or letting us know it was 'from the inside'.

It could also be a matter of the secret government putting these things in plain sight so we are desensitized, we say 'you're crazy, that's in a TV show it can't be really what happened.' Hiding things in plain sight is sometimes one of the most effective things to do... a powerful psychological move. You're questioning the absurdity of it.

reply to post by OrganicAnagram33


I was referring to the video by the op. All i was trying to say was that it seems a silly idea that people think that a film could "prewarn" us about a future terroist attack. They wouldn't have let it released to the public that's all i'm saying. So no I wasn't wrong in what i was saying, it was merely an opinion.

P.S. you really do need to take a chill pill

In 1898 Morgan Robertson wrote a book called Futility or the Wreck of the Titan.

The Titan was a huge and luxurious ocean liner which hit an iceberg in the north Atlantic in April. There was great loss of life because of insufficient life-boats.

The circumstances described in the book mirrored the Titanic disaster of 14 years later much closer than anything related to 9/11.

Evidence of conspiracy ?

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by LukeT0116


I'm sorry I assumed you were addressing my post.

...but quit fappin it into your own brain... and go od on a bottle of chill pills

reply to post by Alfie1


Hahaha, good point... (merely for the speculation) what would be the motivation for conspiring to sink the Titanic? Who benefits?

The powerful non-citizen 'victims' of 9/11 got everything they wanted. PNAC got their recommendations followed, the presidential admin got to invade 2 countries that had nothing to do with that day... the patriot act castrates the populous of their rights. The list goes on... there are many more reasons to question 9/11 than the sinking of the Titanic, although that was a good point and a good find.

Originally posted by OrganicAnagram33
reply to post by Alfie1

 

Hahaha, good point... (merely for the speculation) what would be the motivation for conspiring to sink the Titanic? Who benefits?

The powerful non-citizen 'victims' of 9/11 got everything they wanted. PNAC got their recommendations followed, the presidential admin got to invade 2 countries that had nothing to do with that day... the patriot act castrates the populous of their rights. The list goes on... there are many more reasons to question 9/11 than the sinking of the Titanic, although that was a good point and a good find.

You mean you don't think the Titanic disaster was the result of a conspiracy by the NWO ? Well I suppose it would have been the Old WO back then.

Anyways, have a look at this and I am sure you will be as shocked as I was :-

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by Alfie1


That was hilarious, thank you!

Not sure if anyone else mentioned this, but Tom Clancy wrote a book called, "Debt of Honor" which covered a hypothetical war with modern day Japan. The climax involved a JAL pilot's family being killed during the war, and out of grief he hijacked a Boeing 747, murdered the crew, and flew it into the US capitol in a suicide attack. Here's the kicker- the book was published in 1994.

So the question is, if all these movies, books, and authors were using hypothetical attacks using hijacked planes as suicide weapons, why do you conspiracy people consider it such a reach that a bunch of Islamic fundamentalists could have gotten the idea too? I think it's a given that out of all the possible suspects of who you believe was really behind the 9/11 attack, it wasn't Tom Clancy.

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by OrganicAnagram33
reply to post by Alfie1

 

Hahaha, no. Cheney was involved in the formation of continuity of government procedures a decade before that, he has lied many times and has his hand in the honey jar.

I'm sorry, that doesn't make any sense to me. In 1996, when the film referred to in the op was made, Bill Clinton was President with Al Gore vice President in a democrat administration .

G Bush's republican administration started 2001 with Cheney as vice-president. What role did Cheney have in 1996 and what does " continuity of government procedures mean "?

Dick Cheney had already been Secretary of Defence under George H W Bush, during operation Desert Storm (remarkable for someone who had FIVE deferments from being called up to serve in Viet Nam). In 1996, he was conveniently CEO of Halliburton, a company with a vested interest in Mid East conflict being used to drive up the price of oil. He has also been an Assistant to the President, Chief of Staff of the White House, and Minority Whip amongst several other high ranking political positions. He has held high ranking Government positions at least as far back as the Ford administration.

He is also a convicted felon, having been convicted of DWI. Drunks seems to flock together (GWB was also an alcoholic).

As far as "continuity of Government procedures", this refers to the fact that if the Federal Executive is decimated, there will always be someone there to step up and take charge. After having so many high ranking Government positions, Cheney would have been intimately familiar with such procedures at least 20 years before he was Vice President.

reply to post by babybunnies


Yeah, I should have said two decades before that. Good points as well.

Cheney has all the trappings of a sociopath... not even going to talk about old 'Rummy' right now.

Check out this article from last year: Texas Man Shot by Vice President Cheney in 2006 Still Waiting for Apology

If you watch the video in the link (news report from when it happened), they also mention a solitary instance of his relationship with Scalia. You can smell the corruption

reply to post by babybunnies


The fact that Dick Cheney was CEO of Haliburton in 1996 does nothing to convince me that he was influential at that time in regard to a fictional movie which had no real similarity to 9/11 anyway.

I don't subscribe to the commonly held truther view that there is no real difference between Democrat and Republican.

In any event, I don't think mass murderers usually wish to advertise their intent years beforehand.

It goes to the old saying "where there is smoke, there is fire". The reason they can be so blase about blaming an atrocity on the muslims, is that they set themselves up as the perfect scapegoat. We all see on the news, read in the papers etc... about how they act and react. They have done it to themselves. Should they ever become "civilized" it would be much more difficult to pin such crimes upon them.

So the NWO order control Hollywood's output?

Then why do they permit some films to criticise things that they must surely benefit from? I'm thinking big pharma simply because I watched Love and Other Drugs recently. I find it hard to believe that if something like the NWO existed it wouldn't be heavily involved in the pharmaceutical industry.

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes

However, I'd still like to know why people would think that hints and clues to the 11th September attacks would be put in films and TV shows - hardly memorable blockbusters - many years before !

edit on 24-4-2011 by Sherlock Holmes because: (no reason given)

How about this scenario.

The Loose Change guys watched "The Long Goodnight" before September 11 2001.

After the events of September 11 happened..........the Loose change guys can't quite separate reality from fiction......and then proceed to make their own "movie".........and the rest they say is history.
It's probably not too dissimilar to those people who watch tv soaps and think that the soap is a real life documentary.

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
So the NWO order control Hollywood's output?

Yeah that makes a lot of sense........the vast vast majority of Holywood out put is fiction......where better to include these "messages" than if the land of fiction!