Question about "Loose Change 2nd Edition"

[Syrinx]

I saw it a few weeks ago. My jaw is still on the floor -- I have some guys coming over to help me pick it up next week.

Do I need to see the original? Is the second edition a sequel of the original or an expansion of it?

Thanks.

[Kevin Fenton]

1. If your jaw is on the floor...

... does that mean you compared what they said to the actual facts?

[Syrinx]

2. tell me what you know

I'm interested in all points of view.

[Peter Frank]

3. The first edition is lame (by comparison)... n/t

[Syrinx]

4. thanks!

Thanks for letting me reuse a line. I thought it was funny for me. :)

[QuettaKid]

5. the only problem I had with Loose Change was

the picture of the military officers carrying the "blue tarp covered object". I had seen that before and thought it suspicious. Turns out it was a decontamination tent. Other than that I think the whole video was very well done.

[Loose Nuke]

6. Questions about Loose Change

I question why there was a lot of focus on things like witness who saw the removal of gold bars, etc. and only passing mention of "endless war". I don't believe the gold would've been the primary motivation- it seems clear from the PNAC document and other neocon writings that they placed a very high priority on global hegemony, space command, suppressing domestic dissent to their plans for tax cuts for the rich, increased pollution, ignoring global warming, etc., hyping fear of terrorism and patriotism for war, increasing military budgets and hand outs to defense contractors, who they invest in and who contribute to their political campaigns/agenda. These would prove much more valuable in the short and the long runs than the short term gain of some billions in gold bars. I find it kind of suspicious/odd that Loose Change focuses on this. I only watched the first one one time, and moved on to other sources of info. Dylan Avery does present a number of damning facts, like the interview w/ Hanjour's flight school owner, but then more speculative/less credible stuff gets mixed in as well. The sound track is kind of distracting as well. And why does he only list websites that promote some of the more speculative claims? He doesn't reference
http://www.911truth.org
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org
http://www.911research.wtc7.net
http://www.fromthewilderness.com
http://www.911independentcommission.org

These sites are run by people who were part of the movement early on and have done great work documenting and publicizing the problems with the official story.

[Beam Me Up]

7. I believe the second edition is superior to the first.

No, it is not without its flaws. The young men who created it are VERY young; but more power to them for it! This is the KIND of thing that SHOULD have been done by any one of the major media outlets but not one of them DARED. Of course it isn't perfect. Of course it isn't 100% accurate. How could it be?! Still, it is miles closer to the truth than that bought and paid for cover-up put out by the 9/11 Commission.