Un parlamentare britannico, Michael Meacher, ha organizzato la proiezione del documentario Loose Change sui fatti dell' 11 settembre il 14 giugno nel parlamento britannico.

Loose Change 911: Incendiary documentary exposing the falsehoods of the events of Sept 11, 2001
Korey Rowe, Dylan Avery and Jason Bermas, Producers

May 9, 2006

GlobalResearch.ca
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20060509&articleId=2417


We bring to the attention of Global Research readers this carefully researched documentary on 9/11
' Loose Change 911 (2nd ed) ' (click to view)
 To order or for more information on the video
http://www.loosechange911.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------


 "Loose Change 2nd Edition" is the follow-up to the most provocative 9-11 documentary on the market today.

This film shows direct connection between the attacks of September 11, 2001 and the United States government.

Evidence is derived from news footage, scientific fact, and most important, Americans who suffered through that tragic day.

------------------------------------------------------------------------



British Member of Parliament, Michael Meacher, is having the 9/11 movie, “Loose Change” shown to Parliament in Britain on June 14

This, obviously, is a major coup for the 9/11 Truth Movement. It’s hoped that by doing so, we can get the mainstream media to engage on the subject. Here’s the announcement that appeared today in UKTV:

MPs to watch cult 9/11 documentary

Dominic Schreiber 8:00am A controversial US documentary that casts doubt over the cause of the collapse of the World Trade Center during 9/11 is to be shown to MPs next month.

Made by Americans Korey Rowe and Dylan Avery on a laptop for less than $10,000, Loose Change claims the Twin Towers were brought down in a controlled explosion.

The 90-minute film has gained a cult following and according to Labour MP Michael Meacher - who has arranged the screening on 14 June at the Houses of Parliament - the evidence assembled proves there are major discrepancies in the official accounts of what happened, including the findings of the 9/11 Commission.

"It is an issue that clearly the media and many members of the public shy away from," he said.

"I think 9/11 is so important that as many people as possible should see this film. That’s what I hope to achieve. It really deserves to get the fullest exposure." To contact Broadcast with a news story please call 020 7505 8040 or send an email to broadcastnews@emap.com

_________________________________________________________________________________________

Meanwhile back at the ranch, Part 1 of a new 3-part movie, produced by a friend and associate, Sofia Shafquat, will be out in the next few weeks. "9/11 Mysteries Part 1: Demolitions" will be followed by "Part 2: Hijackers & Planes", and "Part 3: Who Benefits."

The trailer may be viewed at: http://www.911mysteries.com

"Part 1: Demolitions" promises visuals, graphics and analysis not seen before in the 9/11 arena. Created in movie studio/television style, the official story is laid out against real science -- all the scattered bits and pieces of evidence arranged in a way that no one has yet explained. As many have argued, the case for demolitions stands alone. Part 1 of the "9/11 Mysteries" series will be a complete DVD in itself -- for those familiar with the subject who prefer this angle -- but it may very well seal the case for the newcomer, too.

Our goal is to penetrate the mainstream (whose isn't?) as a result of the efforts we have made to audience-test our material over a 12-month period and to use real professionals in putting the movie together. Research for the series has come from individuals all over the country; as of May, the "9/11 Mysteries" movie trailer has had 40,000 downloads.

We look forward to letting you know SOON that the first DVD is ready! Packaging will be both in slimpack and regular black case with insert. The complete series will be available in a multi-disk package.


GUARDA LOOSE CHANGE SOTTOTITOLATO IN ITALIANO
http://www.arcoiris.tv/modules.php?name=Unique&id=4661


 

LA VERITA' AVANZA. UN BRAVO A Michael Meacher.

un altro parlamentare olondese sulla stessa linea
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11222.htm

una grande risposta a quanti definivano il documentario Loose Change "deliri da complottisti"

9-11_picture8__sotower_.jpg, image/jpeg, 229x350

nella foto c'è l'evidenza che le torri non crollarono "perfettamente" sulla verticale come vogliono far credere i sostenitori della demolizione controllata


wikipedia
--------------------------------------------------

Factual inaccuracies

The film states that New York's Empire State Building was hit by a B-52 in 1945. It was actually a B-25 Mitchell, an aircraft less than one-third the size of a B-52. The authors have since apologized and acknowledged this error.

The movie cites a study in which cell phone calls could not be made at 32,000 ft, it is assumed flight 93 was flying that high for the entire flight. According to air traffic controllers in Cleveland, who alerted their counterparts at John P. Murtha Johnstown-Cambria County, the Flight 93 headed south and then east and began a steady descent from an altitude of over 20,000 feet to less than 6,000 feet. According to the air traffic controllers the transponders were turned off for 30 seconds, and then turned on to a different frequency, one that no plane that day was using. The bogus "sqack," a four digit code for the computer to display the planes' information, still allowed the air traffic controllers to track the plane, but not identify it. [1]

The film suggests that a plane hitting a single light pole would crash, citing the example of a Gulfstream II headed to Houston saying it crashed because it hit a light pole. In fact the Gulfstream II jet crashed and a TV reporter noted it had clipped a light pole while crashing, the film suggests the pole ripped the wing off. The film states 5 light posts were knocked over Flight 77, in fact light poles are designed to detach from few simple bolts, on impact from car crashes to save lives. The effect of hitting a light post by a plane's wing would not cause it to rip the wing off. [2]

The authors claim that the military was running exercises in Alaska and Canada, and hence had shifted American military aircraft north, leaving only, quote, "14 fighter jets to protect the entire United States." However, the article cited[3] states instead, "On September 11, 2001, NORAD had 20 aircraft on alert -- two in Alaska, four in Canada and 14 protecting the contiguous United States."
[edit]

Criticisms

Loose Change has been criticized as disinformation even by some within the 9/11 Truth Movement, which disagrees with many aspects of the official version of events on 9/11/01 [4]. A primary concern of many in the movement is the promotion by documentaries such as Loose Change and In Plane Site, that a commercial jet did not hit the Pentagon [5], [6], [7], [8].

Critics of the documentary's proposal that a cruise missile or a small aircraft may have been the cause of damage to the Pentagon, cite the nearly 100 documented accounts from witnesses on the scene[9] who reported seeing a large airliner. Some witnesses specifically noted seeing a 757, while only two witnesses, located some distance from the scene, reported seeing a small plane. Loose Change, however, implies that an equal number of witnesses reported different aircraft as reported a commercial jet, and does not mention the large body of witness reports in support of a commercial jet. Not a single witness at the scene has ever reported seeing a missile[10].

Loose Change suggests that Flight 93 landed in Cleveland instead of crashing or being shot down in Pennsylvania, and that passengers were subsequently secretly evacuated to an empty NASA research building. A number of members of the 9/11 Truth Movement, however, note that there is virtually no evidence for such a claim, and that many witnesses reported seeing and hearing the plane at the crash site [4],[5],[6]

Loose Change claims that the engines belonging to the plane that crashed into the Pentagon, made of steel and titanium alloys, could not have melted, because the burning temperature of kerosene in even a pure oxygen environment is below the melting point of titanium. Critics contend the melting point of titanium is irrelevant since the motors involve steel-titanium alloy rather than pure titanium, although Ti alloys melt at temperatures (1668 C)[11] significantly closer to titanium (1725 C) than to steel (1500 C). Furthermore, a number of engine and other parts found at the scene have been shown to match a 757.[citation needed

-----------------------------------------------

x admin - complimenti per la censura. mostri le palle cazzo. coraggioso.
__________________

x mazzetta che si firma "web"
quando posti delle stupidaggini trova almeno l' onestà di postarle complete e non omettendo quello che non porta acqua al tuo mulino pieno di merda.

l' articolo postato da "web" ( che sarebbe mazzetta) continua così....


"Defense

Some defenders of the film, mostly others involved in similar types of movements and projects have defended the film against criticism. They note that some of the criticism of the film is statistically petty. For example in the film the narrator states that " [There were] 14 fighter jets to protect the entire United States."He says this in reference to War games being conducted on the date of September 11th. Critics point this out as one of many factual inaccuracies or outright lies in the film; the actual number is 16, counting two planes in Alaska (20 if four planes in Ontario are included). Supporters point that in relavance to the United states, there is no real difference between 14 or 20 planes. They also point out that the narrator is somewhat correct because there were only 14 in the lower 48 states.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loose_Change_(video)

Ho postato le critiche
la difesa dice solo che "there is no real difference between 14 or 20 planes."

Le critiche si esprimono su altri punti per nulla contestati nella difesa
Non sono mazzetta, hai capito malato?
Sei tu che hai rotto il cazzo, fai il maiale, spammi insulti e credi che solo mazzetta si sia rotto i coglioni delle tue stronzate?

una cosa e' discutere dell'11 settembre, un'altra scrivere "mazzetta buffone" e intavolare una discussione personale tra persone che peraltro non sono riconoscibili dai nick. Ho nascosto le parti della discussione che non davano informazioni. Se questa discussione continua sui fatti e sulla contestazione dei fatti, bene. Se precipita su "mazzetta merda" o "admin figlio di troia", non interessa a nessuno.

hai postato le critiche senza il pezzo finale dell' articolo che è parte integrante del pezzo da te postato.
hai postato solo quello che ti faceva comodo. senza il link.
quello che dice l' articolo lo decide chi legge, non tu.

ps -non sei mazzetta ma sei iambiguo alla stessa maniera.

Ho postato le critiche riportate da wikipedia, quanto alla difesa si esprime solo sul punto dei 14 invece di 20 aerei in volo, se per te significa che smentisce le critiche fattuali riportate sopra, per me è pari anche 13.
Qui di ambiguo e disonesto ci sei solo tu che spacci un dvd per la prova del complotto, che dici che te ne freghi di quello che gli altri provano e che solo quello che affermi tu è vero perchè lo dici tu.

comincia a fare un corso di inglese. poi vieni a dar lezioni.

porta come esempio il punto 14. r i p e t o: lo porta come esempio, sottolineando come la sostanza delle critiche mosse cambi poco ai fatti documentati.
questo è il senso della difesa, non fare il furbo buffone.
è una patetica difesa la tua, perdente in partenza.

ci sarebbe molto da dire poi su quei presunti movimenti di opposizione che tanto vi piacciono. quelli del culo tra due seggiole e culo in terra ogni volta ma lasciamo perdere che divaghiamo.

inoltre non mi mettere in bocca i cazzi tuoi perche ti strappo la fava a morsi.

non ho mai detto che il dvd è la prova. esiste un fatto. il documentario, bollato da quelli come te come spazzatura verrà proiettato il 14 giugno al parlamento britannico da un parlamentare inglese. stessa cosa in olanda da un altro parlamentare.

questi sono fatti. malgrado voi , utili idioti.

nel link che hai postato c'è questo:

9/11 Special - Dutch Television Documentary

“Was 9/11 more than just an attack? Could the Bush administration have had anything to gain from the attack? Two prominent European politicians, Michael Meacher and Andreas von Bülow, express their serious doubts about the official version of the 9/11 story.”
Two former Government Ministers have grave doubts about what Americans call "the war on terrorism"


QUI DICE CHE DUE MINISTRI (PERALTRO NON CITATI) HANNO DUBBI SULLA GUERRA AL TERRORE, NON SUL 9/11

Michael Meacher - MP - Former UK Government Minister. "The war on terror is bogus"

QUESTO LO STESSO


Andreas Von Bulow, Former German Secretary Of Defense "The official story is so inadequate and far fetched that there must be a different one"
QUESTA È L'UNICA OPINIONE IN PROPOSITO E NON È DI UN MINISTRO OLANDESE

chi è che spara balle?

posto sotto quello che hai scritto. è evidente che hai problemi con l' inglese, e non solo. vai a Londra iscriviti alla scuola Callan. hanno un metodo, si chiama "Metodo Callan, parlare senza riflettere" per parlare senza riflettere sei a posto così, sarai il primo della classe. ti rimane da aggiungerci l' inglese.....

questo sotto, web l' hai postato tu..ho levato la frase che ti ha probabilmente confuso così capisci al crudo che è meglio se taci...



"Two prominent European politicians, Michael Meacher and Andreas von Bülow, express their serious doubts about the official version of the 9/11 story.” .....
........

QUI DICE CHE DUE MINISTRI (PERALTRO NON CITATI) HANNO DUBBI SULLA GUERRA AL TERRORE, NON SUL 9/11"

http://www.epolitix.com/EN/MPWebsites/Michael+Meacher

Meacher non è un parlamentare olandese, ma un laburista inglese, non più parlamentare, neanche bulow è un parlamentare.

Quindi sei tu che inventi balle in quel post, io ho riportato tuttotutto; in proposito vedo che non ha risposte per le critiche su wikipedia a losschange, chissà com'è.

Mi sa che i problemi con l'inglese li hai tu amico

allora dillo subito che sei scemo. lascia stare Callan il metodo, e sopratutto l' inglese.

il post si apre con:

"Un parlamentare britannico, Michael Meacher, ha organizzato la proiezione del documentario Loose Change sui fatti dell' 11 settembre il 14 giugno nel parlamento britannico".


per il resto continua così, guardati BAMBI.

Di Von Buelow ci sono interviste a pacchi ed ha anche scritto il libro "l'11 settembre e la CIA".
Ed in buona compagnia... svegliatevi.