Ain't It Cool News (www.aintitcool.com)
Movie News

Harry sees Oliver Stone's WORLD TRADE CENTER trailer!

Hey folks, Harry here... Yesterday I got given an advance look at Oliver Stone's WORLD TRADE CENTER trailer. Now first of all, yes, I'm fully aware of how "inappropriate" most of you feel the marrying of OLIVER STONE to the subject matter of the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center could be. However, from the trailer - and from the screenplay - I can say, with absolute certainty - that this isn't the film that conservative muckrakers would expect from Ollie.

This trailer is about 3-4 weeks away from appearing for the rest of the world to judge. In fact - most of the digital effects are yet to be included. Not that there are many to be added in. This trailer isn't about showing you the planes colliding with the towers - instead it's about the shadows those planes cast on to the streets below. It's about the tremor upon impact that those in the building felt and the "what was that" looks on the faces of those in the building. Moreso, the trailer is about setting up the Port Authority Police Sarge, played by Nicholas Cage. It's Cage in his rattled nervous best. However, the trailer is really cut to be as "sympathetic" as possible, to give it a "story of hope" feeling. Having said that - this is a true story, based on a pair of Port Authority officers that did get caught in the rubble and apparently did make it out. And those officers apparently were on set everyday giving their recollections of the events.

Nothing in the trailer screamed Oliver Stone. There was no film stock changes or over saturated or desaturated images. It's a very handsomely shot film - in terms of texture to the images - it kinda came across like WALL STREET in the lighting package, but obviously a very different story. Stone's going to draw a lot of fire from those that just believe he's an insane liberal loon, but from the look of the trailer, he's trying to make a film that takes the focus of that horrific day's memory, and place it firmly where it belongs... on those that dove in and tried to save as many people as possible, and somehow made it out alive. That wasn't a conservative or liberal act - it was a purely human and heroic act, and that's what this film seems to be about. At least from the trailer.

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • March 31, 2006, 12:50 p.m. CST

    Frist

    by Forestal

  • March 31, 2006, 12:53 p.m. CST

    Fox News Alert: Stone's 9/11 Film Will Eat Your Brain

    by Deep Cover

    And does rebuking Jesus by marrying another man cause hurricanes? Tonight, on "The Factor"!

  • March 31, 2006, 12:57 p.m. CST

    Wow, Nic Cage with rattled nerves

    by starya45

    That's new.

  • March 31, 2006, 12:57 p.m. CST

    hmmm...

    by vinceklortho

    can't wait to see the trailer.

  • March 31, 2006, 12:59 p.m. CST

    I just want the rants

    by kahootz

    Darn. I was hoping it would be a loonely conspiracy movie just to watch the right EXPLODE.

  • March 31, 2006, 1:02 p.m. CST

    Conspiracy Alert Contest

    by theBigE

    Ok, contest time - let's predict how many talk-back posts in the next 24 hours will be of the "9/11 was a Republican Plot" type. I'm guessing you'll see no less than 100!

  • March 31, 2006, 1:03 p.m. CST

    9/11 was a Republican Plot

    by drjohnnyfever

    Well, not really, but I aim to please. 99 to go!

  • March 31, 2006, 1:04 p.m. CST

    Where's that AGE guy at? I know he's gotten a whiff..

    by IAmJack'sUserID

    ...of yet another opportunity to post telling us to keep an open mind, unless of course you already believe in the Report and he'll quickly dismiss your opinion while whining about people doing the same to him.

  • March 31, 2006, 1:06 p.m. CST

    9/11 was a Republican Plot

    by TheLastBystander

    I don't want to let Cheney pull another 9/11, or so Larouche tells me. George Bush personally authorized the attacks. If you don't believe this then you hate freedom.

  • March 31, 2006, 1:06 p.m. CST

    Boooooooooooooooooo

    by FluffyUnbound

    I boo this movie.

  • March 31, 2006, 1:07 p.m. CST

    I would've preferred the conspiracy.

    by MattCG

  • March 31, 2006, 1:08 p.m. CST

    I would've preferred the conspiracy.

    by MattCG

    9/11 was a crime and a violent one yeah, but all the sensitive whining aside, there are questions about that day that need to be answered and all this sappy-pappy, cuddly, we're all heroes bullshit is seriously starting to get old. When are people going to start viewing it with an objective eye? Oliver Stone really sold out on this.

  • March 31, 2006, 1:10 p.m. CST

    Who wants to watch a 9/11 movie?

    by Spice-Orange

    we already lived through the real thing. yawn. where there WW2 movies 4 years after WW2 ended? I think not. I'd rather see Ice Age 4: The search for a plotline

  • March 31, 2006, 1:10 p.m. CST

    As nutty as the conspiracy theorists are...

    by Deep Cover

    ...there's just as many righties who need to believe all lefties are unhinged kooks in order to justify their existence. Honestly, unless you're stinking rich, there is no reason to be a Republican. None.

  • March 31, 2006, 1:13 p.m. CST

    9/11 was a Republican Plot- 97 more to go

    by Meremoth

    Isn't it too soon to make a film with 9/11 anyway. This capitilizing on 9/11 really pisses me off to be honest.

  • March 31, 2006, 1:14 p.m. CST

    actually...

    by TheLastBystander

    "where there WW2 movies 4 years after WW2 ended?" actually there were. not war movies necessarily, and I agree there does seem to be a pointlessness to making these 9-11 movies now, but lots of movies of the 40s dealt with world war 2. just look at Casablanca, from 1941. or the 1946 The Best Years of Our Lives which dealt with the lives of returned soldiers.

  • March 31, 2006, 1:15 p.m. CST

    Does anyone...

    by brycemonkey

    feel depressed that there are 2 similarly themed movies racing to see who can cash in first on the 9/11 tragedy? Studio execs fighting in a Deep Impact v Armaggedon style has never seemed so pathetic.

  • March 31, 2006, 1:15 p.m. CST

    Hey! let's get David Duke to Direct a Civil Rights flik

    by Fandude

    Yeah, Ollie will do just fine. He doesn't have a conspiracy bone in....oh, never mind.

  • March 31, 2006, 1:18 p.m. CST

    if you dont believe this then you hate freedom?

    by washisdead

    that sounds like something a republican would say. if you are going to spew half baked lunatic conpiracy theories, have the nuts to back it up with evidence. i am as liberal as the day is long, but at least i have the decency not to cheapen the memory of the dead with an agenda... and so does oliver stone. find an audiance that cares... this is a movie website. wrong venue buddy

  • March 31, 2006, 1:18 p.m. CST

    Harry, what gives?

    by casinoskunk

    you finally show your face wround here, just to review a trailer? come on now. call me when you've seen superman returns.

  • March 31, 2006, 1:20 p.m. CST

    Politics Aside . . .

    by Guy Gaduois

    Can't I just think that the last several movies Oliver made were ass? Apparently, no - my disdain for that fiasco 'Alexander' makes me a muckraker. A conservative muckraker. 'The Doors' wasn't unwatchable dreck, I'm just out to grind a political axe. The sound of Harry pulling his own head out of his ass will rival the sonic boom of the space shuttle's re-entry. Oh - 9/11 was all a conspiracy, Dick Cheney hates lesbians, Conservative right wants to make us all go to church . . . if you don't believe it you hate freedom, America, handicapped children, puppies and sunshine.

  • March 31, 2006, 1:21 p.m. CST

    Thanks for proving my point, Anchorite

    by Deep Cover

    You've managed to sniff out a liberal plot without even screening the trailer, much less the film. Like I said, you people need Oliver Stone and Cindy Sheehan a hell of a lot more than we do.

  • March 31, 2006, 1:22 p.m. CST

    what

    by washisdead

  • March 31, 2006, 1:23 p.m. CST

    what?

    by washisdead

    what does being proud of the military have anything to do with a movie about 9/11? thats like saying "i am pro war cause i support the troops"... if you supported the troops yous be ANTI war... cause war has a tendancy to KILL the troops

  • March 31, 2006, 1:24 p.m. CST

    "if you dont believe this then you hate freedom?"

    by TheLastBystander

    ahahaha what does nobody have any sense of sarcasm on this site? what is wrong with you people? and where is the guy who said how no movies were made about WW2 right after it?

  • March 31, 2006, 1:24 p.m. CST

    Is there any intercutting in the film...

    by epitone

    ...to Bush and Cheney dancing around in their underwear singing "Now we can invade Iraq, now we can invade Iraq, goody goody gumdrops"? Because I would totally include that.

  • March 31, 2006, 1:26 p.m. CST

    yeah, there were WW2 movies during WW2

    by vinceklortho

  • March 31, 2006, 1:27 p.m. CST

    yeah, i actually love that line...

    by vinceklortho

    "If you don't believe this, then you hate freedom". hilarious.

  • March 31, 2006, 1:28 p.m. CST

    intercutting

    by TheLastBystander

    yes there is. they wont show that till the tv spots, tho, to try and catch the comedy crowd. colin ferrel plays Bush. it's all in the script.

  • March 31, 2006, 1:31 p.m. CST

    It wasn't a conspiracy

    by Judas_Noose

    Why is it SO difficult to believe that just a small group of dedicated terrorists could orchestrate such a violent attack? It only takes one pin prick to pop the most beautiful balloon. Enough with the "Republicans did it". Democrats aren't known for their powers of observation, either.

  • March 31, 2006, 1:31 p.m. CST

    by washisdead

    i am done posting on talkbacks man... 85% of you people are adel-minded dullards that have about as much of clue as stevie wonder at a silent movie. to the 15% that appreciate movies, the people who make them, and can articulate a solid point... thank you... the rest should go back to whacking off to pictures of Ann Coulter.(wow... its fun to be an jerk)

  • March 31, 2006, 1:34 p.m. CST

    I hear they're filming 9/12 and 9/13 at the same time

    by durhay

    One of the subplots is how scientists were able to determine the affect that vapor trails have on temperature, as all flights were cancelled the following days. Gripping.

  • March 31, 2006, 1:34 p.m. CST

    now i see why you guys are jerks

    by washisdead

    i really dont mean i word i say... its just fun

  • March 31, 2006, 1:38 p.m. CST

    washisdead

    by TheLastBystander

    no dont go... please... we need a humorless pretentious "movie lover" around here to show us the true meaning of life. cause obviously I hate movies, the troops, America, and freedom. man I hate freedom. what has freedom ever done for me? and the Truth. what's so good about the Truth?

  • March 31, 2006, 1:38 p.m. CST

    I've always wondered why (regarding JFK) it's either

    by durhay

    Oswald acted alone or vast government/mob conspiracy. Why couldn't it be a conspiracy of two people who just plain hated on JFK?

  • March 31, 2006, 1:39 p.m. CST

    This > United 93

    by zikade zarathos

    I have much more faith in Stone than I have in Greengrass to deliver an honest-to-God GOOD 9/11 movie.

  • March 31, 2006, 1:41 p.m. CST

    bystander

    by washisdead

    see! we can all have a good time and be vicious too! i give you credit for calling me out on being pretentious... cause i am. you are the first... ive been crapping all over these boards for a few days now... but humorless? maybe... i thought it was funny

  • March 31, 2006, 1:42 p.m. CST

    about 9/11 movies

    by TheLastBystander

    I hate to say it, but in some ways I think a 9/11 film should somehow say something we don't all already know. We don't need a conspiracy theory or a "here is why Bush personally did it" or whatever, but something beyond the same stories and ideas we've heard for the last 5 years might give the film a purpose for existing besides just acknowledging that the event happened and some people were very heroic that day. just my thoughts.

  • March 31, 2006, 1:42 p.m. CST

    and to washisdead

    by TheLastBystander

    hmm u have a point. let's play a round of pool and call it a day.

  • March 31, 2006, 1:47 p.m. CST

    LOL

    by Deep Cover

    He accuses me of putting words in his mouth, then posts more conservative nuttery. I'll stop picking on him, though - it's just too easy.

  • March 31, 2006, 1:49 p.m. CST

    Why World Trade Center Will Suck

    by NeoCon

    News Flash! Oliver Stone Can't Make a Good Movie Any More! He hasn't in over 10 years. A lot of directors more talented than him have lost it (Coppola, Woody Allen, etc.), why can't we just accept that he is a hack? Do we need to go through his film credits over the past 10 years. "Platoon" and "Wall Street" were a long time ago. PS- Has there ever been a bigger kiss-ass than Harry?

  • March 31, 2006, 1:50 p.m. CST

    Neocon - don't forget Spielberg ;)

    by scrumdiddly

  • March 31, 2006, 1:51 p.m. CST

    as paul bettany would say...

    by washisdead

    he who would pun would pick a pocket. in all seriousness i am glad that there is such a strong reaction to a movie like this or flight 93. i think healthy debate is our responsabilty as americans. whether or not you agree, you have to give hollywood credit for trying to get people thinking. its better than pretending it didnt happen.

  • March 31, 2006, 1:52 p.m. CST

    Harry, you're making it sound boring and safe...

    by indiephantom

    and that's not what I pay to see Oliver Stone movies for. I want a film that is going to make me think, not just feel. I hope this film is more challenging and has Stone's voice behind it. We have enough hero worshipping crap to last us three lifetimes. I want a movie that points fingers.

  • March 31, 2006, 1:54 p.m. CST

    Knock knock...

    by PULLDASTRINK!

    Sam and Janet evening...

  • March 31, 2006, 1:54 p.m. CST

    wow... i just wont shut up today

    by washisdead

    you cant judge a movie by its trailer. we may yet see something interesting from ollie... but i doubt it. alexander nuetered him.

  • March 31, 2006, 1:56 p.m. CST

    More Gulf of Tonkin this time

    by BrandLoyalist

    No references to it at all in the United 93 talkbacks.

  • March 31, 2006, 1:58 p.m. CST

    colin ferrel as Bush

    by TheLastBystander

    who agrees with this at least?

  • March 31, 2006, 2 p.m. CST

    "no chance of Hollywood producing a pro-war movie?"

    by Cerebud

    Are you smoking crack?!? Aren't we about to get another Black Hawk Down DVD? Isn't Milius still working? What about Saving Private Ryan, the Thin Red Line, that crappy Bruce Willis movie, and on and on. They're not strictly pro-war, but they're certainly not anti-war either. War movies these days seem to try pretty damn hard to show the realities of war, not one side over another. We're better off for it, too. Outside of Fahrenheit 9/11, I don't think there's been a single major anti-war movie in decades. Also, how can anyone say Stone is making this movie just for cold hard cash and that he doesn't love his country? Because he doesn't love all the same aspects YOU do? I think it's painfully obvious that Stone truly loves america. Look at his list of films from Born on the Fourth, to Platoon, to JFK. He loves a part of our country that's been under attack by the right, which is why O'Reilly and goons hate him.

  • March 31, 2006, 2 p.m. CST

    You are nuts!

    by brycemonkey

    Brad Pitt must play Bush.

  • March 31, 2006, 2:01 p.m. CST

    good point, but i was speaking generally

    by washisdead

    i wasnt picking on you man. i actually appreciate that you have a minority opinion... you are making it more interesting. and wash is dead... and i hate it. at least we can agree that joss whedon is a sadist.

  • March 31, 2006, 2:02 p.m. CST

    thin red line wasn't anti war?

    by washisdead

    do you see it?

  • March 31, 2006, 2:04 p.m. CST

    I'll be the 1st person "not" to see this.

    by NeoGomorra

  • March 31, 2006, 2:04 p.m. CST

    Rumsfeld and Cheney have talked about Flight 93

    by Cerebud

    And they were planning on shooting it down. How is that some crazy conspiracy theory now?? They didn't shoot it down because it went down on its own first.

  • March 31, 2006, 2:05 p.m. CST

    Re:indiephantom

    by NeoCon

    Oliver Stone movies make you think? What does he make us think?: 1) Everyone but Lee Harvey Oswald was involved in JFK's assasination. 2)Ancient Greeks had Irish brogues 3) The communists in Central America were the good guys 4)Nixon was so insecure that he randomly walks into some hippie protest at the Lincoln Monument to explain Vietnam. And then gets out-debated by a 16 yr. old girl tripping on shrooms. I'd like to keep thinking but my head hurts.

  • March 31, 2006, 2:05 p.m. CST

    DID you see it?

    by washisdead

    i can't type... and seriously... i am shutting up now.

  • March 31, 2006, 2:08 p.m. CST

    Thin Red Line wasn't anti-war

    by Cerebud

    It showed that bad things and bad people are involved in war. There was no statement about WWII itself.

  • March 31, 2006, 2:10 p.m. CST

    ok one more... i swear

    by washisdead

    as far as the bush admin planning on shooting the plane down... what would you do? there were three impacts already and flight 93 was on its way. i might think they are a bunch of money grubbing war mongers, but i have to respect that it was a tough call. how do you weigh lives like that?

  • March 31, 2006, 2:15 p.m. CST

    re:NeoCon

    by indiephantom

    It's pretty easy to criticize Stone, because just about everyone has done it. But name another American filmmaker (who is working at his level) who attempts to tackle these kinds of important issues. JFK is brilliant because IT DOES offer so many possibilities.

  • March 31, 2006, 2:15 p.m. CST

    ok I lied... i am not shutting up

    by washisdead

    back to the thin red line: so when you say anti war you mean it in the specific political context in which the movie is set? when i say anti war i mean all war. it doesnt matter when or where, war is the worst part of human nature and its good to be reminded. the last thing that movie was about was politics. to be honest that movie was really more about trees than it was people.

  • March 31, 2006, 2:17 p.m. CST

    9/11 is anchorite's fault

    by lopan

    he planned the whole thing from top to bottom. the lame neocon blabbering is just a front, he's actually a terrorist. arrest him. seriously. on another note, partisan bickering aside, oliver stone post-wall street sucks. i think we can all agree on that.

  • March 31, 2006, 2:23 p.m. CST

    i knew it all along

    by lopan

    fortunately my brain exploded long ago. huffing epoxy, i mean who knew?

  • March 31, 2006, 2:24 p.m. CST

    re: re: indiephantom

    by NeoCon

    I do think JFK was a technically brilliant film. My problem W/ the film is that it is a serious subject and he irresponsibly decided to throw every possible theory at the wall and hoped that one would stick. Most historians absolutely hate the film because it was done so well and convincingly. It is frightening how many accept that film as gospel. Many people (including the left) call Michael Moore's films propoganda and not documentaries. "JFK" was very successful propoganda.

  • March 31, 2006, 2:25 p.m. CST

    It has been said:

    by Novaman5000

    He who is a republican when he is young has no heart, and he who is a democrat when he is old has no brain. I think I'll leave it at that.

  • March 31, 2006, 2:26 p.m. CST

    And Moore's "films" are absolutely propaganda.

    by Novaman5000

    It kind of disgusts me, and I'm a liberal.

  • March 31, 2006, 2:29 p.m. CST

    A miss opportunity

    by FancyKetchup

    They got Nic Cage, too bad they couldn't get Jerry Bruckheimer and Michael Bay as well. The shaky action shots and spinning slow-mo character shots... greatest 9/11 movie ever. I kid, of course. This is one of the first, but I'm more interested to see the 9/11 movies 30 or 40 years from now.

  • March 31, 2006, 2:34 p.m. CST

    HOLLYWOOD isn't balanced?

    by I_Snake_Plissken

    <<It is arguable that there shouldn&#39;t be>> And I

  • March 31, 2006, 2:38 p.m. CST

    Lead me not unto temptation...

    by Mr Nice Gaius

    ...must not engage in conspiracy discussions in TalkBack...must not do it...

  • March 31, 2006, 2:38 p.m. CST

    amen ketchup

    by washisdead

    because it happened so recently its hard for these movies to be objective. they are reactionary. i&#39;d like to see what we have to say in 40 years too, but i cant be sure i&#39;ll live that long

  • March 31, 2006, 2:40 p.m. CST

    go for it dr. baltar!

    by washisdead

    its your civic duty to shove your opinoin down the throats of others! p.s. battlestar galactica rules

  • March 31, 2006, 2:40 p.m. CST

    For "pro-war" movies nowadays, look no further than

    by zencat

    Independence Day or War of the Worlds. When it comes to enterainment, the only safe way to advocate "kill &#39;em all!" is in the idiom of science fiction. You know ... they&#39;re slimy sneak-attacking aliens, so it&#39;s OK to annihilate them. But this is nothing new. Best Years of Our Lives struck an intensely ambivalent note toward WW2, as did Casablanca -- the story of good people caught up in bad times. The current war movies under discussion -- Saving Private Ryan, Thin Red Line, Courage Under Fire -- are just as torn in supporting the *cause* while lamenting the *cost* of war. Bottom line, it&#39;s reductive and simplistic to force all war-themed movies into a pro- or anti-stance. If for no other reason than that the market won&#39;t allow it. What mainstream studio would release a war movie that hadn&#39;t been carefully engineered to appeal to both sides of the audience?

  • March 31, 2006, 2:42 p.m. CST

    "The Thin Red Line"

    by NeoCon

    The debate shouldn&#39;t be about whether or not the film was "Anti-War". The important thing is that it exposed Terrence Mallick as the most overrated filmmaker of all time. The guy does two pretty good movies in the 70s and he&#39;s hailed as god. "The New World" really sealed the deal for him. And why do directors insist on casting Colin Farrel as important historic figures? Unless he&#39;s playing Bullseye or doing some playmate on a grainy tape he&#39;s way out of his league.

  • March 31, 2006, 2:43 p.m. CST

    One exception to the SF thesis

    by zencat

    Verhoeven&#39;s Starship Troopers. Took a pro-war novel and turned it into a truly perverse film -- both pro- and anti- at the same time, and delighting in its own incoherence. (And I speak as someone who loves both Heinlein&#39;s and Verhoeven&#39;s versions.)

  • March 31, 2006, 2:44 p.m. CST

    RE: go for it dr. baltar!

    by Mr Nice Gaius

    Haven&#39;t you heard washisdead? My civic duty went out the window when I surrended to the Cylons. And yes, BSG does rule.

  • March 31, 2006, 2:45 p.m. CST

    Stone peaked 14 years ago

    by HypeEndsHere

    now we&#39;re getting garbage from former greatness. Seriously, people, Stone hasn&#39;t made a good movie in YEARS. at least nothing thought provoking. however, i do get a little bit of a chubby when looking at Stone naked. What? oh. then where IS the Basic Instinct 2 talkback? sorry, folks....

  • March 31, 2006, 2:46 p.m. CST

    i liked alexander

    by shalashaska

    it was good

  • March 31, 2006, 2:48 p.m. CST

    I&#39;m surprised

    by Darth Brooks

    I thought Stone would decide 9/11 was the perfect venue for his first big musical.

  • March 31, 2006, 2:48 p.m. CST

    Have you guys heard the big news though?

    by Mr Nice Gaius

    Apparently, the Venuzuelan government is launching its own, independent 9/11 investigation.

  • March 31, 2006, 2:48 p.m. CST

    starship troopers and terrance mallick

    by washisdead

    "i think that the heart of this film is just young people killing giant bugs." oh paul verhoven... you so crazy. how exactly did it expose him as overrated? i dont think the guy is a god, but i enjoyed the movie.

  • March 31, 2006, 2:53 p.m. CST

    Re: shalashaska

    by brycemonkey

    Oh stop it! You&#39;ve gone too far now...

  • March 31, 2006, 2:55 p.m. CST

    Starship troopers is cool...

    by brycemonkey

    Dougie Houser dressed up as a Nazi + giant alien bugs. Can&#39;t go wrong with that!

  • March 31, 2006, 2:57 p.m. CST

    Good thing they are making a movie about 9/11

    by BobWinters5

    Seeing how it was so long ago I completely forgot all of the events. A terrorist did WHAT!?

  • March 31, 2006, 2:58 p.m. CST

    Loose Change

    by spidermanfreak20

    In the end these movies are pointless because Loose Change (the movie Stone should have made on 911) is ultimately more interesting. The idea the real bad guys are within our own goverment is a much more appealing film that raises questions and pisses people off even though nothing will ever happen. Did anything good ever come out of the JFK conspiracy? In the end it&#39;s like Sin City&#39;s Roarke says..."Power dont come from a gun it comes from lying. When you have people believe in their hearts what they know cant be true you got em by the balls." Well 911 is that lie that has us by the balls. That lie keeps us all alive. Imagine how everyone in the United Nations would react if there was undisputable proof 911 was a demolition attack from people within our on Government.

  • March 31, 2006, 2:58 p.m. CST

    I&#39;m burning star IV

    by Meremoth

    I believe it&#39;s: He who is a conservative when he is young has no heart, and he who is a liberal when he is old has no brain. Close enough though I guess. Anyway, I&#39;ll take my brain and heart and go moderate. And war is not always evil, war is the manifistation of evil desires and others contering them with justice or more evil desires. If there was no greed, lust or injustice there would be no need for war.

  • March 31, 2006, 3:02 p.m. CST

    Meremoth

    by Mr Nice Gaius

    I&#39;ve also heard it said, "If one is not liberal while young, he has no heart. If one is not conservative when older, he has not learned anything.". Essentially the same thing.

  • March 31, 2006, 3:07 p.m. CST

    lol Gus...

    by brycemonkey

  • March 31, 2006, 3:07 p.m. CST

    why stop there?

    by HypeEndsHere

    how would the President feel if he found out Laura was born a man? or how would you feel if you ate a bowl of walnuts only to find undisputable proof that there never were walnuts, but that they were dead beetles? or how would the UN react if there was undeniable evidence that Kofi Anan was from Mars?

  • March 31, 2006, 3:10 p.m. CST

    OK, color me a dark shade of confused...

    by morGoth

    ...by that definition, ALL war movies are anti-war. "...delves deeply into the impact of the war on the families (especially the wives), the inane politics involved and the sense of futility that is so often felt." War movies are innately anti-war as anybody who has ever been in one will tell you (unless they&#39;re a mercenary). And what&#39;s an example of a "pro-war" movie? Wouldn&#39;t that just be state propaganda? At any rate, if what Harry says is true, why not have a movie showing us how a few real people acted under the circumstances of 9/11 in New York? Man, I&#39;m all over hero movies especially war hero movies...military or civilian perspective. I just don&#39;t get how some of you can come off as being so narrow minded.

  • March 31, 2006, 3:13 p.m. CST

    Another safe political fim = YAWN

    by Neo Zeed

    Hollyood promises the liberals the hope of a "point the fingers" movie and provides the controversy to sell movie tickets. Then the safe "it&#39;s not about the politics it&#39;s about the heroes" bullshit kicks in to calm down the right wing. So nobody complains, the movie&#39;s mediocre, and instead of asking important questions we&#39;re back to posting ironic pictures on Myspace.com... So what&#39;s the point of the movie folks..9/11 was bad and the police/firemen were heroes? Gee I didn&#39;t know that before...What a fucking scoop!

  • March 31, 2006, 3:14 p.m. CST

    Here is the Venuzuelan Investigation Story

    by Mr Nice Gaius

    I&#39;m sure AGEIIX will eat this up like a monkey on a bananna -- http://tinyurl.com/qb8ep

  • March 31, 2006, 3:15 p.m. CST

    Will Nic Cage say the line...

    by Mr Nice Gaius

    "I&#39;m a prickly pear!!!" in this film?

  • March 31, 2006, 3:18 p.m. CST

    9/11 conspiracy theories...

    by FancyKetchup

    ...are to be expected, I think. What would a historical moment in time be without a conspiracy theory attatched? The moon landing, JFK, Vietnam, 9/11, even American Idol has conspiracy theories. Such is the way of things, when so many people are touched by it. Some people get something COMPLETELY different and interesting out of it. Besides, who&#39;s to say they&#39;re all just theories? Not me. But I don&#39;t believe any of them lol

  • March 31, 2006, 3:21 p.m. CST

    My bad, meremoth,

    by Novaman5000

    I was paraphrasing, wasn&#39;t sure the exact wording, same basic idea though.

  • March 31, 2006, 3:31 p.m. CST

    I have a kind of unrelated question

    by FancyKetchup

    Well, we have a Poseidon Adventure remake coming to theatres soon. But, I would be more interested in a Towering Inferno remake, myself. In past years I thought they wouldn&#39;t want to draw comparisons to 9/11 and the WTCs. But now that we have 9/11 movies, does that really matter anymore? I suppose not... sorry for wasting space answering my own questions

  • March 31, 2006, 3:34 p.m. CST

    I liked Alexander

    by Rowley Birkin QC

    there I said it

  • March 31, 2006, 3:37 p.m. CST

    Hey!

    by brycemonkey

    Short Round and shalashaska have to stop with that kind of talk. Before you know it we&#39;ll have Alexander 2...

  • March 31, 2006, 3:38 p.m. CST

    Go Watch Some FOX News

    by I_Snake_Plissken

    To be clear, I didn

  • March 31, 2006, 3:44 p.m. CST

    Too soon...or not soon enough?

    by Evil Lincoln

    I&#39;m really hopeful that they really do concentrate on the "heroic" aspects of 911. The stories of the people who lived through that horrible day should be brought to light. Politics should be kept out of such movies about this subject and just show us how the "people" reacted to such a catastrophic event. I&#39;ll have to go see this film despite the fact I can&#39;t stand Nicholas Cage! *GACK*

  • March 31, 2006, 3:49 p.m. CST

    Wow, homewrecker...

    by Mr Nice Gaius

    You may have just issued yourself a clear invitation to the dance.

  • March 31, 2006, 3:52 p.m. CST

    If CHARLIE SHEEN didn&#39;t approve the script, I won&#39;t go!

    by Mike Nesmith

    That fella knows THE TRUTH of what happened.

  • March 31, 2006, 3:52 p.m. CST

    the problem with supposing that there was a...

    by Novaman5000

    conspiracy is that it&#39;s going to cause massive, massive outrage. You think people are mad that they&#39;re making a film about 9/11 now? Imagine if the film blamed the attacks on the government, instead.

  • March 31, 2006, 3:54 p.m. CST

    MottThePoople - You are crap.

    by Lamerz

    That&#39;s all.

  • March 31, 2006, 3:54 p.m. CST

    Holy Smokes, homewrcker

    by deathstar73

    <i>this is the handiwork of fbi-nsa-cia-mossad-bush.</i> I&#39;m about as conservative as they come and even I can tell you that George Bush is way too much of an idiot to have hatched a plan like 9/11 and certainly not smart enough that anybody else on that list would want to include him. You need to loosen up the band on your tin-foil hat. It&#39;s cutting off the circulation to your brain.

  • March 31, 2006, 3:59 p.m. CST

    LOOSE CHANGE: THE MOVIE

    by warpspasm

    Now i&#39;d pay to see that-it reveals the truth about 9/11.

  • March 31, 2006, 3:59 p.m. CST

    Hey Snake Pliskin

    by NeoCon

    First of all, as I read your rants I&#39;m actually picturing Kurt Russel with the mullet, eye patch, and cigar saying this stuff to Donald Plesence. I crack myself up...Anway, Are you saying that Hollywood is the only balance against the Bush administration? Every single mainstream media outlet in the world relentlessly attacks Bush. His approval rating is always low because of the constant drumbeat of criticism from all of these sources. Except of course when he actively campaigns and wins elections (ouch! That&#39;s gotta hurt). Hey, have you heard about how great our economy is? No?.... Our unemployment rate is 4.7%? No?... How about the fact that over 80% of the Iraqis are glad we kicked out Saddam? No? .... How about the fact that Iraq had all of the agents necessary to make WMDs? No?... How about that there were dozens and dozens of trucks going back and forth from Iraq to Syria before the war? No?... How about that nerve gas they found two years ago that terrorist were going to launch on Jordan came from Syria? No?..... How about that Saddam actually plotted to kill Pres. George HW Bush..No? That must be the balanced media you are talking about. Keep choking on that hatred Snake!

  • March 31, 2006, 4:04 p.m. CST

    I_Snake_Plissken - "why did we go into Iraq?"

    by Lamerz

    You still haven&#39;t figured it out? Intelligence agencies across the world thought Saddam had WMD. It wasn&#39;t just Bush. Let&#39;s see ... Bill and Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry, and so on, and so on. They all demanded that Saddam disarm. As in, "Hey motherfucker, you got weapons, you are a threat, and you best give the shit up." Let&#39;s not forget also, the vote in the UN was unanimous, calling on Saddam to DISARM and fully disclose all weapons programs, or face serious consequences. So why the fuck would everyone vote for him to disarm and fully disclose, if they all thought he didn&#39;t have shit in the first place? Trumped up charges? Did the entire world trump them up? That&#39;s one massive fuckin conspiracy. Saddam could have stopped it all. He had the choice, and he made the choice.

  • March 31, 2006, 4:05 p.m. CST

    Loose Change - The Movie

    by Mr Nice Gaius

    Is that the one about the hooker with dysentary?

  • March 31, 2006, 4:11 p.m. CST

    Loose Change IS being made into a movie...

    by FancyKetchup

    It&#39;s mentioned in wikipedia that the documentary is being worked into a film script by the same guys.

  • March 31, 2006, 4:15 p.m. CST

    People tend to lump "conspiracy theories".....

    by jollysleeve

    .....all together. As if the credibility of one has anything to do with the credibility of another......... Anyone who wants to discredit those who say that we haven&#39;t been told the whole 9/11 story can easily rattle down an entire list of nutty beliefs that people have had since the dawn of time, despite whether any of those beliefs have ANYTHING to do with the alternate ideas being offered concerning 9/11. The nuttier the better........ Rosewell, faked-moon-landing, hollow earth, lizard people, oh, and that crazy one about the official 9/11 story not being accurate.......... Or they tend to give equal weight to all theories about 9/11. We must dismiss and ignore many troubling facts about that event, many of which are publically-known (such as FBI agents warnings being repeatedly ignored, the stock anomolies, etc), because a few kooks also believe that the planes were holograms designed by space aliens. Obviously, such wildly diverse ideas are no where near comparable in logic or believability, and yet, they are presented as identical............ I wish that just some of those that rely on such arguments would step back a bit and think things through logically. There HAVE been a lot of "crazy conspiracy theories," and yes, some of them have even been proven to be true. The problem is, as soon as such plots have been uncovered and publically acknowledged--in the minds of many people--they no longer fit the definition of "conspiracy." Suddenly they are just another boring news story or bit of history. Of course, if one has a world view which constantly allows for such a malleable perception of reality--NO conspiracy theory can ever be proven......... (BTW, has anyone here heard of ENRON? If what those suits did doesn&#39;t sound like the script of some cartoonish Hollywood movie, I don&#39;t know what does.)

  • March 31, 2006, 4:16 p.m. CST

    Frankenblogger - ahahaahaha!

    by Lamerz

    Poooooooooop.

  • March 31, 2006, 4:19 p.m. CST

    No jollysleeve - no one here has heard of Enron

    by Lamerz

    Please enlighten us. And what was the point of your post?

  • March 31, 2006, 4:21 p.m. CST

    My "Rants" are actually a Moderate viewpoint

    by I_Snake_Plissken

    <<First of all, as I read your rants I&#39;m actually picturing Kurt Russel with the mullet, eye patch, and cigar saying this stuff to Donald Plesence.>> That

  • March 31, 2006, 4:22 p.m. CST

    I&#39;ll say this...

    by Mr Nice Gaius

    ...but I&#39;m not about to get into this again like I have in the past. It&#39;s not about "blind patriotism" guys. It&#39;s about reason and a substantial amount of indisputable proof. Are there questions to be raised? Sure. What issue doesn&#39;t have uncertain aspects to it? But simply watching a video that tries to portray the Twin Towers as a demolition isn&#39;t going to cut it. It&#39;s like those old illusion games you used to play in gradeschool. If you stare at something long enough, it begins to turn into something else entirely.

  • March 31, 2006, 4:23 p.m. CST

    If you had trouble comprehending the.....

    by jollysleeve

    ....sentence structure and combination of words used in my first post--I highly doubt you&#39;d understand any follow ups.

  • March 31, 2006, 4:26 p.m. CST

    You guys are all missing the point.

    by MattCG

    It doesn&#39;t matter if the terrorists or government plotted it, you could go on about that all day. I think what we REALLY need to confront is this: This would have never happened if it weren&#39;t for the homosexuality and immorality in America. They should make a movie about THAT! Because, I know that as an AMERICAN! (Fuck yeah!) I want to cast the blame AS FUCKING FAR AS I CAN FROM REALITY! You know, so no one will pay attention to any of thse CRAAAAZZYYYY conspiracy theories that start to make a fucking lot of sense when you start thinking about how much Bush and his cronies have personally benefitted from this whole thing. So, let&#39;s blame the gays and lesbians of America and then make a movie that directly links buggering and rug munching and gay marriage with horrible acts of terrorism. Shit, it would probably win an Oscar.

  • March 31, 2006, 4:29 p.m. CST

    What was the Specific threat?

    by I_Snake_Plissken

    Okay, Lamerz, the world thought he had weapons (Republicans and Democrats

  • March 31, 2006, 4:31 p.m. CST

    I hope this shit tanks...

    by Manaqua

    It just annoys the hell out of me for some reason to see hollywood making this. I dont need to see some pretentoius prick&#39;s &#39;take&#39; on 9/11.

  • March 31, 2006, 4:31 p.m. CST

    Um....I&#39;m quite sure that&#39;s not what I was saying.....

    by jollysleeve

    .....but I could be wrong, since I&#39;m having trouble following the logic of what you&#39;re saying. Maybe you should read my post again.......... All I was trying to do was point out a common arguing tactic used by those who believe the official 9/11 story. And I was trying to make describe why I thought it was a weak tactic...... Also, I&#39;m not saying that some conspiracy theories MIGHT be true. I&#39;m saying we KNOW for a fact that many conspiracies have been true....... No, that alone isn&#39;t proof of a 9/11 conspiracy. (And I&#39;m quite sure I never said any such thing in my post.) On the other hand, that also means similar arguments used by Bush supporters (that people in authority would never be so mean) cannot be taken as "proof" either.

  • March 31, 2006, 4:37 p.m. CST

    Please...

    by AnAgentOfEvil

    can we at least try to spell Nic Cage&#39;s name correctly, Harry? I&#39;m sick of seeing it spelled with an H.

  • March 31, 2006, 4:38 p.m. CST

    Controlled Demolition

    by Frankenblogger

    So would "indusputable proof" be that recent leaked memo showing that we had every intention of going to war with Iraq prior to 9/11 or is that not thick enough? Going with my gut here. Something has been stinking since day one. Oh, and those of you already commenting on the video I linked might want to watch the whole thing before commenting. It IS quite interesting.

  • March 31, 2006, 4:40 p.m. CST

    let&#39;s get one thing straight

    by frank cotton

    heterosexual guys hate gay MEN - everyone loves lesbians. how hard is that to get right?

  • March 31, 2006, 4:41 p.m. CST

    let&#39;s get one thing straight

    by frank cotton

    heterosexual guys hate gay MEN - everyone loves lesbians. how hard is that to get right?

  • March 31, 2006, 4:44 p.m. CST

    Can&#39;t wait to see WTC

    by watashiwadare

    It should be a powerful drama. I&#39;ve never seen a Stone movie that doesnt come up with something deeply observed about human beings.

  • March 31, 2006, 4:47 p.m. CST

    what the fuck is 9/11?

    by lopan

  • March 31, 2006, 5 p.m. CST

    Republicans = Negligent, Weak, and Inept

    by ZombieSolutions

    9/11 wasn&#39;t a Republican conspiracy. 9/11 happened as a result of Republican negligence, weakness, and ineptitude. Remember: the Bush administration literally had a memo put on their collective desk telling them, point blank, that there was going to be a "spectacular attack" involving planes being flown into buildings in New York within a month. They ignored this warning because the Bush/Cheney agenda was to start a war with Iraq in order to take control of their Oil; they weren&#39;t terribly concerned with protecting American citizens, cause, shit, great big fistfulls of cash were to be made! Now, this, of course, is where the conpsiracy comes in; a laughably inept conspriacy because, not only is the Endless War still going on, its getting worse. So, here we are, hemoraging money on oil -- which is funding the terrorists, I might add -- while babysitting a Civil War the Bushies started; an action which is not only emboldening our enemies, but making sure that more and more of American dollars are going not only to funding the Iraqi Civil War we started, but is also funding the terrorists. The funniest thing about that being that, by babysitting the Civil War We Started, we are actaully helping Iran (the latest boogeyman) win and consolidate its power. In a nutshell, the Bush administration and the Republican party has not only doomed the US to economic collapse and ruin in only 6 short years, it has made peace in the Middle East all but completely impossible. And just you wait until the draft comes back. I guess thats what happenes when you let a bunch of guncrazy alky cokehead theocratic chicken hawks running the show instead of real leaders. Looking forward to the Midterm Elections and the impeachment trials which are almost sure to follow.

  • March 31, 2006, 5:05 p.m. CST

    Frankenblogger

    by Mr Nice Gaius

    I assume you are addressing me. The "memo" has nothing to do with how the Towers came down. (Unless you are going to link that to the Iraq War, etc.). Whatever. Fair enough. What I&#39;m saying is, I just love how everyone suddenly becomes a physics/forensics expert when watching a conspiracy "The True Story of 9/11" video. I&#39;ve seen several of them and not-a-one has convinced me one way or the other. I think it goes back to basic facts: the design of the building, the inner core and layout, the planes - their weight - their fuel load, the inertia of the impact, where the planes hit, the damage done by the explosions, the weakening caused by the fire, etc, etc, etc. All it takes is for one floor to give away. ONE. And the whole thing comes down. Gee, what is the sound of an acre-sized cross section of highrise flooring when it gives away? Answer: it probably sounds like a big bomb. And I&#39;m not trying to defend our current government or any independent agency that reaches certain conclusions. But this country has been paranoid about its government since Kennedy&#39;s assassination (or maybe Roswell...). No one wants to believe that the big, bad USA could ever by harmed unless the ol&#39; USA were to harm itself. The world goes about in clueless benevolence while the US conspires to punch itself in the face in an effort to put justify its twisted agenda. Yet, sometimes, it&#39;s simply Occam&#39;s Razor. And the truth is sometimes very, very boring. I just realized that I&#39;m just musing here...my apologies.

  • March 31, 2006, 5:30 p.m. CST

    Snake hops down off the soapbox

    by I_Snake_Plissken

    Alright, my last comment then I will (try) to disengage. Right before we invaded, Saddam was actually making offers to allow inspectors unfettered access to keep looking for weapons. You keep mentioning Iran, well now here

  • March 31, 2006, 5:31 p.m. CST

    nice.

    by mocky_puppet

    "Yesterday I got given an advance look at Oliver Stone&#39;s WORLD TRADE CENTER trailer." Yesterday I got given. boy howdy.

  • March 31, 2006, 5:46 p.m. CST

    I&#39;m not sure which is crazier

    by Undead Neverhood

    The conspiracy nutcases that hopped over here from the Flight 93 thread, or, the hollywood execs that actually gave money to Oliver Stone to make another movie given his past track record.

  • March 31, 2006, 5:55 p.m. CST

    Snake for Congress

    by I_Snake_Plissken

    Kerry

  • March 31, 2006, 5:57 p.m. CST

    howleee shit

    by samsquanch

    homewrecker... I&#39;m picturing a morbidly obese albino who never leaves his house and has sex with his dog... anyone else?

  • March 31, 2006, 6:05 p.m. CST

    You Leftist Conspiracy Nuts r 1 step from Islamofascist

    by Saxster

    Seriously. IDIOTS. I&#39;m tired of the Marxist scum in this country that would sooner sell us out to foreigners than to believe that we actually have enemies like the Islamists that are so hellbent on destroying us that they actually managed a horrific stunt like 9/11. Grow up, read some fucking history and put down the crack pipes. You might finally get the bigger picture. Otherwise, just go join your local mosque and let them fully indoctrinate you into the "Religion of Peace". LOL.

  • March 31, 2006, 6:09 p.m. CST

    is it just me, or...

    by samsquanch

    are things getting way nastier around here? Did someone link AICN to some skinhead site by accident or something??

  • March 31, 2006, 6:11 p.m. CST

    okay, here&#39;s my brainstorm:

    by mocky_puppet

    FRANCHISE. The next one: World Space Center--but we let the good guys turn the tables a little (and it&#39;s on a space station). The next one: World Mars Station, you bring in alien artifacts. Nic Cage as the hero in each, gets a sidekick in 3, loses a girlfriend somewhere along the way, goldmine.

  • March 31, 2006, 6:15 p.m. CST

    anchorite:

    by mocky_puppet

    i agree with you.

  • March 31, 2006, 6:18 p.m. CST

    I hope Stone shows WTC7 going down

    by performingmonkey

    Hmm...there were a few fires on the lower floors, so the whole building had to be brought down. Now THAT figures... There is actually no doubt now that WTC7 was brought down using explosives. Why would the eyewitnesses lie about it? For anyone who doesn&#39;t know, they described how all the lower windows blew out in a large explosion seconds before the tower started to collapse. IMO it&#39;s likely that part of the 9/11 operation was carried out from within WTC7 and it&#39;s destruction helped cover it up. After all, the last place anyone would think the WTC attacks were co-ordinated from is within the WTC itself! The building was &#39;pulled&#39;. But wtf were demolition charges doing inside WTC7 in the first place? If they were in WTC7, it makes sense to assume that they were also in WTC1 & 2.

  • March 31, 2006, 6:21 p.m. CST

    What about the conspiracy....

    by _Kayser_

    of the Chuck Norris roundhouse kick?

  • March 31, 2006, 6:30 p.m. CST

    ever had a cheap bitch lead you on?

    by FinalSolace4

    all these conclusions can be denounced with hard evidence that the GOV is holding or has already been destroyed like the steel columns shipped to china... oh and how can a building PANCAKE AT FREE FALL SPEED? how the hell you tell me now? why werent any of the central 42 colunms still standing after the fall. WHY? its about the WHYS? WHATS? HOWS? AND WHENS? questions questions...

  • March 31, 2006, 6:35 p.m. CST

    Final Thoughts (Probably not)

    by I_Snake_Plissken

    I would take Clinton (Bill) over Bush any day of the week, but I

  • March 31, 2006, 6:36 p.m. CST

    On Iraq...

    by Knugen

    There were no WMDs. There were inspectors. US and later GB were going to invade Iraq on March 10 2003 according to newly discovered evidence. They waited another 9 days but then they executed the plan from many years back that had been lying in wait for an opportune moment. 9/11 - Well...

  • March 31, 2006, 6:49 p.m. CST

    hey Snake

    by samsquanch

    thanks for hanging around. I&#39;ve agreed with just about everything you&#39;ve said, buddy.

  • March 31, 2006, 6:52 p.m. CST

    hey Anchorite-

    by samsquanch

    keep egging this homewrecker guy on- you do it well, and he&#39;s a real treat!

  • March 31, 2006, 6:56 p.m. CST

    Oliver Stone makes me sad

    by Fearsme

    he&#39;s not a filmmaker. he&#39;s a fucking child screaming for attention. I&#39;M RELEVANT, I&#39;M RELEVANT.... someone should ass fuck him for this one.

  • March 31, 2006, 7:31 p.m. CST

    Attack conservatives all you want...

    by El Scorcho

    but only the Hollywood left is evil enough to cash in on 9/11 less than a decade later. This is pathetic.

  • March 31, 2006, 7:46 p.m. CST

    a group of special people cashed in on 9/11

    by HypeEndsHere

    within a few months. we call them Halliburton.

  • March 31, 2006, 7:48 p.m. CST

    too bad it&#39;s Oliver Stone

    by Maniaq

    After being disappointed ONCE AGAIN by Any Given Sunday I vowed I would NEVER EVER watch an Oliver Stone movie EVER AGAIN! Has this guy actually made any GOOD movies? Can somebody name one? I SURE AS HELL CAN&#39;T!!!

  • March 31, 2006, 7:53 p.m. CST

    Harry, "I&#39;m fully aware of how &#39;inappropriate&#39; most

    by Immortal_Fish

    Those quotes way tip your hand. Way. And, obviously, within cognizence. Care to divulge the reason why?

  • March 31, 2006, 7:57 p.m. CST

    Anchorite

    by cyanide christ

    In one of your above posts you used the upper case "L" in "lost" where it was not needed. Geez, you&#39;re really detroying literacy in this country. How can people debate this film when there are errors in your post like that?

  • March 31, 2006, 8:01 p.m. CST

    Harry, "I&#39;m fully aware of how &#39;inappropriate&#39; most

    by Immortal_Fish

    Those quotes so way tip your hand. Way. And, obviously, within cognizence. Care to divulge the reason why? Lookit -- If Cage pulls off SNAKE EYES weight absent of VEGAS "Academy" weight, then I&#39;m prolly there. Enough with the Jill Carrol melodrama.

  • March 31, 2006, 8:02 p.m. CST

    cyanide christ "you&#39;re really detroying literacy"

    by Immortal_Fish

    Way to go, Helen!

  • March 31, 2006, 8:10 p.m. CST

    Will it have over the top music like Born 4th July?

    by Orionsangels

    you can try and justify this movie till your face turns red. Bottom line is - It&#39;s glorifying, commercializing & capitalizing on 9/11! No buts about it.

  • March 31, 2006, 8:15 p.m. CST

    Only America does it. Make movies about its tragedies

    by Orionsangels

    We&#39;re such a ham of a country. it&#39;s not even about who caused 9/11. it&#39;s about respect to the victims families, to everyone in America that mourned that day. Stone turns everything into entertainment for the price of movie ticket.

  • March 31, 2006, 8:54 p.m. CST

    This is gonna piss some peopple off but...

    by UncleEthan

    Am I the only person who thinks this: While 9/11 was certainly a serious tradgedy and deserves a special place in American history...what the fuck? Can we just get over ourselves all ready. So we lost 3,000 people and change when those animals slammed those commercial jet-liners into those buildings...we lost 10,000 or more in the first few days of the European invasion following D-Day. We lost over 30,000 Americans at Gettysburg alone. We lost more Americans last year to drunk driving accidents than died on 9/11. Drop the politicaly correct overly sensative bullshit. Go check out the Vietnam Memorial and do a name count next time you feel like these times are particularly meaningful or special. You have been scared and duped. Are Islamic Terrorist out there? You bet. You are, my friends, in more danger from ciggerettes and airborne carcenogens than you will ever be of them. Oliver Stone shouldn&#39;t make a movie about this subject right now? Run the numbers. Gain some freaking perspective and grow up. Our armed forces have killed more non-military people since 9/11 than have been killed by Islamic terrorist since 1960. GROW UP! WAKE UP! Let Ollie make his flick and go back to your Ultimates Comics...I know I will.

  • March 31, 2006, 9:34 p.m. CST

    I suppose I can see how it could work

    by Subversive01057

    FBI & CIA agents could discover hints of the tragedy about to come and try to warn people, but red tape and a series of coincidences which suggest a mysterious agenda from the White House thwart their every move. Then tragedy hits in all its horror, and the movie could end with the passage of the USAPATRIOT Act, which tries to redefine patriotism to disempower the individual by saying patriotism means "surrender your freedoms and don&#39;t question the government." But hope nevertheless hope for the future remains alive in a few progressives. Yeah, yeah, I guess it could work with the right director.

  • March 31, 2006, 9:37 p.m. CST

    My wish...

    by Batman_9

    i just want an America that gives makes it socially acceptable to be a Christian, conservative, Republican and heterosexual. i&#39;m afraid those days are never coming back.

  • March 31, 2006, 9:37 p.m. CST

    wahhh a movie about sacred 9/11 waaah

    by Exterminans

    People seriously need to get a grip. If you&#39;re too upset to watch it then simply don&#39;t watch it. Your emotions (or the victims) should not prevent an artist from expressing themselves. No one will force you to watch it. Movies were made about Pearl Harbor not that long after it occured. Movies were made about WW2 while it was still being fought. The same with Vietnam. I lost my house, friends and family to Katrina. I&#39;m sure a film will be made about that within the next 5 years. And you won&#39;t see me crying over it. If I feel I am not ready emotionally to watch it. I simply won&#39;t watch it.

  • March 31, 2006, 9:52 p.m. CST

    Don&#39;t worry, Batman_9

    by Subversive01057

    You too can be re-educated. And the first step was just admitting that you have a problem.

  • March 31, 2006, 10:11 p.m. CST

    LOOKIN&#39; FORWARD TO IT!

    by williamD

    I just hope it&#39;s a lot better than ALEXANDER!!!

  • March 31, 2006, 10:43 p.m. CST

    will nic cage find the kuwaiti gold bullion?

    by warpspasm

    after all-it was all about MONEY!

  • March 31, 2006, 11:02 p.m. CST

    About these conspiracies

    by thatpeterguy

    I will preface what I am about to say by first stating that I am NOT a conspiracy nut. I am however an intelligent media savvy person who does believe everything the FOX news channel tells me or any other media outlet whether they lean left or right. But is it so crazy to believe that after the first bombing of the WTC in the early &#39;90&#39;s that the government might have put those charges in the buildings so that if there was an attack they would have some control over how it fell if it came to that. Imagine the buildings toppling over sideways. The damage would have been even worse. They might have seen what happened and knew that if they detonate it they will kill the remaining people in the building but ultimately save lives of the people in the surrounding areas. I am not saying I think this is what happened I just don&#39;t think it is that crazy of an idea to suggest the possibility.

  • March 31, 2006, 11:56 p.m. CST

    homewrecker

    by Meremoth

    I think you should lay off the weed dude. It&#39;s made you very paranoid. Those shrooms your probably taking aren&#39;t helping either, so quit those also please before you totally flip and shoot a couple of kids at an after party, OK.

  • April 1, 2006, 12:02 a.m. CST

    I liked Alexander.

    by donkeypark

    You heard me. Bad wigs/accents/bloated storylines and I still found it entertaining. Wow. First post ever and I blow all credibility. shame on me.

  • April 1, 2006, 12:32 a.m. CST

    Ah, the downtrodden Christian, hetero, conservative...

    by samsquanch

    Will you ever have your chance to blossom? or will the evil liberal homosexual pagans always have the upper hand in American society? (P.S. kudos if you were kidding)

  • April 1, 2006, 1:01 a.m. CST

    At least Michael Bay isn&#39;t making this...

    by Kampbell-Kid

    ...because then it would focus on the plane crashes and sixty plus camera angles of the towers collapse in your local HD projected theater & DD 9.1 EX sound. Just think... 20+ years from now it won&#39;t focus on the heros, but instead inject some untrue love story as it&#39;s main story focus with some sappy catchy ballad to basterdize and mainstream it&#39;s audience. Just like they did with two other films about the US&#39;s worst tragedies... Titanic and Pearl Harbor. All you guys may be getting on your political high horses now... but many years from now when this tragedy is basterdized into a cute popcorn flick. Your children will all see it twelve times and buy the cd single ballad by Kelly Clarkson. Then I&#39;ll have to sit in a theather and get subjected to your laughs/giggles of how the people died via the films special effects like I endured with Titanic. Because it was apparnetly cool and funny to watch peoples bodies get tossed around like rag dolls. You all go on and on and on ramble ramble ramble about your pointless relgious and political views when in 20 years you won&#39;t give a shit, be just as arrogant as a citizen as you were prior to 9/11 and drooling for the release of the special edition dvd of Michael Bay&#39;s version.

  • April 1, 2006, 1:41 a.m. CST

    kick back and relax

    by aestheticity

    you&#39;re not going anywhere for 1hr 20mins. Watch and learn - Loose Change: http://tinyurl.com/c6nge

  • April 1, 2006, 2:30 a.m. CST

    UncleEthan we also lost two iconic buildings

    by Orionsangels

    The tallest buildings to ever collapse in recorded history. They were a symbol of America. The WTC was seen in hollywood movies. It&#39;s something you thought that would be there for your whole life. This event doesn&#39;t happen everyday. The reason it lingers is because it has an unnerving effect on us. If this can happen anything can happen. What&#39;s next a nuclear explosion in a major city? It now seems like reality after 9/11. Before 9/11 there was this sense that we were safe in America and that something like 9/11 was too fantastical to actually happen. It only happens in movies like Armageddon. Yet it did and many americans are asking. when will it happen again? what&#39;s next? while we&#39;re worrying about this. wondering what horrors are to come next. boom! here comes Hollywood bringing you 9/11 on Ice! tickets are still available. For many the horror on 9/11 never ended. it feels as fresh as it did 5 years ago.

  • April 1, 2006, 3:10 a.m. CST

    osama was innocent!

    by misnomer

    free the paedos!

  • April 1, 2006, 3:15 a.m. CST

    HELP! Someone Neutered Oliver Stone!

    by Darkplanet

    Wow, what a predictable pile of crap. What I&#39;m really sick of is Hollywoods continued skirting of the issues Ala &#39;Jarhead&#39;. Just fucking tell it like it is and stop pussy footing around to appease a bunch of brainwashed right-wing loonies. Stop being "clever" and start being raw and in your face! I must say I expected MUCH more from someone like Oliver Stone. Really disappointed with his avoidance of some key 9/11 anomalies. There WAS a great movie in there. COUGH...V for Vendetta.

  • April 1, 2006, 4:45 a.m. CST

    "...Tonight, on "The Factor"!"

    by PurityOfEssence

    Bill O&#39;Reilly has achieved the once impossible act of having his head so far up his own ass that it has actually traversed his digestive system and exited his mouth.

  • April 1, 2006, 7:46 a.m. CST

    Didn&#39;t take long for Hollywood to exploit 9/11

    by The guy

    Good for them!!!!!!!!

  • April 1, 2006, 8:28 a.m. CST

    right turn Clyde

    by stvnhthr

    I don&#39;t think it is a right or left thing. Oliver Stone is not known for being historically accurate, but a gifted film maker with an agenda. NO ONE wants to see the tragedy misused to further one&#39;s agenda. The pain is too fresh. We don&#39;t need to have someone artistically modify it to tell a fictinalized account. Many of the real heroes are still alive and the memory of the lost ones should not be dilluted by a Hollywood version.

  • April 1, 2006, 8:53 a.m. CST

    Maybe the explosions witnesses heard/felt will be there

    by Bean_

  • April 1, 2006, 9:16 a.m. CST

    Well...I think we&#39;ll all know whether we are willing...

    by Samuel Steamer

  • April 1, 2006, 9:18 a.m. CST

    Well...I think we&#39;ll all know whether we are willing...

    by Samuel Steamer

    to give up the cash once we see this trailer. Sounds like it will be sad to all that again. I am not against this film being made but it may not be for me. I hope Ollie pulls out a good film though. He needs it.

  • April 1, 2006, 9:35 a.m. CST

    Silly Americans

    by BigWig

    I&#39;m amazed that most of you still don&#39;t get it... Bin Laden&#39;s crew don&#39;t give a shit whether you&#39;re Democrat or Republican; they only hate you because you&#39;re AMERICAN. Count on the fact that the terrorists are laughing their asses off as they watch Americans point the finger at other Americans. It&#39;s frightening how divided America has become. I&#39;m all for dissenting political views, but I think it&#39;s insane that most Americans are forced into one of two camps. America didn&#39;t deserve 9/11, but there are distinct reasons why it happened. Nobody has done anything to address those reasons. Blaming 9/11 on the Democrats or the Republicans is bullshit; in fact, that&#39;s exactly what the terrorists want. It was planned during the Clinton administration, executed during the Bush administration, but wasn&#39;t aimed at either of those administrations. It was aimed at Americans.

  • April 1, 2006, 10:14 a.m. CST

    Stone&#39;s looney conspiracy theory

    by MilesGloriosus

    (( I was hoping it would be a loonely conspiracy movie )) Agreed. Who&#39;d believe a looney theory about a conspiracy of 19 Arabs with box-cutters who somehow caused every single U.S. air defense system to fail simultaneously? Stone should have come up with something a little more believable, say, a story about nefarious neocons staging "a new Pearl Harbor" to justify aggression abroad and tyranny at home.

  • April 1, 2006, 10:51 a.m. CST

    Two words:

    by rev_skarekroe

    Too soon.

  • April 1, 2006, 10:56 a.m. CST

    You guys are whining about Hollywood exploiting 9/11?

    by I Dunno

    When Bush uses it in every speech?

  • April 1, 2006, 11:03 a.m. CST

    GOD BLESS those Venezuelan Crusaders of Truth

    by AGE IIX

    I Kind of missed all the action, but still...Mr. Nice Gaius I realy love the way you say "I just love how everyone suddenly becomes a physics/forensics expert when watching a conspiracy "The True Story of 9/11" video" and than later on in the same post "All it takes is for one floor to give away. ONE. And the whole thing comes down. Gee, what is the sound of an acre-sized cross section of highrise flooring when it gives away? Answer: it probably sounds like a big bomb." You are realy jumping thrue hoops to convince everybody how rediculus loosechange911 (or any other 911 video) sounds and that they can&#39;t back their claims up with proof. BUT you then go and claiming that the "Tsunami like forces" brought the buildings down in freefall speed, and now you say "All it takes is for one floor to give away. ONE." Who made you an expert on how buildings come down? Maybe you don&#39;t know it but your claims to the contrary sound as wacky and made up as the Conspiracy.

  • April 1, 2006, 11:46 a.m. CST

    Kampbell Kid -

    by Guy Gaduois

    If Kelly Clarkson is still making records that far in the future, you and I have to make a suicide pact. Otherwise, I agree. DarkPlanet - did we see the same "V for Vendetta"? Have you lived in a cave for the last year? Intolerance of homosexuals and the religion of Islam by fascist govt&#39;s isn&#39;t the problem today, bub. I&#39;d say religions that want to kill people for changing from their belief and want to kill people because of cartoons are a bigger problem. There&#39;s some totally screwed brains out there when you rail against the FCC for &#39;censorship&#39; and are totally silent about a the world&#39;s largest religion advocating censorship by death. Back on point, the talkback shows that everybody acknowledges Oliver has made some Klunkers. The only real debate is whether or not his best days are just a bit behind him or if he&#39;s become so self absorbed that he has slouched into Hackdom. I think Hackdom. Maybe if he stops doing charicatures of his own films, this one won&#39;t be unwatchably pretentious. But his last four have been unwatchable, pretentious, and indulgent.

  • April 1, 2006, 11:46 a.m. CST

    nic cage&#39;s character MUST...

    by thebearovingian

    call his wife or daughter "Hummin&#39;bird" in some weird Southern/ New Yawk hybrid accent, say with a steely look and sly grin "I&#39;m gonna save the fuckin day", have the twitches and funky grunts from Matchstick Men "Go in that burning tower? You bet your ass! Nnnmmmhhh!"

  • April 1, 2006, 11:55 a.m. CST

    George Bush Should Be Played By JAR JAR BINKS

    by ZombieSolutions

    not Ahmed Best, mind you. just Jar Jar Binks, but with Bush&#39;s voice. Dick Cheney should, of course, be played by Ian McDiarmid in full Sith makeup.

  • April 1, 2006, 12:23 p.m. CST

    Anchorite and DocPazusu have, like, nothing in common.

    by FluffyUnbound

    How could anyone think they were the same person? Next you people will be claiming that I am thecutestofborg.

  • April 1, 2006, 12:41 p.m. CST

    Washisdead... Wash-is-KIN!!! Judas Iscariot!

    by DeeJay

    While I usually attempt to make a salient comment in talkbacks, it doesn&#39;t seem as if that would serve much purpose with such a divisive dialog. It&#39;s quite interesting to see, however, how the mere notion of Oliver Stone directing a film with political overtones can cause so much anxiety among "certain" movie lovers...

  • April 1, 2006, 12:43 p.m. CST

    AGE, thanks for stopping by

    by samsquanch

    I was wondering if you were going to show up. No one here is really interested in the conspiracy/Loose Change debate though, this talkback seems to be more about everyone getting along, except for rare examples of absolute insanity in the form of anti-zionist nutcases and christian fundementalist skinhead types. hop in! the water&#39;s fine.

  • April 1, 2006, 12:51 p.m. CST

    homewrecker is TubGirlTonay

    by HypeEndsHere

    glad to see you redirecting your passion.

  • April 1, 2006, 1:22 p.m. CST

    oh homewrecker

    by samsquanch

    be nice! Or we&#39;ll send the dancing jews to GET you!

  • April 1, 2006, 1:29 p.m. CST

    Homewrecker is an anti-semite maxi-zoom dweebie.

    by Mr Nice Gaius

    If you had done your homework, Homewrecker, you would know that Doc Paz has been absent from AICN all week. He disclosed that it would be so back in the Peter Jackson/Kong DVD TalkBack...where we all witnessed the much prophecied returned of Ringbearer9. (I look forward to him tearing you a new one.) I don&#39;t know how you could confuse the good Doc with Anchorite as they have been known to lock horns on a semi-routine basis. But much like Ringbearer9, your insanity makes me weep for all of mankind.

  • April 1, 2006, 1:35 p.m. CST

    Thanks for the shout-out, AGEIIX

    by Mr Nice Gaius

    I don&#39;t know where you are getting your information from but, I never said the words "tsunami forces" anywhere in any TalkBack. I think you&#39;ve got me confused with someone else. Which makes it easier for me to understand why my post would be so confusing to you. Look kid, I&#39;ve tried debating you nicely. Let&#39;s keep it that way, alright?

  • April 1, 2006, 1:46 p.m. CST

    Tsunami like forces was from anchorite...i think..

    by AGE IIX

  • April 1, 2006, 1:51 p.m. CST

    It&#39;s about time we got this movie!

    by kaos12345

    In my opinion Hollywood would rather spend money on gay themed movies and communist drivel like Munich and Good Night, and Good Luck. So please hear this. WE ARE THE GOOD GUYS!!! I don&#39;t care about the Islamo Facist Nut bags you Liberals are championing. We were ATTACKED, and because of that we are at war with the Islamic Nazis and the war ground is IRAQ. SO GET WITH THE PROGRAM! They pulled us in this, just like in WWII. Now for some reason All of you people are ashamed of AMERICA. That&#39;s why we haven&#39;t gotten our Captain America movie yet. This is not our fault. These jerks have been at war with us since CARTER was President. And he&#39;s a BIG LIBERAL! Do not roll over whimper and die, be strong and unashamed we will be victorious over evil inspite of stupid people,liberals, the Democratic Party and Islamic Nut bags. We need American Movies showing American Heroes!

  • April 1, 2006, 2 p.m. CST

    YAY! another nutcase!

    by samsquanch

    I&#39;m seriously laughing my fucking ass off right now. Is this all the same guy just with different screen names?

  • April 1, 2006, 2:03 p.m. CST

    kaos12345

    by Mr Nice Gaius

    I&#39;m gonna go with my gut feeling on this guy and say, "PLANT!". Methinks someone on this board is pulling our collective leg.

  • April 1, 2006, 2:10 p.m. CST

    I don&#39;t know, Gaius...

    by samsquanch

    Something is fishy, for sure, but you know as well as I do that there really are folks out there this cross-eyed. I kind of hope they are for real. HEY! BATMAN_9!! come back! (i&#39;m wiping the tears out of my eyes) Oh yeah, and sorry for ruining yoiur Captain America movie, kaos... (Rolling On the Floor Laughing My Ass Off)

  • April 1, 2006, 2:14 p.m. CST

    Bombs

    by The Only Woj

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8260059923762628848&q=loose+change So, are they going to mention the bombs going off in the building before it comes down? Or the elevator shafts melting?

  • April 1, 2006, 2:21 p.m. CST

    9/11 conspiracy nuts

    by just_a_poster

    Feel free to disagree with scientists and experts. I&#39;m sure they&#39;re all zionists and gov&#39;t plants. http://tinyurl.com/5ec4a "To investigate 16 of the most prevalent claims made by conspiracy theorists, POPULAR MECHANICS assembled a team of nine researchers and reporters who, together with PM editors, consulted more than 70 professionals in fields that form the core content of this magazine, including aviation, engineering and the military. In the end, we were able to debunk each of these assertions with hard evidence and a healthy dose of common sense. We learned that a few theories are based on something as innocent as a reporting error on that chaotic day. Others are the byproducts of cynical imaginations that aim to inject suspicion and animosity into public debate. Only by confronting such poisonous claims with irrefutable facts can we understand what really happened on a day that is forever seared into world history.--THE EDITORS"

  • April 1, 2006, 2:26 p.m. CST

    That much lauded popular mechanics article....

    by jollysleeve

    .... has been discredited itself in many venues and on many fronts. It is by no means the definitive last word on these issues, unless of course one wants it to be.

  • April 1, 2006, 2:34 p.m. CST

    http://911revisited.com/

    by jollysleeve

    If one wants to talk "scientists and experts" here are few that don&#39;t seem to tow the official line. (http://911revisited.com/)..... (http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/)

  • April 1, 2006, 2:47 p.m. CST

    By all means. . .

    by just_a_poster

    believe what you like. If you really believe that the United States Government was able to make it seem like four planes were hijacked, run into various targets, blew up three buildings, fired missles into it&#39;s defense center, make several hundred people disappear from flights, forged calls from people on board those flights to their loved ones, had the most infamous terrorist in the world take credit for it, yet they couldn&#39;t get a plan of action together for Katrina. . .go for it. No one is stopping you.

  • April 1, 2006, 2:54 p.m. CST

    Likewise, if you want to believe....

    by jollysleeve

    .... that 19 incompetant Arabs did the same, in addition to defying known laws of science, physics, aerodynamics, engineering, mettalurgy and architecture--then go for it.

  • April 1, 2006, 3:04 p.m. CST

    jollysleeve, you say those are "experts"?

    by just_a_poster

    Lets go over some of their fields shall we? Oriental languages; Theoretical linguistics, Literature and Humanities, English as a Foreign Language, Professor of Theatre, Population Biology, Evolution and Ecology, Accounting, Finance & Information Systems, Associate Professor of Creative Arts, Juris Doctorate; Music publishing; Radio broadcasting, Solar energy, Manufacturing, Folklore, Assistant professor of English Literature, Literary Theory; Modern Literature; Creative Writing, Director of The Institute for Psychohistory, Microbiology and Immunology, Mathematician, Classics and Philosophy...the list goes on. C&#39;mon man. It&#39;s not like PM went to the local drama teacher and asked for his opinion on controlled demolitions! Would you trust any of those fields to construct a house or a car or an airplane for you? Granted, there were like three people on there that had some form of engineering in their background, but you&#39;ll ignore over 70 people specialized in particular fields because the Professor at a Community College with a background in theology is questioning the "official story"? That&#39;s how you do it?

  • April 1, 2006, 3:06 p.m. CST

    Popular Mechanics article...

    by Johnno

    you mean the one written by Michael Chertoff&#39;s cousin and completely demolished and laughed at by other disagreeing experts?

  • April 1, 2006, 3:10 p.m. CST

    Now they were "incompetant"?

    by just_a_poster

    What the hell did they need to do besides exploit our immigration policies and learn to fly a plane? It&#39;s not like this involved splitting the humane genome or anything. If you want to think that black helicopters are coming and the gov&#39;t is out to get you, have at it. Fortunately commonsensical folks (you might call them zionists) still are the majority here. Oh yes, please tell me what laws of physics were violated. I&#39;m sure you have a strong background in the subject so please enlighten the less educated of us.

  • April 1, 2006, 3:14 p.m. CST

    Does Cheny say it&#39;s doubtful Osama was responsible?

    by Johnno

    Interesting interview---Q I want to be clear because I&#39;ve heard you say this, and I&#39;ve heard the President say it, but I want you to say it for my listeners, which is that the White House has never argued that Saddam was directly involved in September 11th, correct?-------THE VICE PRESIDENT: That&#39;s correct. We had one report early on from another intelligence service that suggested that the lead hijacker, Mohamed Atta, had met with Iraqi intelligence officials in Prague, Czechoslovakia. And that reporting waxed and waned where the degree of confidence in it, and so forth, has been pretty well knocked down now at this stage, that that meeting ever took place. **** So we&#39;ve never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden [sic] was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming. ***** But there -- that&#39;s a separate proposition from the question of whether or not there was some kind of a relationship between the Iraqi government, Iraqi intelligence services and the al Qaeda organization----- http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/03/20060329-2.html ----- very weird... so who exactly was America after for 9/11 anyway? Its&#39;s one thing to say Osama is suspected, but the impression was that they were quite confident... Republicans... Democrats... doesn&#39;t matter really... after all the decision to go to war was supported equally by both sides and the American people didn&#39;t have a choice in that matter... all you fought over was homosexual marriage and abortion... if there is any conspiracy, it&#39;s certain that democracy itself is a falsity in America... over really important issues like war with a country that never attacked you... those decisions are made for you, and the left/right illusion leaves you to argue over other shit that doesn&#39;t look to ever be resolved, but it sure is useful for maintaining the illusion that you have a choice between two parties on ethical matters that I doubt they really give a damn about anyway... but I&#39;m just musing...

  • April 1, 2006, 3:25 p.m. CST

    just a poster...

    by jollysleeve

    About the physics, I already posted the links. (http://911revisited.com) That one&#39;s easy. It&#39;s a movie; just click and watch. You don&#39;t even have to leave your seat. (And don&#39;t put words in my mouth. I never mentioned Zionism once in any of my posts.)

  • April 1, 2006, 3:28 p.m. CST

    Flash: Popular Mechanics Article Debunking - Debunked!

    by Mr Nice Gaius

    And the people who "demolished" and "laughed" at the PM article were themselves discredited because their fuzzy math didn&#39;t add up either. It goes on and on and on and on. Back and forth. I love it. And how were the 19 hijackers "incompetant"? How racist! And what laws of nature were violated? The same ones that occur on Earth or some zero vacuum planet? I&#39;m curious. So, let&#39;s see this hard evidence you guys are quoting.

  • April 1, 2006, 3:28 p.m. CST

    post a link to my sphincter

    by HypeEndsHere

    it&#39;s about as reliable as your sources.

  • April 1, 2006, 3:33 p.m. CST

    It was the heebs

    by smackfu

    9/11 was a Jewish conspiracy, don&#39;t you guys know anything? You can tell because there were no jews in the buildings that day, they were all whisked away to a jewel-encrusted safety bunker where they drank infants blood until it was all over. Seriously, an angry muslim guy said so, so you know it&#39;s true...

  • April 1, 2006, 3:35 p.m. CST

    Oliver Stoned

    by MarkWhittington

    You will forgive me if I do not take Harry&#39;s word that Oliver Stone is not going to insert some looney conspiracy theory in his 9/11 film (and how would he know about that, anyway, just from watching a trailer?) It was on this very board that we were told that Antonio Bandaris was going to fight neocons in his last Zorro movie. That turned out to be a lie.

  • April 1, 2006, 3:36 p.m. CST

    Yeah I&#39;m a big racist.

    by jollysleeve

    I was using that word based on their reported abilities from their time in flight school. If you don&#39;t like that characterization, fine....... What&#39;s odd is you guys keep asking for how the laws of physics were defied, and the links keep getting posted. (http://911revisited.com) Have I accidentally typed the address in an invisible font or something? (And you know what&#39;s really funny? I will probably get a wise-guy rebuttal to this post from someone who *still* hasn&#39;t watched the video.).......... It&#39;s true, I don&#39;t have any degree in physics--but then, I imagine the same could be said of you guys. The point is the people speaking in that video DO have a background in this stuff, and I dare say they are at least as qualified to talk about these issues as some of the experts cited from your side.

  • April 1, 2006, 3:48 p.m. CST

    The best 9/11 movie came out years ago

    by RezE11even

    It was called the 25th Hour.

  • April 1, 2006, 5:17 p.m. CST

    This cannot be a good movie.

    by deadguy76

    I swear if Oliver Stone gives Nicholas Cage a homosexual crush I&#39;m going to scream. Stone&#39;s last two movies sucked, why does anyone think this would be different?

  • April 1, 2006, 7:08 p.m. CST

    Tom Cruise should play Bush!

    by donkeypark

    Remember the make-up job in the 1st mission impossible? "I want the truth!!!"

  • April 1, 2006, 7:18 p.m. CST

    Next year we&#39;ll see "Scary Movie 5/11"...

    by Flim Springfield

    ...Sorry.

  • April 1, 2006, 7:32 p.m. CST

    Stone IS very aware of his subject matter

    by donuts

    and will deliver his most mature effort to date. Then llok for him to do the big screen adaptation of H.R. Pufnstuf www.theweeklydonut.org

  • April 1, 2006, 8:36 p.m. CST

    Hey Kaos! Speaking of WWII

    by UncleEthan

    Kaos, If us goddamn Americans are such bad asses nowadays...how come we were able to defeat the Nazis in Europe and the Japenese Empire in the Pacific in less time than it has taken us to get skull fucked in Iraq? Talk amongst yourselves.

  • April 1, 2006, 9:15 p.m. CST

    The reason, you simpletons....

    by I Dunno

    Is that we didn&#39;t have to occupy a nation in WWII, not for an extended period and not alone. Yes, we held some cities and we still have troops in Japan and Germany but you cannot compare the two. Nuking a city or two with half the world on your side is easy. I&#39;m talking about down and dirty occupation of a country that doesn&#39;t want us there, throwing a nation into choas and dealing with insurgents that see us simply as invaders. We took a nation that we had under relative control, destoryed its infrastructure and plunged it to the brink of civil war. All for nothing. We&#39;re now dealing with terrorists or insurgeants or whatever they&#39;re called this week that didn&#39;t exist 3 years ago. We&#39;re breeding an entire generation of Iraqis who will want us dead. And for nothing. No WMD, no ties to 9/11. No threat to us. Anyone who can say with a straight face that our role in Iraq wasn&#39;t a complete fuck up that will ultimatly hurt us is a moron. So they have elected leaders now? So does Iran. What I&#39;m most dissapointed about is that if we were going to perform an illegal operation, we should have at least taken Saddam out, had a puppet regime and planted whatever WMD were necessary to make us sheep feel good about it. The lack of efficiency in my government to lie to me is appauling. And you tools still think they orchestrated 9/11?

  • April 1, 2006, 10:37 p.m. CST

    AMERICA! FUCK YEAH!!!

    by donkeypark

    I&#39;ve traveled around the world and everywhere I go there is a serious hate brewing for Americans. I&#39;ve even had a group of Australians ready to haul me off my barstool and take me outside for a beating just because they heard my accent when ordering a beer and thought I was American. When I explained that I was Canadian they paid for my beer. I don&#39;t know why this is but I don&#39;t have to figure it out do I? You&#39;re the ones getting your asses kicked out back while I enjoy a free beer. Think about it.

  • April 1, 2006, 10:43 p.m. CST

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?do.......

    by jollysleeve

    (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=964034652002408586)....... Physicist Steven Jones gives a 2-hour plus, power-point presentation.

  • April 2, 2006, 3:11 a.m. CST

    GreatOne2 - thou art dumb

    by HermansHead

    Infrastructure - 1. Iraq&#39;s intfrastructure was decent in some spots, bad in others. It is *not* true that we have already had a net positive effect on basic needs throughout the country - delays in public works projects have set many areas back. Some have improved. 2. The reason why Iraq&#39;s infrastructure was so bad in most spots before the war was because we crushed their economy with our failed sanctions policy. It caused thousands upon thousands to starve to death, and served to turn opinion against us in Saddam&#39;s favor. WMD - you say that Hayes has proved that they had some? What? Iraq&#39;s nuclear program had not been active since 94, their stockpiles of chem weapons had long been destroyed (those were the chemical weapons that we gave to Iraq a decade earlier so they could use against Iran, by the way), they&#39;ve never had a bioweapons program...unless oil wells are now considered "WMD," Iraq didn&#39;t have shit. Nothing that was a threat to us or anyone else, really. 9-11 Connection - With your earlier claims you might just be ignorant, but here you are clearly lying. Bush&#39;s premise for the war was that it was part of the global fight against terror. He has always tried to obsfucate the two. Cheney and Rumsfeld publicly floated those trussed-up stories about the al-Queda member who met with the Saddam regime. And given that a huge percentage of the American public *thinks* that Saddam was involved, liberals are not talking to each other - they&#39;re talking to 1. the liars and 2. the millions of idiots willing to believe the liars. But of course, even if EVERY SINGLE THING you&#39;re saying is correct, it still doesn&#39;t make it a good idea for the US to abandon any sense of a global community and go Rambo on any country it so chooses. Pre-emptive war as a concept dismantles any leadership or credibility we have, makes it less likely for countries to cooperate with us on security matters, and CREATES thousands of terrorists who will be killing the shit out of our future generations. Thanks a lot.

  • April 2, 2006, 4:30 a.m. CST

    cue Benny Hill music--

    by samsquanch

  • April 2, 2006, 8:38 a.m. CST

    Deep Cover&#39;s ravings

    by RichardNixon

    Deep Cover you say: "...there&#39;s just as many righties who need to believe all lefties are unhinged kooks in order to justify their existence. Honestly, unless you&#39;re stinking rich, there is no reason to be a Republican. None." You criticize those who paint those on the left with an overly broad brush and yet in many of your posts do the same thing to those on the right. In my opinion, you are an example of just another person in this country who is not intelligent enough to have an actual political discussion on the issues (without having to resort to talking about labels and what the labels mean) but sure can get behind your team! There are people on both the left and right who see their party in the same light as their favorite sports team. I don&#39;t think you even understand anything you&#39;re talking about - just the fact that you like Democrats and think Republicans are all rich oil barons. (Why don&#39;t you look at the traditional Republican platform - which some policies of George Bush contradict, btw - and tell me why only the rich should be Republican.) And just to drop this whole discussion down to your level - could someone post and call Deep Cover and raving kook? Thanks, I&#39;ll hang up and listen.

  • April 2, 2006, 8:51 a.m. CST

    Christ, GreatOne2, where to start

    by I Dunno

    I know fellow engineers who have been over there, so don&#39;t tell me we didn&#39;t seriously fuck up their country worse than it was. If you&#39;re going to insist on arguing that, then argue with the dead civilians. Just yesterday, the "insurgents" bombed a Shiite mosque. The same insurgents that Cheney said were in their "last throws" months ago. We plunged their country into civil and have zero exit strategy. Anyone who is still contending that this war was a good idea is either an idiot or a stubborn prick. And the WMD shit you pulled out of your ass is nonsense. Meanwhile Iraq is working on an actual nuclear arsonal and actually making threats about it and we can do fuck all about it because of this mess.

  • April 2, 2006, 8:52 a.m. CST

    Iran that is, in the last sentence

    by I Dunno

  • April 2, 2006, 9:09 a.m. CST

    For al the people that hated Loosechange911

    by AGE IIX

    I just took 2+ hours to see the video jollysleeve posted http://tinyurl.com/cyujy and AGAIN I am Gobsmacked about how ANYBODY could believe the 911 commission! This is just a academic taking us thru all the inconsistencies of the whole WTC&#39;s coming down. I hope every unbeliever go&#39;s an watches this before tairing it a new asshole.

  • April 2, 2006, 9:15 a.m. CST

    i saw video of J.Lo sucking 2 dudes off online

    by HypeEndsHere

    again, post a link to my sphincter. it&#39;s just as reputable as your sources.

  • April 2, 2006, 9:27 a.m. CST

    Is Nic Cage still "acting royalty"?

    by Drunken Rage

    Whatever. I&#39;d rather eat my own shit than see this movie.

  • April 2, 2006, 10:02 a.m. CST

    HypeEndsHere

    by AGE IIX

    Why should I try and convince you about 911 Why don&#39;t you try to convince me for a change! Because why would I want to believe a report by a commison that works for evil pocket filling Bastards (NeoCON&#39;s) They have lied about enough things for me to totaly discredit them every thing they will ever say. But I will probably get a link to the Reverse engineering Popular mechanics article.

  • April 2, 2006, 10:51 a.m. CST

    the burden of proof falls on the person with the

    by HypeEndsHere

    ridiculous claims. such is life. You wrote: "They have lied about enough things for me to totaly discredit them every thing they will ever say." -- so, what would be the point in providing you with evidence since you will only see it when you believe it anyway? and far be it from me to post the same two links in every talkback to drum up support for my tired insane theories (not my style, since this IS the internet after all). the problem i&#39;m concerned with is not so much the gov&#39;t conspiracy, but the fact that some people think so much of the gov&#39;t to think it a possibility. the 9/11 commission, while powerless overall, was made up of both democrats and republicans and placed the blame squarely on the shoulders of the current and previous administrations. so your Neocon label has no business in that part of your argument. but i feel the need to correct myself: you have no argument. just a link to a video that may or may not be a blend of fact and fiction.

  • April 2, 2006, 11:08 a.m. CST

    HypeEndsHere

    by AGE IIX

    "just a link to a video that may or may not be a blend of fact and fiction" ah this just shows that you are not open to anything but you own opinion. Saying that I have rediculous claims... How&#39;s this for REDICULOUS...The reason WTC7 came down, 24 Steel core support collems and 57 Steel Perimiter collems giving way at exactly the same time. but keep posting stuff about your sphincter it&#39;s realy funny.

  • April 2, 2006, 11:25 a.m. CST

    by HypeEndsHere

    You wrote: "They have lied about enough things for me to totaly [sic] discredit them every thing they will ever say."... and I&#39;M not open? i&#39;m a skeptic. and the thing about the skeptic is that he believes anything is POSSIBLE, but not probable. you however, have committed to a POV based on a few individuals presenting their opinions. opinions that are overwhelmingly refuted at every step. but keep posting links to online sources (mark of true journalism) it&#39;s realy [sic] funny.

  • April 2, 2006, 11:40 a.m. CST

    Harry knows that his bread is buttered....

    by Jar Jar 4 Prez

    by the tons of conservative assholes (like Fluffyunbound and anchorite) that come to his site. That&#39;s why he posts a review of an Oliver Stone trailer. Duh.

  • April 2, 2006, 11:42 a.m. CST

    Hype

    by AGE IIX

    "POV based on a few individuals presenting their opinions".-------- I would like to know how many are a few?------ opinions that are overwhelmingly refuted at every step." by who? name one other source except 911 commision and PM.... And I&#39;ll keep posting links to online sources in the hope some people will take the time to read and watch them. And what I meant with "They have lied about enough things for me to totaly discredit them every thing they will ever say" is that the American goverment has (imo) lied to us with their 911 com report and dilibratly left out information (like the whole WTC7!!!) so I won&#39;t be believing anything that they say but I am open to other sources.

  • April 2, 2006, 12:07 p.m. CST

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/

    by HypeEndsHere

    it goes against my beliefs to post a link, but knock yourself out.

  • April 2, 2006, 12:30 p.m. CST

    MOTHER OF ALL CONSPIRACY THEORIES!!!

    by Mallestarion

    Well the truth is out there! I would like to see a movie about the real reason why "son of" Laden hates USA. A very large portion of the world hates USA, why is that? Are they just stupid and crazy? That many? Not likely! Is it possible that they have a valid reason? I think that MAYBE they have, and that story is far more important to tell than self-gloryfication! Fuck Oliver Stone and Nicholas Cage! Cast Wille Nelson as Bin Laden and get that show on the road!

  • April 2, 2006, 12:40 p.m. CST

    Well HYPE that was a nice site

    by AGE IIX

    but it didn&#39;t have anything on WTC7 so it&#39;s kind of useless. but maybe you can go against your beliefs one more time and post another link. One with a explination why wtc 7 came down. thx

  • April 2, 2006, 12:46 p.m. CST

    thanks for lying to me.

    by HypeEndsHere

    check the page on the engineer&#39;s assessment of the collape. the first sentence "WTC7". watch video of the show. once again, you refuse to see what you don&#39;t belive. and seriously...thank YOU. you&#39;re special.

  • April 2, 2006, 1:05 p.m. CST

    Hype, the ideas in thePBS doc has been addressed by....

    by jollysleeve

    ....by real honest-to-goodness egineers and physicists, and much of it doesn&#39;t hold up to close scientific scrutiny. And these objecters aren&#39;t just "people giving their opinions." They are professionals who are every bit as qualified to address these topics as your sources. Just watch the darn videos. (http://911revisited) and (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=964034652002408586).......... You have no right to comment on their validity before then....... And before you say these are just some wackos, keep in mind that statements by *NIST* itself confirms that the original theory (that fires weakened the steel in the WTC buildings causing their collapse) is impossible...... If you disagree with the speakers in these videos, I&#39;d be curious to hear what specific ideas you object to and what exactly your scientific rationale is for objecting those ideas.

  • April 2, 2006, 1:14 p.m. CST

    ok the site mentions WTC 7 ....only once!

    by AGE IIX

    "It wasn&#39;t until Dr. Thomas Eagar saw Building 7 of the World Trade Center implode late on the afternoon of September 11th that he understood what had transpired structurally earlier that day as the Twin Towers disintegrated." --------And thats it! I&#39;ve watched all 3 clips and they didn&#39;t mention WTC7 the just explained to my that the plaines knocked the special fireproof coating of the steel beams and that&#39;s why the fire weakend the steel in WTC1 and 2. But guess what.... WTC 7 didn&#39;t get hit by a plain, so it kept it&#39;s fireproof coating. So Again why did it go down. LETS recap... 1...No plane hitting it. 2...No JETFUEL. 3... Fireproof coating on steel collems intact. 4...fires only on a few floors. 5...THE BUILDING FALING DOWN SYMMETRICLY AT NEARLY FREEFALS SPEED IN TO IT&#39;S OWN FOOTPRINT.

  • April 2, 2006, 1:15 p.m. CST

    Jolly, the ideas in those videos have been addressed

    by HypeEndsHere

    by real honest-to-goodness egineers and physicists, and much of it doesn&#39;t hold up to close scientific scrutiny. And these objecters aren&#39;t just "people giving their opinions." They are professionals who are every bit as qualified to address these topics as your sources. Just watch the darn videos......If you disagree with the speakers in these videos, I&#39;d be curious to hear what specific ideas you object to and what exactly your scientific rationale is for objecting those ideas. <------- you see how i can use THE EXACT SAME ARGUMENT as you? so where does that leave us? well, my argument isn&#39;t embraced by the conspiracy-seeking fringe, so that leaves me with credibility. you won&#39;t accept info if it comes from a source you don&#39;t like. how open-minded is that? like i said, a skeptic believes anything is possible. i don&#39;t think we have all the answers, but it&#39;s due to human fallibility. conflicting reports from that morning still plague the internet. unfortunately, after they&#39;ve been refuted, they still remain for anyone able to type "google" to believe. over and out.

  • April 2, 2006, 1:17 p.m. CST

    the owner had the building &#39;pulled&#39; by

    by HypeEndsHere

    firefighters based on their recommendations. what&#39;s your point?

  • April 2, 2006, 1:22 p.m. CST

    NO Hype your scource only adresses a few topics

    by AGE IIX

    and avoids the others like... WTC7. WTC 7 is the achilles heel of all you unbelievers!

  • April 2, 2006, 1:28 p.m. CST

    Hahahahaha!!!! common sense HYPE!

    by AGE IIX

    "the owner had the building &#39;pulled&#39; by firefighters based on their recommendations. what&#39;s your point?"----------- OK MEN I want you to go in to that BURNING building and rig it from top to botom with HIGH EXPLOSIVES.----------- Now think how silly does that sound.

  • April 2, 2006, 1:29 p.m. CST

    Well we know one thing....

    by jollysleeve

    ....the 911 Commission report actually misrepresents how the Twin Towers were constructed. (I believe they did something ridiculous and claim that the central support columns, the trademark feature of the towers, didn&#39;t exist.) And they didn&#39;t even acknowledge the existence of tower7. That alone discredits them as a reliable source. At least for me.......... Also, I don&#39;t think we&#39;re actually posting the exact same types of things. The academics in my videos specifically address (and disprove) many of the theories in the PBS documentary. However, I have yet to see a PBS documentary which specifically rebutts (and disproves) these academics&#39; critique on them........... (PS. Given the time stamps on these posts, you seem to have managed to watch all 2 and a half hours of video I posted in less than 10 minutes.)

  • April 2, 2006, 1:34 p.m. CST

    you posted the other day in the other

    by HypeEndsHere

    talkback. nice try though.

  • April 2, 2006, 1:36 p.m. CST

    Pulling building 7?

    by jollysleeve

    ....I hope you realize that the official explanation as it stands now is that building 7 fell due to fire. (In fact, if you read this and previous threads, you will find fellow believers in the official story adamantly clinging to the idea that small fires did indeed cause its unprecedented collapse. Unfortunately, such an idea conflicts with reality and logic, even more than the idea that firefighters would be sent back into a supposedly raging inferno with high-intensity explosives to perform a rigging operation in minutes that would normally take weeks to complete.)

  • April 2, 2006, 1:40 p.m. CST

    HypeENDEDhere

    by AGE IIX

    you backed yourself into a corner.

  • April 2, 2006, 2 p.m. CST

    Come on Hype at least post another SPHINCTER remark

    by AGE IIX

  • April 2, 2006, 2:01 p.m. CST

    i&#39;m in no corner. i&#39;m open to evidence

    by HypeEndsHere

    internet video of people hypothesizing and their fanatical followers is not evidence. the world is on my side. and refuting foolishness as if WE are on the defense does nothing for those that lost people here in NY. unfortunately, you refuse to believe that the building that burned for 7 hours was pulled for safety reasons (which incorporates high explosive charges according to you) and that declares it as a building lost to fire. you&#39;re entitled to your own opinons. you&#39;re NOT entitled to your own facts. but hey, as long as you&#39;re not considering a job as an investigator, feel free to ignore such necessities as: Motive, Means, Witnesses, Evidence, etcetera....

  • April 2, 2006, 2:04 p.m. CST

    and because i take requests

    by HypeEndsHere

    sphincter. ps: you look sharp in that tin-foil chapeau

  • April 2, 2006, 2:17 p.m. CST

    GLAD to see you back

    by AGE IIX

    "you refuse to believe that the building that burned for 7 hours was pulled for safety reasons (which incorporates high explosive charges according to you) and that declares it as a building lost to -fire." YES I REFUSE TO BELIEVE THAT! But now it gets better are you implying that pulling a building can be done without high explosives? (somebody said the HULK did it) And Now that you got yourself backed into a corner you come up with necessities as: Motive, Means, Witnesses, Evidence, etcetera...ok ---MOTIVE---Kind of hard but I&#39;ll give it a go, PARIOT ACT, WAR, OIL, JUMPSTARTING IRAK Econnomy. ---MEANES--- They had excec to the building in the weeks before 911, their were powercuts and fire drills (they left the bombdogs at home) And WTC7 had a FBI department in their also. ---WITNESSES--- The whole world and Everybody with an internet connection. ---EVIDENCE--- Physically its kind of hard becouse a prick of a mayor shipped all the evidence to china! but we have video proof how the building came down.

  • April 2, 2006, 2:18 p.m. CST

    "according to you...."

    by jollysleeve

    Dude, I&#39;m sorry but you&#39;re floundering now. Yes, the pulling of a building WOULD need high explosive charges. That&#39;s not even open to debate. And we&#39;re not refusing the idea that the building was pulled, just the idea that it could&#39;ve/would&#39;ve been pulled and rigged in minutes.......... Are you aware that the lease owner Larry Silverstein himself (after making a controversial statement that he&#39;d ordered the building pulled) later rescinded and stated that the building fell due to fire. Heck, the OFFICIAL story says as much...... Witnesses? There are firefighters there on the scene that state it was obviously a controlled demolition. But even disregarding them, the footage of 7 can be watched by anyone from multiple angles by anyone with an internet connection..... Motive? How about a whopper of an insurance policy, taken out a few weeks before 9/11?......... Evidence? EVERY piece of physical and video evidence, and EVERY widely accept law of physics and engineering contradicts the official story...... And concerning your cracks about "people" hypothesizing, as if these were not qualified physicists and engineers. Do you consider the NIST to be unreliable and nutty too?........... (http://911revisited.com)...... (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=964034652002408586)

  • April 2, 2006, 2:21 p.m. CST

    i&#39;m floundering in an argument with schizophrenics

    by HypeEndsHere

  • April 2, 2006, 2:22 p.m. CST

    please post a link to a fringe website

    by HypeEndsHere

    it helps with your credibility.

  • April 2, 2006, 2:25 p.m. CST

    Be a Man hype!

    by AGE IIX

    and admit that WTC 7 doesn&#39;t add up!

  • April 2, 2006, 2:30 p.m. CST

    ....

    by jollysleeve

    I hope you&#39;re aware that so far you have not made one legitimate argument or rebuttal. Instead of actually backing up your claim that you are open minded and a true skeptic and watching the videos posted, all you can do is make wisecracks and fall back on the same cheap tactics employed by those since time immemorial who&#39;ve found themselves in the precarious position of defending an illogical point-of-view. And that tactic is to rely predominantly on name calling and painting the other side as the "fringe."

  • April 2, 2006, 2:55 p.m. CST

    GreatOne2... Please Stop

    by DeeJay

    Fact #1... just so that you know, virtually every reliable fact log published a few years in front of the 1990 Operation Desert Storm in Iraq notes that the majority of that country

  • April 2, 2006, 2:59 p.m. CST

    Bush Should Play Bush!

    by ZombieSolutions

    seeing as how he&#39;s about 8 months from impeachment (expect the trials to begin sometime in late november, early december after the elections) and will no doubt need a job. as far as dialouge, i think it would be best if he just adlib. he can stare at the screen, eyes wide, seeming to drool a little, then he can say "9/11" a bunch of times and something about "freedom" or whatever. later on he can clear some brush and pretend that he&#39;s not the most elite of the bad bad Elite East Coast Billionaires ever in the history of the United States (remember, he moved to Texas, he t&#39;weren&#39;t born there. he has about as much in common with you Red Staters as Saddam does). also, he can pretend not to be a dry-drunk theocratic neo-fascist whose days are numbered. he can also pretend that Dick Cheney isn&#39;t the one running the show from the Bunker. Ah, sweet sweet backlash! drink it in, drink it in...

  • April 2, 2006, 3:01 p.m. CST

    I&#39;m not a fucking liberal, GreatOne2

    by I Dunno

    I&#39;m not enough of a simpleton to subscribe to one political ideology unilaterally. I was actually with Bush through Afganistan and right up until he dropped the ball there and invaded Iraq. As to your points, they&#39;re all trying to point to the fact the we were right in invading Iraq and are pointless. If you maintain that contention then there&#39;s no reasoning with you. You can find some bullshit link to support anything, it doesn&#39;t make it so. Oh, and the government didn&#39;t blow up the WTC, you idiots. Go tally some cattle mutilations or examine the Zupruder film again or something.

  • April 2, 2006, 3:18 p.m. CST

    Last night a DeeJay saved my life...

    by samsquanch

    well said, reasonable guy. Prepare to be flamed to ash by the weirdos...

  • April 2, 2006, 3:19 p.m. CST

    now it all makes sense!

    by HypeEndsHere

    they blew up WTC7 because of oil! and the witnesses are? everbody! well, geez louise! it must be some consolation that even though you supply no real evidence for anything involving a conspiracy (in terms of Motives, Means, Evidence, Witnesses) in any way beyond vagueries, your frustrating replies irritate to no end. so that&#39;s something your side has going for you.

  • April 2, 2006, 3:27 p.m. CST

    I think that the only answer for all of you...

    by Jar Jar 4 Prez

    is chemical castration.

  • April 2, 2006, 3:36 p.m. CST

    what i have a problem with is READING about trailers

    by chickychow

    Charlette&#39;s Web, World Trade Center. Gee, thanks for telling us you&#39;ve seen the teaser. Now what care I about that again?

  • April 2, 2006, 4:25 p.m. CST

    i feel a hell of lot more informed now

    by slappy jones

    I am glad I come to aicn for my fix of political opinions.....

  • April 2, 2006, 4:31 p.m. CST

    Well they had the motive.

    by I Dunno

    9/11 worked out well for a lot people besides bin Laden. Bush got re-elected based on it, Cheney&#39;s buddies at Haliburton got a new no bid contract and we got a free pass to invade the middle east. Or that would have been the case, if they didn&#39;t fuck up Iraq so badly. So now you&#39;re going to hear about a new threat and a new weapon being developed in Iran for the next few weeks. Then there will be the rumors about Saddam&#39;s WMDs being stached in Syria. Osama and Bush wanted the same thing. A war between the west and Islam. They got it but it&#39;s not going as well as they&#39;d hoped. So they had the motive. But did they do it? I don&#39;t think so. I just don&#39;t think they have it in them.

  • April 2, 2006, 4:48 p.m. CST

    9/11 was a Republican Plot

    by OurManInMontr

    Gunning for 200!

  • April 2, 2006, 4:55 p.m. CST

    Jim Caviezal As Osama Bin Laden!

    by ZombieSolutions

    Now that would be funny.

  • April 2, 2006, 5:21 p.m. CST

    So ... where&#39;s the insurrection?

    by Judas_Noose

    If most everyone is convinced of the conspiracy "theory" (and that&#39;s all it is, folks) surrounding the events and attacks of 09.11.01 ... why aren&#39;t we all marching up K Street and up the Capitol Steps and into the chambers of the House and Senate in anger and disgust? The only explanation I can think of is that even those who claim to support this "theory" (and, yeah ... I probably would even use my index and middle fingers to put those little quotation symbols in the air as I say it) really aren&#39;t even themselves very convinced of it, either. All this blither seems to be is regurgitated data from a few sources copied over, and over, cited in different places, during different pseudo-lectures, and on various conspiracy theorist websites. Were you there? Can you confirm the presence of this mysterious explosion that was only felt, and admittedly verified from careful examinations of seismogram readings, but not necessarily heard? People on the ground near the buildings described utter chaos as falling, flaming debris from the upper floors were raining down around them, setting cars, trucks, vans, and EMS equipment on fire - multiple explosions were reported on the ground in the hour leading up to the collapse of the towers. Many firefighters were charged exclusively with extinquishing the vehicles on the ground that were in flames and that would also likely have their respective petrol tanks explode. Who&#39;s to say that there wasn&#39;t a serious structural failure along the entire section due to the intense heat caused by not only the fuel carried aboard the planes, but all that freakin&#39; office equipment - computer monitors, reams of paper, chairs, desks, even the ceiling tiles were probably flammable if you got them hot enough. Face it, folks ... maybe Bush did get a generally specific warning about an attempt to attack the State, but there was no verifiable target, no way to know when, where, or even necessarily how. We get "threats" all the time, from many countries, factions, and extremist groups who would like nothing more than to see this land and its freedoms disappear in an atomic blast. Do we take them all seriously? More importantly - CAN we take them all seriously? Think how many extremist groups in the Middle East have claimed responsibility for terrorist attacks and activities when, in fact, it was some entirely different group, often from an entirely different contry, and they were just trying to cash in on the home-dawg respect card they so eagerly want. That said - do I agree with Bush? No. Did I vote for him? None of your business. Do I think we were led to war under false pretenses? Absolutely. Are we being lied to? You betcha ... everyday mr McClellan gets up on that podium and does what he&#39;s paid to do: Spin the truth in Bush&#39;s favour. So ... the question really isn&#39;t whether or not 09.11.01 was a conspiracy, but rather, what are you going to do so that this country stops lying to you in the name of what "they" call "a matter of national security". I don&#39;t know about you ... but when I&#39;m lied to ... I tend to lose my trust in the source from which the lie was spoken.

  • April 2, 2006, 5:27 p.m. CST

    And one more thing ...

    by Judas_Noose

    It only took the work of three American-born men to kill over a hundred men, women, and children in Oklahoma City ... just a dedicated domestic terrorist with a penchant for hatred and destruction. Doesn&#39;t take much more than a pin-prick to pop a balloon.

  • April 2, 2006, 6:17 p.m. CST

    Judas....

    by jollysleeve

    The fact of the matter is, people just don&#39;t give a shit. Even if you eliminate all talk of 9/11 conspiracy, Bush has done all kinds of thing to warrant outrage in the general public, but it never happens. People are apathetic. That&#39;s all it is. Apathy is not proof of anything. ......The German people did nothing about the Holocaust. It was not openly acknowledged and certainly not reported on, and that was an operation I imagine which would take quite a bit more to keep secret than any 9/11 conspiracy. However, the inaction and ignorance of the German people was no proof that such a thing was not happening........... Do you think the lack of public outcry means anything? Look at these threads. One can&#39;t get outraged if one doesn&#39;t care. And one can&#39;t be informed if one absolutely refuses to look at any data which may contradict a fragile world view. Not only have those that believe in the official 9/11 not gotten outraged, they couldn&#39;t even find the courage within themselves to even *look* at some qualified professionals who espouse an alternative view. And so those few of us who *are* outraged are not treated to informed opposing opions, but rather lazy childish insults....... Throughout history the general public is rarely moved into action until their own backs are up against the wall. Unfortunatley by then, it is often too late to prevent anything.

  • April 2, 2006, 6:31 p.m. CST

    Criminally Negligent Incompetance vs. Conspiracy

    by ZombieSolutions

    the thing about conspiracy theories is that they are ultimately comfortable; they ultimately reinforce that there is a plan, even if that plan is evil. the sad fact of the matter is that NO PLAN EXISTS. oh sure, there was a plan to attack Iraq regardless, so theres a conspiracy there; a laughably inept conspiracy that isn&#39;t working, no less. but 9/11? that was a pure FUCK UP; its what happens when the Emperor Wears No Clothes. the fact that the Bush Administration specifically and the US Govt. in general is totally useless and criminally negligent is much, much scarier. Think about it. Do you feel safe? They can&#39;t stop a terrorist attack they knew about, they can&#39;t prepare for a storm they knew was coming. The lack of a conspiracy is actually much more frightening; because it points incontrovertably to the fact that things are completely and utterly out of control and we are heading towards total national and ultimately global collapse. feel safe yet? grab yr ankles its gonna be a bumpy ride!

  • April 2, 2006, 6:36 p.m. CST

    What about ...

    by Judas_Noose

    What about the well-known and so-called German Propoganda Machine of the Third Reich? Being German-born, I&#39;m well aware of how conveniently Germany has, of late, swept the reality of how the country used the element of fear to control the mentality of the general public. Sound familiar? Does a colour-coded Terror Alert level 1) allow you to coordinate your wardrobe to match the current level of alert status - cuz lord knows wearing a pink pant-suit with a level of "yellow" is not chic this season, or, 2) make you afraid of the so well publicized "unkown" variable? (e.g. the Jews ... the Arabs ... insert era-appropriate threat here) Once you make a person afraid enough ... they&#39;ll do just about anything you want them to so long as you issue a declaration that if they follow those specific procedures, they will be kept safe. It&#39;s all about manipulating the psyche of the "patient" - meaning, you. The U.S. media tends to market its products on the precept of fear and exclusion. "Buy this, or you won&#39;t be happy" ... or, "You&#39;d better own one, or you won&#39;t be as cool as the Jones&#39;s" - I, for one, am quite through with being afraid. I, and many like me, have spent far too long in the shadows. Even my own genetic make-up has me freaked out of my gourd for acknowledging, knowing, and being well aware of my so-called "alterative sexuality". Must I dart into a dark alley every time some insecure dude in a passing truck yells "faggot!" at me as I walk down the street in one of Portland, Oregon&#39;s "famed" gay areas? No, I should think not. Very much in the same way the American people shouldn&#39;t have a knee-jerk reaction to such "said threats", as unsubstantiated as they usually are. I, like I said, I&#39;m done with having fear, and the things that we do while under the guise of said affect, dictate our actions and responses. It&#39;s time for all of us to stand up, be counted, and ask some serious, serious questions as to the nature of our government and what they&#39;re actually trying to do, as opposed to what they say they supposedly are.

  • April 2, 2006, 6:43 p.m. CST

    I&#39;m impressed, Judas.

    by jollysleeve

    Nice post and I applaud your sentiments. Bravo.

  • April 2, 2006, 6:56 p.m. CST

    by FinalSolace4

    to the guy about why arent people stepping up to capital hill. theres gonna be a massive rally soon- i dont want to spread it here though coz its better it stays word of mouth. lets just say this thing is gonna blow up like you never believe- its more likly the gov will launch another terrorist attack ot attack iran- or release a bird flu activator or someyhing?? why is the gov stockpiling 300 vats of smallpox vaccine?????

  • April 2, 2006, 6:58 p.m. CST

    This was a US Made WWII film made in 1943

    by Shan

    From imdb.com "The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp (1943)" - Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger&#39;s first Technicolor masterpiece, The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp (1943), transcends its narrow wartime propaganda to portray in warm-hearted detail the life and loves of one extraordinary man. The film&#39;s clever narrative structure first presents us with the imposingly rotund General Clive Wynne-Candy (Roger Livesey in his greatest screen performance), a blustering old duffer who seems the epitome of stuffy, outmoded values. But traveling backwards 40 years we see a different man altogether: the young and dashing officer "Sugar" Candy. Through a series of affecting relationships with three women (all played to perfection by Deborah Kerr) and his touching lifelong friendship with a German officer (Anton Wallbrook), we see Candy&#39;s life unfold and come to understand how difficult it is for him to adapt his sense of military honor to modern notions of "total war." Notoriously, this is the film that Winston Churchill tried to have banned, and indeed its sympathetic portrayal of a German officer was contentious in 1943, though one suspects that Churchill&#39;s own blimpishness was a factor too.

  • April 2, 2006, 7:05 p.m. CST

    It has been said ...

    by Judas_Noose

    That Guy Fawkes, the man who code-name "V" found as an ... ally to the cause. He was said to have been the only man to have ever entered Parliament with good intentions ... hint, hint ... wink, wink ... nudge, nudge ...

  • April 2, 2006, 7:13 p.m. CST

    Ever wonder ...

    by Judas_Noose

    Why the F.C.C. has been lobbying heavily to get Sirius Satellite Radio under its own jurisdiction? It was all nice and comfy so long as terrestrial radio was under the thumb of Clear Channel, et. al. Once that bond was broken ... they freaked out, opened up very animated arguments against the service, and likened it to several un-patriotic actions such as flag burning (Note: The only respectful means of disposing of an American flag is by burning it.) suddenly ... the service is a so-called and so-named "threat". Define threat? Threat to who? One man&#39;s freedom fighter is another man&#39;s terrorist. You can&#39;t have both. Pick one.

  • April 2, 2006, 7:29 p.m. CST

    ... As Thinkers, We Should Always Wonder

    by DeeJay

    Dstrbo1... thanks for the compliment! I see that Anchorite/Tubgirl Tonay is akin to the train that comes right on time--- but moves in the wrong direction. Judas, Jolly and Zombie... it&#39;s good to see that there are still some true thinkers on this board. Hype... let me be plain. Very few people are alleging any "conspiracy," and I would&#39;ve thought that a number of the proceeding posts made that clear

  • April 2, 2006, 7:36 p.m. CST

    Thanks for the compliment...

    by jollysleeve

    ...DeeJay. That&#39;s some good company. But I suspect you&#39;ll probably want to disavow further association with me considering some of the links I like to post...... (http://911revisited.com/video.html) and (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=964034652002408586) .....but thanks anyway.

  • April 2, 2006, 8:33 p.m. CST

    I thought Oliver Stone was like... dead...

    by dr_dreadlocks

    I just hope Alexander taught him a thing or two about opening a film on a very dry and boring set of speeches by a very gifted actor... and stretching them out for THREE AND A HALF HOURS. Yes, I watched the movie once. I&#39;ll never do so again. -- http://humapple.blogspot.com/

  • April 2, 2006, 9:15 p.m. CST

    Could someone please refute this statement?

    by Shan

    I&#39;ve been wondering about this for a while. Saddam did all these awful things for decades without too much reaction from the West, including a brutal 8 year war with Iran. When he gassed the Kurds in 1988, I believe the overall reaction was disgracefully mute. Now, if Saddam had done just one thing different (not invade Kuwait) could anyone dispute that a) he&#39;d probably still be in power b) he&#39;d be one of our new best friends helping the war in terror (the attacks in 2001 would still have happened) like other dubious regimes to varying degrees like Uzbekistan and Pakistan. Maybe even using the war on terror as cover to squash domestic opposition without expecting much criticism which seems to be going on in Uzbekistan.

  • April 2, 2006, 9:29 p.m. CST

    deejay

    by HypeEndsHere

    to believe that the media and gov&#39;t willfully keep from the public the true details of 9/11 implies a &#39;conspiracy&#39;, as acting together to achieve the same goal means to conspire. i apologize if you were unaware of this before you arrived.

  • April 2, 2006, 9:31 p.m. CST

    Not to mention ...

    by Judas_Noose

    The U.S. gave Saddam the weapons he then later used against the Kurds - even trained some of his elite forces personnel how to use them. What did we expect? Some tyrant to just ... wait until he absolutely needed to use them? Remember that photo of Rumsfeld shaking hands with Hussein? No? ... wonder why ... Come on ... Lest we forget ... The C.I.A. have millions to the Taliban way back when, and even trained some of bin Laden&#39;s troops in the ways of the Sith. It&#39;s like giving a child a loaded weapon, and not expecting him to point it at you, even in jest. Wise up, dudes - really.

  • April 2, 2006, 9:36 p.m. CST

    And I suppose you think ....

    by Judas_Noose

    That the so-called Groom Lake AFB, or "Area 51" as it&#39;s so affectionately named, actually has extra-terrestrial space craft, too? There&#39;s a reason for not tell us everything ... and I&#39;m not so sure I even want to know. If WE know ... THEY know ... imagine how effective "their" next attack would be if they knew the ins and outs and all the labyrinthine intricacies of our government and the means by which they protect the general public. There is a need for secrecy, reasonable secrecy, of course ... but we can&#39;t know everything - it&#39;s not safe to know too much in these days and times. You would be considered a liability if you did.

  • April 2, 2006, 9:50 p.m. CST

    Typing skills notwithstanding ...

    by Judas_Noose

    The argument that I&#39;m trying to put forth in this forum is that 1) we are governed by fear, 2) that fear is exaggerated to the benefit of those who seek the votes, and 3) that we are being manipulated by those who win the votes won through fear. Cheney remarked, rather, WARNED of making "the wrong decision" during the 2004 election ... even went to far as to suggest that making an errant decision might even *gasp* result in the United States being attacked again. Do you really enjoy being manipulated like that? I certainly don&#39;t. I don&#39;t mind secrecy, but I DO mind being lied to about the need for that secrecy. What&#39;s so difficult about saying, "Y&#39;know .. I can&#39;t really answer that question fully because it may very well pose a security threat to this nation and its people"? I&#39;d much rather have a blunt, honest answer than a rambling, cyclical response that really doesn&#39;t offer any real absolution, but rather a mere nebulous, undefineable "thing". Rumsfeld is probably the only dude I know who can talk for six hours and not say a God-Damned thing. Just give me a little truth once in a while ... I&#39;m tired of the cakewalk.

  • April 3, 2006, 12:06 a.m. CST

    Hype... Would You Be Reasonable?

    by DeeJay

    Hype... in virtually every local murder case that is covered by regional newspapers, there are salient details the authorities don&#39;t provide the media. In some cases, they convince reporters to *not* to publish certain facts. This has become a fairly common device in television dramas, as the function of this is to use that information to later verify the actual criminals. By your definition of conspiracy, police officers weave one *every* time we read the newspaper. This could amount to hundreds of such conspiracies occurring in the US every year... an absurd notion, to say the least. I think that virtually any law enforcement officer, most reporters, the vast majority of government officials, any reasonable individual, and m-w.com would take issue with your definition.

  • April 3, 2006, 1:18 a.m. CST

    that&#39;s funny

    by samsquanch

    I always heard it the other way around. that&#39;s the thing with those homespun chestnuts- they&#39;re reversible.

  • April 3, 2006, 1:50 a.m. CST

    9/11 was all about money, money, money, money..

    by warpspasm

    ..and bad men likes lots of it.

  • April 3, 2006, 6:57 a.m. CST

    *SPOILER*

    by Pageiv

    The WTC is destroyed!!!!!!!! Sorry about that, and to the Canadian that says Americans are taken out back for a thrashing I say: Not all of us are Park Ave liberals that just take what life gives us. http://www.geocities.com/pageiv71/Michigan_Partisan.html

  • April 3, 2006, 8:18 a.m. CST

    *sigh* fine. i agree with your post Deejay.

    by HypeEndsHere

    elements are kept from the public by investigators/gov&#39;t. i believe the phrase is "fuckin&#39; duh" i don&#39;t know how that relates to the idea that gov&#39;t actively destroyed the WTC, which is what we were discussing before you showed up.

  • April 3, 2006, 9:21 a.m. CST

    Jeepers.

    by DocPazuzu

    Maybe I should go away for week-long trips a bit more often. When I returned this morning and later popped in to check out AICN, I initially lamented the fact that I had missed out on some good talkbacks. However, upon closer scrutiny of this one I realized that it was much more fun without me. What resident High Times conspiracy loon homewrecker has proven in this TB without a shadow of a doubt are two things

  • April 3, 2006, 9:30 a.m. CST

    Heyzues. Are you guys still arguing over this?

    by Mr Nice Gaius

  • April 3, 2006, 11:27 a.m. CST

    IS IT ABOUT BUILDING 7???

    by Bishop6

    WHICH SPONTANEOUSLY IMPLODED FOR NO KNOWN REASON?

  • April 3, 2006, 11:35 a.m. CST

    I don&#39;t believe in conspiricy theories

    by TimBenzedrine

    Mainly because I don&#39;t think either party could organize a half decent company picnic let alone the destruction of two skyscrapers in the world&#39;s largest city. I DO think that once it took place the administration had 2 choices: they could admit that they spent the entire summer bent over a table with their shorts around their ankles just waiting for something to happen, or they could use this tragedy to their own advantage and push every wrong headed plan they had on the back burner to the forefront, claiming anyone showing the least bit of skepticism is "on the side of the terrorists".

  • April 3, 2006, 12:11 p.m. CST

    This just in...

    by NathanH

    FOX NEWS ALERT: The myth of the Holocaust, a Democratic plot? FOX NEWS ALERT: Why do Democrats hate America? FOX NEWS ALERT: Why do Democrats hate Kittens and Sunshine? FOX NEWS ALERT: Why the Democrats WANT your daughter to have an abortion! FOX NEWS ALERT: Democrats building chunnel to CUBA??!! FOX NEWS ALERT: What to do if your daughter is dating a Democrat! FOX NEWS ALERT: Why the Democrats want the terrorist to win! FOX NEWS ALERT: Do the Democrats WANT your son to die in Iraq? FOX NEWS ALERT: How the Democrats got us trapped in Iraq! FOX NEWS ALERT: Democrats funding child pornography ring! FOX NEWS ALERT: Are the Blue States a breeding ground for Terrorists? FOX NEWS ALERT: What the democrats don&#39;t want you to know about 9/11! FOX NEWS ALERT: Why the Democrats hate Jesus! FOX NEWS ALERT: Why the Democrats want VODOO taught in YOUR child&#39;s high school!! FOX NEWS ALERT: Why the Democrats want MORE violence and nudity on your child&#39;s TV!!! FOX NEWS ALERT: Prez Says, "Democracy good, Terrorists bad."

  • April 3, 2006, 12:28 p.m. CST

    But to be fair and balanced...

    by NathanH

    Fox News will soon be bankrupted by Shepard Smith&#39;s massive eyeliner and mascara bills. "Mr. Smith, um, dont you think you have enough eyemakeup on...um ....sir" "I&#39;LL TELL YOU WHEN I HAVE ENOUGH YOU PATHETIC SHIT! NOW BREAK OUT THE MAX FACTOR AND DO YOUR FUCKING JOB! MOOOOOOORE EEEEYYYYEEEE LINEEEEEER!!! /THUNDER/ Oh, and this movie looks like crap.

  • April 3, 2006, 1:10 p.m. CST

    isn&#39;t shepard smith

    by smackfu

    the guy who made the live-on air comment about J-Lo giving a blowjob a couple of years ago?

  • April 3, 2006, 1:17 p.m. CST

    Once and yet again ....

    by Judas_Noose

    People who actually weren&#39;t in New York City are claiming that there&#39;s "no known reason" for certain events that occured - namely, the collapse of building 7. Were you there? I don&#39;t know about you, but some of the pictures that I have seen taken immediately after the first tower&#39;s collapse show SEVERE damage to the middle and lower sections of WTC 7. Who knows how many gallons of still burning fuel (and that&#39;s not just AvGas I&#39;m talking about, but the paper, chairs, computers, desks, people) fell onto and then into that building? I sure as hell wasn&#39;t about to run around with a tape measure calculating the total volume of said objects and substances - but I can almost certainly guarantee you, it didn&#39;t fall right into its own footprint. A controlled demolition would have been a lot less messy - in fact, several EMS units had to drive a few blocks around the WTC Center and come at the complex from another direction simply because WTC 7 fell slightly forward and toward the gaping hole that had been torn in the structure by the waves of debris that came cascading down, and into the street - it&#39;s not balsa wood, dude. Secondly, I have yet to see the collapse of WTC 7 from any other direction that from a perspective that appears to be Southward-facing. In all, I&#39;ve only seen 3 videos of the collapse of "7", and they&#39;re all pretty much from the same perspective. From watching them, and I admit I am no expert on structural failures and the like, I have almost certainly determined that the building did in fact fall slightly forward and down around the structural weaknesses that were only exacerbated by the flames and intense heat. Sure - looked smooth, but have you seen any ground-level footage of the collapse? Like I&#39;ve said - you&#39;re just regurgitating what some other theorist has speculated, increasing the divisiveness of the issue, and neglecting to scientifically question, for YOURSELF, the nature of the events that took place.

  • April 3, 2006, 1:22 p.m. CST

    It&#39;s easy to say...

    by Judas_Noose

    Well, so-and-so said that ... and I believe such-and-such because ... Face it, folks - it was a terrorist attack. It wasn&#39;t a conspiracy. Perhaps the Executive Branch and its higher-ups determined it to be a GREAT excuse to go to war with a country that had nothing to do with the attacks in the first place (Remember, most of the hi-jackers were from Iran, NOT Iraq). It&#39;s easy when most Americans are stupid and ignorant - they see one "towel-head", they&#39;ve seen &#39;em all. They&#39;re all the same to a W.A.S.P.

  • April 3, 2006, 1:27 p.m. CST

    If you&#39;ve ever spoken with ...

    by Judas_Noose

    A firefighter ... you may also have learned that to "pull" a building means not to bring it down or implode it, but to evacuate all personnel because of the noticeable and predictable loss of structural integrity due to an intense fire. To "pull it" means, "get the fuck out of there".

  • April 3, 2006, 1:46 p.m. CST

    by flipjinklee

    Ok, GreatOne2. Here are some contradictions to your beliefs on the war in Iraq. This is what Colin Powell stated at a press conference in Egypt on Feb 24th 2001

  • April 3, 2006, 1:48 p.m. CST

    If Bush really wanted to create a true conspiracy ...

    by Judas_Noose

    He and his subordinates would have hired IRAQI hi-jackers so as to ensure his subsequent invasion. However ... I guess Iranians and Saudi Arabians were on sale at CostCo and decided to pinch a few pennies? Ah, but a man&#39;s reach should exceed his grasp, or what&#39;s a war for?

  • April 3, 2006, 1:58 p.m. CST

    I&#39;m with Doc Pazuzu...

    by Childe Roland

    ...in the "way late to the dance" club, but I see in reading back over this whole thing (seriously...killed more than an hour just now) that the points I woulod&#39;ve made were made quite eloquently by other people. Judas, I like the cut of your jib. Any advocacy of independent fact finding and verification is most welcome in this continuing "discussion" (a looser use of that term has never been applied) from talkback to talkback. You get a lot of folks who throw up links or recite canned infobytes designed to support a specifically constructed account (be it the one the administration is peddling or one cobbled together by someone with too much free time and extra cash to spend on hallucinogens). As I&#39;ve often said, neither the staunchest supporter of the party line nor the most whacked out of whackjobs can possibly have enough facts at this point to form a conclusive and incontrovertible assessment of the "truth" concerning the events of 9/11 (or why we&#39;re in Iraq, for that matter). I&#39;m kind of amused to see certain things coming from certain folks. I believe it was Hype who lambasted me so pithily on the Flight 93 talkback for remaining open to so many possibilities, yet here he seems to advocate that position. And since I&#39;m momentarily on HYpe, I&#39;ve got to point out (even though it&#39;s been pointed out already) how his definition of a "conspiracy" tends to hinder useful debate or discussion on this topic. Suggesting that certain facts can and will be witheld from the general public to benefit (even if only temporarily) a body in authority is not, by any stretch, indulging in a "crackpot" theory. It is an acknowledgement of presupposed (and widely agreed upon/admitted to) fact. The question is to what degree and purpose information is being withheld or misrepresented, and so far - in this instance - we simply don&#39;t know. But remaining open to the possibilities until you can prove them (not simply believe them) impossible is not a position to be so glibly dismissed as someone like anchorite is prone to doing. And since I&#39;m in his neck of the woods, I&#39;ve got to comment on what I believe to be an uncharacteristically open minded approach to this talkback. You&#39;ve revealed quite a bit about what you believe and why you believe it, and I wouldn&#39;t dream of making light of it or trying to twist it against you. But I would ask you to think about one point in your reasoning and see if, perhaps, you can see it from a differnt angle. You suggest that - even if our reasons for going to war in Iraq were faulty (due to bad intelligence, lack of faith in the word of a dictator we didn&#39;t trust, or whatever covert agenda someone might&#39;ve had) and the situation there is untenable for the U.S. in terms of any of the goals stated thus far (the discovery and disarmament of WMD, the fight against terror or the liberation of the people) it would be a disservice to the memory of those killed in the conflict thus far for the U.S. to pull out. Doesn&#39;t this kind of translate into the "We&#39;re already dirty so we might as well get filthy instead of trying to clean up?" philosophy? Do more wrongs (in this instance, the deaths of American soldiers and innocent or even irate and resisting Iraqi citizens) somehow make the whole thing right? I would argue that it would be more respectful of the memory of those fallen and respectful of those who remain alive to acknowledge our past mistakes and make every effort to correct/atone for them. Or, at the very least, to demonstrate that we&#39;ve learned from them. Thus far, the administration is giving no indication that it is capable of this all-important developmental skill. Just food for thought. Oh, and although I&#39;ve never seen you both in the same room, I can say right now...based entirely on my gut feeling, that there is no way in hell you (anchorite) and Doc P are the same guy. Not unless you&#39;re both actually facets of some deranged chick&#39;s MPD, in which case I&#39;d say there&#39;s a better-than-even chance homewrecker is another submerged chunk of her subconscious. Come to think of it, if that&#39;a all true, in the spirit of remaining open to possibilities, I&#39;ll have to entertain the notion that I, too, am just another slice of Sybil&#39;s pie. Anyway, good talk, kids. Keep those thinking caps on.

  • April 3, 2006, 2:06 p.m. CST

    WHY DID WTC 7 COLLAPSE?!?!

    by boast

    explain it?

  • April 3, 2006, 2:08 p.m. CST

    No evidence that Al-Queda involved...

    by boast

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5223932

  • April 3, 2006, 2:08 p.m. CST

    A more ... personal note:

    by Judas_Noose

    My long-time roommate is a member of the Oregon National Guard. He was driving one of the many Humvees in a convoy along what was supposedly a "safe road" - meaning, it had been cleared of all I.E.D.s and remote-operated R.P.G.s. One of those bombs went off next to his convoy, and he took a large shard of shrapnel in his lower back, severing some nerves and severely damaging others. He got his Purple Heart, was excused from active combat duty indefinitely. He&#39;s looking forward to six very invasive, and very dangerous neuro-surgeries to try and help correct some of the damage that has been done. I once asked him, "Was it worth it? Were the injuries you sustained worth it?" He said to me, with the most honest eyes I have ever seen: "I shouldn&#39;t have been there - that war was won in two days, and we should have been gone in twelve". And this is from one of the dudes who was out there putting his neck on the chopping block. He didn&#39;t want to be there - he knows it&#39;s a misrepresentation. But, he also acknowledges: Saddam was a very, very bad dude. Once he was gone and out of there ... there really wasn&#39;t a threat anymore. See - dictatorships don&#39;t work like democracies ... in case you weren&#39;t aware. He was in so much control of everything, that when the shit hit the fan, his entire infrastructure was in utter chaos - nobody knew who was in control of what or where the other half was. That house of cards got caught in the gust of "shock and awe". We all saw the CNN reports. The war was won in two days - we should have been gone in twelve. Anyone care to give a rebuttal?

  • April 3, 2006, 2:09 p.m. CST

    Well said, Childe Roland...

    by Mr Nice Gaius

    Let&#39;s be hopeful that your post does not go to waste as this TB appears to be dying down.

  • April 3, 2006, 2:11 p.m. CST

    Why did WTC 7 collapse ...

    by Judas_Noose

    Gravity

  • April 3, 2006, 2:11 p.m. CST

    above shoulve said "No evidence of Iraq involved" sorry

    by boast

  • April 3, 2006, 2:16 p.m. CST

    With the exception of Judas Noose...

    by Mr Nice Gaius

    who appears to be typing to himself...

  • April 3, 2006, 2:51 p.m. CST

    Hype... Thanks for Admitting That You Were Wrong

    by DeeJay

    Based on your last post, it seems that you agree your definition of conspiracy... to which you dedicated an entire post... was incorrect. Thank you. On a different note, if you now think that this discussion is geared towards the idea that the "government actively destroyed the WTC," it would reveal much about your tendency to selectively read posts. Thanks for sharing.

  • April 3, 2006, 3:13 p.m. CST

    rather than focus on the actual collapse..

    by warpspasm

    what about all the other stuff that occured beforehand-insider trading, insurance policies on both towers weeks before-no plane at the pentagon-no fottage for that matter. to many dodgy things happened leading up to this-many fingers on the hand doing things separately to make this happen.

  • April 3, 2006, 3:26 p.m. CST

    i figured, why not let the baby have his bottle?

    by HypeEndsHere

    you showed up late and backtracking isn&#39;t something i feel like doing. i concede.

  • April 3, 2006, 3:41 p.m. CST

    HypeEndsHere..

    by warpspasm

    point taken! i&#39;m covering the same ground.

  • April 3, 2006, 3:47 p.m. CST

    Hype, Hype, Hype

    by DeeJay

    I see. So, when 2 and 1/2 hours pass before I reply to your comment directed at me (in a talkback that been going on for nearly 4 days, no less) I&#39;m "late." Clearly, the two of us have different standards of what is reasonable, but I suppose that such is life.

  • April 3, 2006, 3:53 p.m. CST

    dude, win gracefully. no need for shots after the bell

    by HypeEndsHere

    you won. you&#39;re reasonable or something. i don&#39;t know. i had a tough time following your posts. i&#39;m just verbally overpowered, i suppose. again, congrats.

  • April 3, 2006, 3:55 p.m. CST

    Out of curiousity...

    by Judas_Noose

    What about what I&#39;ve said makes it appear that I&#39;m, as you said, "typing to myself"? A few examples would be helpful - I enjoy a good debate, and also appriciate constructive criticism(s) - any suggestions would be welcomed.

  • April 3, 2006, 4:16 p.m. CST

    Deep Impact vs. Armaggeddon.

    by VoodooV

    hehe, that takes me back. That shit was hilarious how the fans for both movies would snipe at each other over which was the better movie. as tasteless as I think these 9/11 movies are..I will be hilarious to watch history repeat itself. so does this mean Flight 93 is the "actiony, flag-waving, America Fuck yeah!!/rock video" movie like Armaggeddon was? and Stone&#39;s film is the "serious movie that panders to intellectual-wannabes?" movie like Deep Impact was? Just askin&#39;

  • April 3, 2006, 4:25 p.m. CST

    Either one was entirely fictional

    by Judas_Noose

    There is no feasible way the U.S. or any other global super-power could 1) See a cometary object that is projected to be only about a year out ... we&#39;d see it a lot sooner than that 2) An asteroid the size of Texas floating around space on a collision course, and we only have 13 days? Both were entirely improbable. Not to mention the discrepancies that deal with planetary physics and intertia ... please ... just so happens that an asteroid on its way to Earth, one that is tumbling on ALL three axes of orientation relative to a stationary observer, and Mr. Willis just happens to blow it up in such a way that the whole thing spinters into two pieces, each of which miss the Earth by a comfortable margin? Improbable - Highly improbable. But .. I guess it makes for some decent work by ILM and Digital Domain. Deep Impact was its own movie ... a bit more realistic, I thought - however ... Landing on a rotating object like a comet - let alone traversing the debris field in the coma and tail ... also, highly improbable. Consider the relative speed of the spacecraft involved, and then include the relative speed of the cometary object ... any piece of debris, no matter how small, impacting the craft would have devastating consequences ... loss of pressurization, oxygen depletion. It&#39;s nice to think that humans are in control of nature&#39;s so-called "destructive forces", but ... it&#39;s probably just as easy to stop a volcano from erupting: Highly improbable.

  • April 3, 2006, 4:28 p.m. CST

    I mean ...

    by Judas_Noose

    It&#39;s easier for you to drive into a spinning parking garage than it is for a computer to park a Soyuz craft at the I.S.S. - I suggest you try it.

  • April 3, 2006, 4:28 p.m. CST

    Democrat victory as Flight 93 trailer is pulled!

    by Silver Shamrock

    The trailer was pulled from a theater in New York! Shoot, I was hoping to see it, but I&#39;d sooner see images of 911 in the liberal mainstream media! Have you forgotten? http://tinyurl.com/f6adx

  • April 3, 2006, 4:35 p.m. CST

    Very, very interesting, Silver Shamrock

    by Judas_Noose

    I can&#39;t imagine why anyone would want to pull a supposedly accurate depiction of the events that took place aboard flight 93. That, to me, is very, very interesting ... although - I can also understand how many people feel that it&#39;s far too soon to be ... capitalizing on said events. Why the casting of Nic Cage? It&#39;s not like they paid him a pittance...different movie, I know ... but, still ... raises some very interesting questions.

  • April 3, 2006, 4:52 p.m. CST

    Hype... Agreed

    by DeeJay

    I think we can all agree that this talkback has taken on a life of its own (probably the reason one poster said that we should all be sterilized--- or something similarly ridiculous), likely because we all have such strong feelings about 9/11. I guess I&#39;d like to throw out a question to everyone. Does anyone plan to see this movie? I actually don&#39;t. It&#39;s not to say that I absolutely won&#39;t (and this has almost nothing to do with Oliver Stone), it&#39;s just to say that I tend to have a difficult time with such films... ones that challenge us to re-live painful times. What about the rest of you?

  • April 3, 2006, 5:04 p.m. CST

    Well, then ... I guess ...

    by Judas_Noose

    Pearl Harbour wasn&#39;t meant to be seen by many ... and, as I&#39;ve read - even THAT film greatly exaggerated the actual events for the appeal of dramatics. I don&#39;t plan to see it - will I if someone else buys my ticket? Possibly.

  • April 3, 2006, 5:18 p.m. CST

    Bowels in, or bowels out?

    by Judas_Noose

    See - Iraq and Iran, as similarly as they are spelled are, in fact, entirely different countries. I have no doubt, yes, Saddam was a very, very dangerous person to be left in the position of power that he held. So ... he&#39;s gone. Where&#39;s Osama? Even Bush has said he doesn&#39;t even consider Osama that much of a threat anymore. What does this tell you? Like I said ... Most Americans see one "towel-head", they&#39;ve seen &#39;em all. Undereducated, misled, and a lied-to public.

  • April 3, 2006, 5:25 p.m. CST

    A consideration to ... consider

    by Judas_Noose

    Perhaps this isn&#39;t a war over factions and nationalities - but, rather, maybe, just maybe, it&#39;s a war over the civilizations that our respective beliefs support? Women do not have an equal voice, are rarely seen without a Burka or head-scarf ... are stoned to death for reasons we here in the Western countries would rather make a Dateline Exclusive over the issue, rather than bury a woman up to her neck in that dirty, dirty sand and throw stones at her head until she dies? Which would you prefer? One must also consider the fact that the so-called "democracy" doesn&#39;t always work as it&#39;s meant to, so, knowing this, who is to say that inflicting a theory of democracy (and, yes, I meant inflicting) in a nation built upon such a theocratic basis is going to work or function? An arrogant presumption, at best. We need to get out of there - let them annihilate eachother ... problem solved. Sad, I know - but ... change, and the world changes with you. They refuse to. Their loss, and it sure as hell won&#39;t be mine.

  • April 3, 2006, 5:33 p.m. CST

    Off the grid ...

    by Judas_Noose

    can&#39;t tell me this war is solely for the purpose of instilling peace in a war-torn region. Bullshit - absolute, unequivocal bullshit. If we&#39;re so proud of our oil reserves and how much we "own" (don&#39;t even get me started on the debate about how conglomerations of atoms - YOU - can lay claim to other arrangements of other atoms) why aren&#39;t we using them, and, in the meantime, arranging a system in which we aren&#39;t so dependent on foreign oil? Get real, man ... they say it ain&#39;t about the oil ... so ... why aren&#39;t we going after North Korea?! THEY HAVE A NUKE! Probably more than one ... but ... I guess they don&#39;t have what we want ... yet.

  • April 3, 2006, 5:39 p.m. CST

    Okie dokie ...

    by Judas_Noose

    They "LOOK" like Palestinians? ... critical flaw - forged and fabricated. Bar none - ignored.

  • April 3, 2006, 5:41 p.m. CST

    Cite your sources - let us verify them

    by Judas_Noose

    Come on, dude - give a URL or something ... I ain&#39;t gonna take anything anyone says in here at face value.

  • April 3, 2006, 5:42 p.m. CST

    I doubt I&#39;ll see it.

    by Childe Roland

    I just don&#39;t see the point. I&#39;m tired to death of 9/11 being used as a rallying tool by one side and a bludgeoning stick by the other. It was a terrible tragedy that no movie is going to help me comprehend the significance of on a deeper level than I already do (having been on the phone with our people in New York throughout the events of the morning). The only thing at this point that will change my perception of that day and the people who have capitalized on it will be the revelation of information that forms a more complete picture of the events. You can bet that revelation isn&#39;t going to come from Hollywood, any more than it did in those "good old" World War II movies or in Mike Moore&#39;s recent work. I like it when Hollywood holds up a veiled mirror to reality, casting shadows on the back of the cave wall that make us think more about parallel events in our own lives. But when it tries to beat me over the head with a disco ball I tend to tune out.

  • April 3, 2006, 5:51 p.m. CST

    Mike Moore ...

    by Judas_Noose

    preaches to the choir ... nobody who really NEEDED to see Fahrenheit 9-11 actually saw it ... only the people who already knew and believed what he was saying. What we need is someone who guises under the mask of "republican", and yet ... defies the "democrats", and even still disavows any "independent" political afflilations. We need an intellectual - someone who can formulate an entire sentence without stuttering, someone who wasn&#39;t born with that proverbial "silver spoon" in his mouth. We need a real, corn-fed, free-range American to run this country.

  • April 3, 2006, 6:58 p.m. CST

    Wow...

    by DocPazuzu

    ...I can almost hear the crack pipe bubbling from here. Nice to see you felt so cornered by being called on your cowardice, homewrecker, that you felt the need to reply for once, even if you neglected to respond to one single thing other than the feeble rubber-and-gluer regarding your cowardice. Kudos though for making it such a nutbag of a post anyway. Like the talkbacker above stated: provide us with some links to those "facts". What I love about the looniest of you tinfoil-hatters is that you have about as much desire to ask questions about 9-11 as the most zealous of Dick Cheney fans. You are interested in nothing but peddling a pre-fabricated fantasy which justifies your own prejudices against whichever group of people you happen to dislike, whether it be Jews, Arabs, Lithuanians or Martians (with a nice, neat little list of "acceptable" exceptions to prove you&#39;re not a racist). Your insane theories fall apart at the seams almost immediately when--conveniently--exposed "evidence" "proves" the conspiracy, while lack of evidence is "proof" of how ingenious and far-reaching the powers of cover-up are for the secret cabal. In the evolution vs. creation debate, creationists resort to the same type of tactic (known as "the god in the gap") where temporary lack of evidence which lends credibility to evolution is attributed to the presence of an unknowable God. But, more than anything, you&#39;re still the asshat who once claimed that all people who think Sean Combs is a musical hack are racists. Remember, it&#39;s "puff puff pass", not "puff puff puff puff puff puff puff puff puff puff".

  • April 3, 2006, 8:05 p.m. CST

    345 posts in this thread alone.

    by jollysleeve

    I guarantee you that right now the producers of both 9/11 movies are rubbing their hands together and salivating. I&#39;ve said it before and I&#39;ll say it again, these movies are going to clean up at the box office. Hooray for controversy!

  • April 3, 2006, 8:15 p.m. CST

    this ain&#39;t gonna result in ticket sales.

    by HypeEndsHere

    i think we&#39;re all in agreement: money no leave my wallet for 9/11.

  • April 3, 2006, 9:50 p.m. CST

    by FinalSolace4

    is it ordinary for so many talkbacker- aicn talkbacker of all people- the notorius fanboys of the net to switch sides like this?? well heres some more switchers- its like 1 in 10 on some forums [url]http://www.ga-forum.com/showthread.php?p=3010348#post3010348[/url] [url]http://www.aintitcool.com/tb_display.cgi?id=22837#1120681[/url] [url]http://episteme.arstechnica.com/groupee/forums/a/tpc/f/28609695/m/509000628731[/url] [url]http://www.shoutwire.com/comments/7534/Agents_Try_To_Remove_911_Eyewitness_From_Wikipedia[/url] [url]http://youtube.com/watch?v=psP_9RE0V2I[/url] [url]http://www.eurogamer.net/forum_thread_posts.php?thread_id=50561&forum_id=1[/url] [url]http://forums.understanding-islam.org/community/showthread.php?t=2808[/url]

  • April 3, 2006, 9:53 p.m. CST

    by FinalSolace4

    oh and by the way there was zero debrie damage to WTC7 look at photos and video from both sides- not a scratch.

  • April 3, 2006, 10:39 p.m. CST

    AICN: Alot of Ignorant Conservative Nonsense

    by bushsux

    I&#39;m not saying the site AICN itself is right-wing, I&#39;m just sick of all these ignorant right-wing idiots and apologists coming on this site and embarassing themselves all the time. GreatOne: Iraq had no WMD&#39;s. I don&#39;t care that the Weekly Standard or whatever piece of crap right-wing rag you read said Saddam had Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Weapons it simply is not true. We&#39;ve had hundreds of thousands of coalition soldiers, UN Weapons Inspectors before and 3 years after the war and they found ABSOLUTLEY NOTHING. Second, GayOne (no offense to people who are openly gay), members of the Bush Administration, including Bush and Cheney themselves, and most of the Republican Party before the war said Iraq had a connection with 9/11. Unfortunately for you idiots, Michael Moore taped the Facr The Nation and Meet the Press interviews where they said that and put it into his movies. Anchorite, stop pretending to be a centrist. You are one of the biggest most ignorant right-wing ditto-heads on this site and that is saying something. Nobody buys your "republicans are the lesser of two evils argument". Maybe if the other political party was the Nazis the Republicans would be the lesser of two evils. Let&#39;s see, Clinton, win the Kosovo War in 79 days with an international coalition behind us and almost no casualties. Bush, 3 years and counting in Iraq with almost no international coalition behind us from the start and over 2,300 US Soldiers and Marines. You sire, are a friggin idiot.

  • April 3, 2006, 11:09 p.m. CST

    by FinalSolace4

    give a three buzzwords to ordinary people and they turn politics mad. i&#39;ll leave it up to people to figure what ther are.

  • April 3, 2006, 11:26 p.m. CST

    PNAC: Project for a New American Century

    by brokebackcowboy

    Of which Dick Cheney and Paul Wolfowitz were members. Headed by William Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard magazine, published by Rupert Murdoch, the owner of Fox News. Their mantra was total American economic and political hegemony worldwide through use of military force. The only way this can be accomplished? The only way the American people will back this? In their words, a cataclysmic event such as a new Pearl Harbor. How convenient then, for the Bush Administration.

  • April 3, 2006, 11:51 p.m. CST

    I still think...

    by bastard_guy180

    I still think they should make TRADE CENTER! With Leslie Nielson and O.J Simpson, it could combine the best elements of Airplane! and Naked Gun with some hysterical 9/11 elements!

  • April 4, 2006, 1:29 p.m. CST

    shit, I can&#39;t believe I&#39;m going to say this, but-

    by samsquanch

    I&#39;m finding myself agreeing with almost (almost) everything in Anchorite&#39;s last post. It&#39;s nice to see someone who identifies themself as firmly on the right wing of things give actual reasons how and why Clinton fucked up. And you didn&#39;t even mention Monica! not even once! You don&#39;t know how refreshing that is for me. I make the same arguments, and people call me a Bush supporter. One thing though- "If you recall, our original viewpoint was that terrorists and the countries that harbored and supported them were going to be considered our enemy. We have softened that stance too much since then, as far as I am concerned. You may disagree." I do. I wonder how you see this happening, with the conflict in Iraq escalating every day (&#39;last throes&#39; comments and &#39;mission accomplished&#39; banners notwithstanding), and the States doing some saber rattling of it&#39;s own concerning Iran. Unless you&#39;re dissapointed with the lack of interest in states like Saudi Arabia and Syria, in which case I&#39;ll agree with you some more. Just wondering. Oh- and one other thing- the connection the Admin made between Iraq and 9/11 was a textbook example of social engineering. Now, before you bite my head off, I&#39;m not yelling &#39;conspiracy&#39;, I&#39;m simply suggesting that the Admin knew full well that whatever connection they made between Al Quaeda and Saddam would be interpreted as a link to 9/11 by the general public, and this would allow them to sell the war. You may disagree.___________And on that note, it&#39;s been a fun talkback, but it&#39;s slowly setting into the horizon of the bottom of the Homepage, and we&#39;ll all be saying goodbye soon. So I&#39;d like to sign off by saying that in most cases, war is the failure of government, and even though we&#39;re not all good people deep down, we can at least agree that it&#39;s bad business to fuck other people over too often. Good day._dstrbo1 out.

  • April 4, 2006, 2:42 p.m. CST

    PUKE

    by flipjinklee

    We can all go on and on about the war and 9-11 and puke out our opinions all day. Bottom line, the majority of Americans no longer trust the Bush administration, with just cause. This is the same &#39;president&#39; that stole the first election, ignored intelligence that could have prevented 9-11, mislead the people to an unnecessary war, keeps giving tax breaks for the rich while public services are being cut all over the nation, absolutely refuses to take any responsibility for his failed policies, allows torture as means of gathering information, allows people in his administration to leak top secret material with no disciplinary actions, has taken the largest federal surplus EVER (thanks to Clinton) and turned it into the largest federal defecate EVER, authorizes illegal wiretaps, has the blood of almost 2,500 American Soldiers and probably 100,000+ Iraqi&#39;s on his hands....this list could go on and on. No wonder we can&#39;t win a war, the compentcy level in the White House is comparable to a group of monkeys doing quantum physics. My only question for those who STILL support the circle miscreants in the White House.....How far does George Bush&#39;s penis have to be up your ass before you realize he is fucking you?

  • April 4, 2006, 4:52 p.m. CST

    I am happy

    by flipjinklee

    If you noticed I put &#39;probably 100,000 Iraqi&#39;s&#39;, but your right, there&#39;s only been about 40,000 (recorded) Iraqi deaths but I am sure there will be well over 100,000 by the time this war is over. Also, if you notice, this is the number of RECORDED deaths. Here is a link to look up my "pulling numbers out of thin air" http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3962969.stm About all my other &#39;opinions&#39;... Stolen election.....FACT.....Ignored intelligence.....FACT, don&#39;t believe me? Read the 9-11 commission report. Tax breaks for the rich.....FACT. Federal Cuts for public services.....FACT. Allows torture for information.....FACT. Allows people in his administration to leak top secret material......FACT. Has taken the largest federal surplus EVER and turned it into the largest federal defecate (<---glad I got a laugh out of you) EVER.....FACT. Authorizes illegal wiretaps.....FACT. Blood of almost 2,500 American Soldiers.....FACT. And probably 100,000+ Iraqi&#39;s on his hands (debatable) more than likely fact soon. I guess if facts are opinions then you are right, I just puked out some opinionated facts.

  • April 4, 2006, 5:02 p.m. CST

    rather than bitch about Republicans Gone Wild, flip

    by HypeEndsHere

    (which would be a great video, BTW) how about bitching about the (more than) half of the political landscape that let them run wild? you know, the ones with the power to question and confront those in power? and for the fun of it.....FACT.

  • April 4, 2006, 5:10 p.m. CST

    by flipjinklee

    One more thing....and this is purely me puking my opinion. Anchorite, your the type when Bush walks into a room, you&#39;d be more than happy to drop your pants, grab your ankles and when he is in full stride, inside you, all you can think is "Boy, I am sure happy Bush is protecting me from terrorists." RIGHT!??!

  • April 4, 2006, 5:18 p.m. CST

    humina

    by flipjinklee

    humina humina humina humina humina humina humina humina homeland security humina humina humina humina humina humina humina humina homeland security humina humina humina humina humina humina humina humina homeland security humina humina humina humina humina humina humina humina homeland security humina humina humina humina humina humina humina humina homeland security

  • April 4, 2006, 7:22 p.m. CST

    Now HERE is some important news:

    by chromedome

    http://tinyurl.com/mnhqk

  • April 4, 2006, 8:58 p.m. CST

    Only 10% of the first 3 days gross for flight 93

    by moondoggy2u

    is being donated to charity. That&#39;s right, boys and girls. The pond scum director and/or producer of this movie will only donate 10% of the first 3 days&#39; gross to charity. Dont tell me they are doing it to inform the public; they are raping the memories of 9/11 for the cash and ONLY the cash.

  • April 5, 2006, 9:42 a.m. CST

    by flipjinklee

    Just deny the fact and keep ignorant, seems to be what you do best!

  • April 5, 2006, 1:10 p.m. CST

    by flipjinklee

    Oh, I guess that&#39;s why people in this administration are being indicted on the leak and more are on the way. There are plenty of facts that Bush stole the election, just Gore and the rest of the Senators were too big of weenies to do anything about it. Allowing torture for gathering information.... We Americans put ourselves on a pedestal because &#39;we value life and freedom&#39;. Isn&#39;t that essentially why we are in Iraq in the first place? We defeat our own purpose by allowing torture for information. And torturing people for information does not work anyway. When someone is being tortured, they tell you exactly what you want to hear, whether it is truth or not, just so they don&#39;t have to be tortured any longer. It is totally ineffective and there have been plenty of studies done on this to prove it. If an American soldier was captured and tortured for information, we would think it was absolutely despicable, but if we use those same tactics, it&#39;s ok? And so what if torture tactics of other nations were worse in the past (well, Hitler did it so why can

  • April 5, 2006, 1:53 p.m. CST

    by flipjinklee

    Hey John McCain, Does torture work? I await his response..... I am sure he would tell you "You bet, it works great, I told them everything they wanted to hear so they would stop torturing me." Also, there would be no Americans in immediate danger if we weren&#39;t over there in the first place. Tell me, when was the last time your son and wife were in immediate danger and torturing someone was able to save their lives? Like I said, we defeat our own purpose by being there and allowing torture. YOU WILL BE LIBERATED....OR WE WILL KILL AND TORTURE YOU!

  • April 5, 2006, 2:33 p.m. CST

    Re: Valerie Plame - anchorite

    by Max Meanie

    When Robert Novak outed Valerie Plame in his column she was undercover at the time. She was a non-official cover officer meaning she agreed to operate overseas without the protection of a diplomatic passport. If caught she would have been executed. In his follow up column which everyone overlooks, Novak goes on to name the cover company she worked under which placed every one of her co-workers in jeopardy overseas. This is treason plain & simple. Novak placed lives in danger and possibly got someone killed. We&#39;ll never know who was affected and/or captured because if his column.

  • April 5, 2006, 2:55 p.m. CST

    by flipjinklee

    Hey man! Can&#39;t you think of anything juicier than that? I mean, corrupt politicians leaking top secret information that could have potentially gotten an American killed isn&#39;t quite juicy enough.....jeeeez! Maybe we should torture Scooter so he can tell us all what we want to hear. Oh but wait....he&#39;s not Muslim or an Iraqi, so we can&#39;t do that to him. Besides, that leaking information stuff is just an opinion anyway, Right anchorite?

  • April 5, 2006, 3:09 p.m. CST

    McCain on torture:

    by DocPazuzu

    "As passed by the Senate and endorsed by the House, McCain&#39;s amendment would prohibit "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment" of anyone in U.S. government custody, regardless of where they are held. It also would require that service members follow procedures in the Army Field Manual during interrogations of prisoners in Defense Department facilities." .... http://tinyurl.com/en7dj ...... Sorry, anchorite. McCain is strongly opposed to torture and now the chimp prince in the white house has been forced to suck it up.

  • April 5, 2006, 3:27 p.m. CST

    bliss

    by flipjinklee

    Good article. So tell me, would Sen. McCain be apposed to torture if he thought it was a solid way of acquiring information? This is a man that knows first hand of how effective torture is. It

  • April 5, 2006, 4 p.m. CST

    debunking anchorite - it&#39;s fun!

    by Max Meanie

    "then I doubt the Republicans would have done so well in the last couple of sets of elections." That&#39;s the childish argument of "he must be right because he makes more money that you." Republicans only win elections by disenfranchising voters and playing the FEAR card. How do you justify Ken Blackwell discarding thousands of voter registration cards in Ohio because they were not the card stock he wanted days before the election? If he had no worries that Bush would win then why cut all these voters from the record? Why did he install fewer voting machines in democratic districts? Why did people wait 8 hours to vote here when in republican districts there were no problems? re: FEAR - why did Cheney continue to make statements like "with a Kerry White House you can guarantee that we will be hit again." Republicans cannot debate the issue, they smear and use people&#39;s fears against them.

  • April 5, 2006, 4:02 p.m. CST

    anchorite - ever hear of spy satellites?

    by Max Meanie

    Next up, erase the idea that Iraq may have shipped their weapons to Syria in trucks. Y&#39;know why? Because Powell would have presented this evidence in his infamous UN speech. He didn&#39;t and you can be sure we had Iraq covered with every satellite eye we had in the lead-up to the war. Where O where has your common sense gone?

  • April 5, 2006, 4:04 p.m. CST

    for GreatOne2 but anchorite can bathe in it too

    by Max Meanie

    Next up, the reason there is an insurgency is not because of terrorists. The White House confirmed that only 5% of the insurgents are non-Iraqis. The conflict is between the 3 factions (kurds, sunni, shia) but the main catalyst is unemployment. The best way to get someone to stop shooting at you is to give them a job. Paying high fees to contractors to repair basic services is ridiculous when there is a cheap labor force of Iraqis already familiar with their own country. The reason there wasn&#39;t an insurgency after WW2 is because of the Marshall plan we enacted to keep the Germans busy rebuilding. Enable a similar plan in Iraq and guaranteed the violence to diminish and good will towards the US will increase.

  • April 5, 2006, 4:43 p.m. CST

    by flipjinklee

    Very true Max. The only problem, if we allowed the Iraqi&#39;s to rebuild their own country, there would be no need for us to be there and companies like Halliburton and KBR would have to find legitimate, bidding contracts. I have a friend in particular who is over there right now, contracting. He is making $160,000 a year to do heating and air conditioning (first $100,000 is tax free!). Pretty much fixing shit we blew up. The soldier standing next to him, who is protecting his ass is making $40,000 a year. We have Bush blowing his bull horn saying the anti war movement is sending mixed signals to our troops. WHATTT, paying a contractor four times the amount of money that a soldier making, cutting military benefits while they are fighting a war and to have a President (who started the war) saying

  • April 5, 2006, 10:58 p.m. CST

    anchorite stay open-minded

    by Max Meanie

    Don&#39;t give in to the talking points. I used to listen to Limbaugh too until I realized he was a hypocrite who never registered to vote until after Reagan was elected. If you admit you understand that Social Security & Medicare cuts will hurt the elderly that you understand what&#39;s right. This isn&#39;t a game where the right or left has to be proven correct. These are hard times and everybody needs to help everyone. Gays, mexicans, blacks, arabs - they are not the enemy. If someone tripped right in front of you on the street you&#39;d do the right thing and help him no matter who he was, wouldn&#39;t you? Wake up and realize Iraqis were not your enemy. That&#39;s Cheney&#39;s bullshit fear-mongering preying on your vulnerability. Al-Qaeda, the record deficits, lack of healthcare, high gas prices, rebuilding New Orleans, helping the poor - these are the real problems. Help solve those and stop pushing the agenda of people that don&#39;t give one fuck about you and the US.

  • April 6, 2006, 2 p.m. CST

    listening to both sides is the answer

    by Max Meanie

    Of course you understand that Democrats are in the minority and thus they cannot get legislation through because republicans control the floor of the houses and will not let democratic bills through for a vote. It&#39;s childish. Democrats are constantly putting forth bills but republicans scrap them and then write up their own that are antithetical. That&#39;s the problem. Clinton listened to both sides and had republicans in his cabinet. Cheney&#39;s position is everything Clinton must go despite if they worked and Delay, Frist and Hastard will not work with democrats. I ain&#39;t saying they have all the answers but it&#39;s a sign of poor leadership to not listen to every side. That&#39;s why Iraq is a failure and we should&#39;ve focused on Afghanistan & Iran first. Iraq was a built in buffer against Iran and now with that block removed we&#39;re now worried that Iran will walk right in. Kinda silly when you think about it.

  • April 6, 2006, 3:06 p.m. CST

    max, why do the conservatives control 3 branches?

    by HypeEndsHere

    more importantly, why should they listen to the &#39;other side&#39;? if me and my boys ran things, who&#39;d care about anyone else? no one to blame except the non-voter.

  • April 6, 2006, 3:08 p.m. CST

    Corporations run both parties

    by Max Meanie

    Dems and Reps ain&#39;t the problem, corporations are. The immigrant issue appeals to companies because they don&#39;t have to pay minimum wage to workers. The answer is raising the minimum wage and hitting corporations with heavy fines for hiring immigrants. If no one hires them they wont come here. On the other hand if they go through the process to become a citizen we shouldn&#39;t block them from coming. That&#39;s what America was built on. You feel sane because you have a job and a home and thus feel enititled to an opinion. Lots of people have neither & have no one speaking for them.

  • April 6, 2006, 3:11 p.m. CST

    by flipjinklee

    Now there&#39;s something we can agree on!

  • April 6, 2006, 3:14 p.m. CST

    HypeEndsHere - run off voting is the answer

    by Max Meanie

    It would validate third parties. If someone votes for me with you as the 2nd choice and I don&#39;t win those votes would go for you. Of course, barring newly registered voters fucks everything up like in Ohio. Ken Blackwell discarded thousands of voter registration cards because they were not the card stock he wanted days before the election. Also he installed fewer voting machines in democratic districts causing 8 hour lines. Without a valid method of counting votes you can never be sure of the will of the people.

  • April 6, 2006, 3:14 p.m. CST

    Last message was for Archorite

    by flipjinklee

    By the way, new info on the leak investigation. Looks like Bush is going to have another whole to dig out of. Not suprising. http://nysun.com/timesleak.php

  • April 6, 2006, 3:52 p.m. CST

    23rd Qualm (the King Bush version)

    by flipjinklee

    The 23rd Qualm (with apologies to King David) Bush is my shepherd, I dwell in want. He maketh trees to be cut down in national forests, He leadeth trucks into the wilderness, He restoreth my fears. He leadeth me in the paths of international disgrace for his ego&#39;s sake. Yea, though I walk through the valley of pollution and war, I will find no exit, For thou art in office. Thy tax cuts for the rich and thy media control, they discomfort me. Thou preparest an agenda of deception in the presence of thy religion. Thou annointest my head with foreign oil. My health insurance runneth out. Surely megalomania and false patriotism shall follow me all the days of thy term.

  • April 7, 2006, 9:24 a.m. CST

    Study says torture doesn&#39;t work

    by flipjinklee

    http://www.upi.com/SecurityTerrorism/view.php?StoryID=20060405-040637-5721r

  • April 10, 2006, 11:20 a.m. CST

    !

    by flipjinklee

    Don&#39;t sugarcoat it anchorite, tell him how you really feel.