It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by JibbyJedi
I'm a bit out of touch with the up to date 9/11 documentaries or brief short clips. I'm from the old school of Loose Change, September Clues, 911 Mysteries, etc.
I have a friend who is sort of the alpha male of this group of acquaintances of mine, he is a long time Mensa member, and completely cemented in to the 9/11 Official Story. He's well read, 100s of books on many subjects, but he has no real depth beyond those pages of his books. He lacks the ability to think outside of the box, or outside the books in his case.
We got into an argument about jet fuel taking down the towers, and he wouldn't even discuss building 7 with me. He thinks I'm "out there" because of the things I speak about, you know the type I'm talking about... "9/11 was totally an inside job"... cue eye roll
So I was wondering, since I'm out of the current 9/11 truth research loop, which are the best documentaries to link him to as of 2012?
Thanks in advance.
Google Video Link |
Originally posted by JibbyJedi
which are the best documentaries to link him to as of 2012?
Originally posted by kwakakev
I do consider the arguments presented to be strong enough to stand up in a court of law.
Originally posted by JibbyJedi
I'm a bit out of touch with the up to date 9/11 documentaries or brief short clips. I'm from the old school of Loose Change, September Clues, 911 Mysteries, etc.
I have a friend who is sort of the alpha male of this group of acquaintances of mine, he is a long time Mensa member, and completely cemented in to the 9/11 Official Story. He's well read, 100s of books on many subjects, but he has no real depth beyond those pages of his books. He lacks the ability to think outside of the box, or outside the books in his case.
We got into an argument about jet fuel taking down the towers, and he wouldn't even discuss building 7 with me. He thinks I'm "out there" because of the things I speak about, you know the type I'm talking about... "9/11 was totally an inside job"... cue eye roll
So I was wondering, since I'm out of the current 9/11 truth research loop, which are the best documentaries to link him to as of 2012?
Originally posted by kwakakev
reply to post by spoor
For the same reason that every other court case that touches on the 9/11 subject gets dismissed with extreme prejudice. Even a petition to the ICC about the Bush 6 torture policy contravening the Geneva Convention has failed. For whatever reason, the legal system is not ready to confront this.
Originally posted by psikeyhackr
I have yet to see anything that I regard as superior to 9/11 Mysteries.
Originally posted by Six Sigma
Originally posted by psikeyhackr
I have yet to see anything that I regard as superior to 9/11 Mysteries.
Yes, doctoring footage like Sophia the producer did in this "documentary" makes it a great watch! Rick Siegel the owner of some of the footage was suing her (several years ago) for "adding fabricated explosions" to it.
great documentary, Truther!
9/11 Eyewitness vs. 9/11 Mysteries
Rick Siegel sues Sofia Smallstorm in Federal Lawsuit
by The Idaho Observer
It appears that Rick Siegel seems to have forgotten the thesis of “911 Eyewitness” itself – the film created by his partner Dave Shaw to demonstrate the pre- and mid-collapse explosions caught by Siegel’s camera as the towers collapsed. Siegel has expressed outrage toward Smallstorm on the Internet and in public emails for using the word “collapsed” at all – insisting the towers “exploded.” Additionally, “911 Mysteries” does not contend who was behind 9/11 ... in fact, the film is famous for its neutral and evidence-based presentation.
The last two years have been spent exchanging letters between lawyers – with Smallstorm explaining as clearly as possible what transpired between her and Siegel’s partners, who were published joint copyright holders to the “911 Eyewitness” film. Six years after he shot his “Original Footage,” Siegel registered an official copyright with the U.S. Copyright Office, and also copyrighted “911 Eyewitness” in his name. He maintains today that his partners were never authorized to give anyone permission to use his footage.
OR, it's the same reason the Wizard of Oz told Dorothy to "pay no attention to that man behind the curtain".
Yet, all he does is play with cardboard boxes like an eight year old and find new and exciting ways to ask people for more money in order to pay to create new and exciting ways to ask people for more money. Would you mind explaining why?
Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Yet, all he does is play with cardboard boxes like an eight year old and find new and exciting ways to ask people for more money in order to pay to create new and exciting ways to ask people for more money. Would you mind explaining why?
Originally posted by psikeyhackr
It appears that the Idaho Observer does not quite support your position.
That is the thing about 9/11 truthers. Endless misleading bullsh# and partial information. Truthers spread partial information that misdirects people in the direction they prefer.
I don't know what was or was not changed. A couple of seconds of supposed explosions in the discussion of a skyscraper collapse is irrelevant.
Originally posted by Six Sigma
Bad form, Truther.
Whether or not some sounds of explosions were added to a little segment of film has no effect on the conservation of momentum. I don't know and don't particularly care. You just know a suit was filed. You don't know if it was actually changed or not.
Regardless, I tell people, these buildings fell in 10 seconds, they’re 110 stories. Now let’s just use our mouth to demonstrate this. If a pancake collapse can be described as “clunkity clunk” How many times can you say that in 10 seconds? And if one floor is “clunkity clunk clunkity clunk” you cannot say that 110 times in 10 seconds. So let’s even give it the benefit of the doubt, let’s just take off the “clunk”. Let’s just say “clunkity”. You can’t say that in 10 seconds, 110 times.