** Truth Rising: The 9/11 Chronicles Part I **

DriftingByTheStorm
DriftingByTheStorm Posts: 8,684
edited July 2008 in A Moving Train
Alex Jone's new cinema verite documentary, Truth Rising: The 9/11 Chronicles Part I was released just hours ago on his prisonplanet.tv website, for subscribers (it's really cheap!)

I'm sure it will be up on youtube by later this evening.
[edit: Truth Rising on Google Video!]

Everyone should check it out.

It is a Alex Jones free movie (no "crazy" voice overs)
about the 9/11 truth movement,
and includes interviews with people like
Charlie Sheen
Martin Sheen
Ron Paul
George Carlin
and more ...

along with confrontations (mostly by We Are Change) of big time politicians like Rudy, Arnold and the Clintons.

Going home to watch it ASAP.

Woot!
:D:D:D
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Post edited by Unknown User on
«13

Comments

  • flywallyfly
    flywallyfly Posts: 1,453
    I saw this in Austin with Jones in person a few weeks ago. Great documentary. The part where the one truther broke away from security and hauled ass was hilarious. Also the McCain photo op where he had no idea what the signs said until it was too late.
  • DriftingByTheStorm
    DriftingByTheStorm Posts: 8,684
    flywallyfly wrote:
    I saw this in Austin with Jones in person a few weeks ago. Great documentary. The part where the one truther broke away from security and hauled ass was hilarious. Also the McCain photo op where he had no idea what the signs said until it was too late.

    I REALLY wanted to go to this,
    but Texas was like 13 hours from my place in Georgia,
    and there was NO way i could work a night shift on Friday and make it to ANY of the showings and be back by 5pm on Monday.
    [with OUT getting on a plane]

    sigh.

    At least i got to hang with AJ at Bilderberg.
    That was fooking suh-weet!

    Can't WAIT to see this.
    Hopefuly getting out of work in about 30 min.

    Is the confrontation you are talking about with the truther breaking away,
    is that the one with Luke Rudkowski in the crowd asking Zbrignew Brzinski about 9/11?

    And he runs down the street huffing and puffing afterwards?

    That WAS awesome.
    I think that was the confrontation that brought him to the limelight.
    :D
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?
  • flywallyfly
    flywallyfly Posts: 1,453
    DriftingByTheStorm wrote:
    Is the confrontation you are talking about with the truther breaking away,
    is that the one with Luke Rudkowski in the crowd asking Zbrignew Brzinski about 9/11?

    And he runs down the street huffing and puffing afterwards?

    That WAS awesome.
    I think that was the confrontation that brought him to the limelight.
    :D

    Yes, that was funny as hell. Took some big balls to pull that off by himself !
  • Brisk.
    Brisk. Posts: 11,578
    cool im interested in the 9/11 event so i'll check this out.

    Just hope someone can bump it up when its on youtube or somewhere for free.
  • DriftingByTheStorm
    DriftingByTheStorm Posts: 8,684
    I BrisK I wrote:
    cool im interested in the 9/11 event so i'll check this out.

    Just hope someone can bump it up when its on youtube or somewhere for free.

    it will be up QUICK.

    i just logged in to prisonplanet.tv

    it is up for download in FOUR formats.
    .wmv
    2 quicktimes
    divx

    so i'm sure several will make it to youtube\gvideo in the next few hours!

    :D
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?
  • RolandTD20Kdrummer
    RolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    well....It sounds interesting...

    http://onebigtorrent.org/torrents/3636/Alex-Jones-9-11-Chronicles-Part-One-Truth-Rising
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    The man Roland comes up trumps again! ;)
  • DriftingByTheStorm
    DriftingByTheStorm Posts: 8,684
    "The building is about to blow up!
    Everybody stand back!
    It's going to explode.
    The building is about to blow up!"
    - Unknown First Responder, 9/11/2001 moments before WTC 7 came down

    Seriously.
    Anyone who still can't believe that these towers were brought down, all three of them ... check out the documentary Improbable Collapse ... check out the part with the recorded quotes from first responders ... quotes that came from testimony SEALED by the state, and released to the people after a heated battle over a freedom of information request between 911 victims' families and R. Giuliani and the State of New York.

    In reference to WTC 7 specificaly:

    You have 3 or 4 identical testimonies regarding a exploding ring of red lights going in sequence around the entire building, followed by collapse.

    You have at least a half dozen statements by first responders describing what to them appeared to be a controlled demolition, in explicit language.

    You have people saying there were 3, 5, 10, 12 explosions before the buildings came down.

    Someone saying there were multiple explosions, a short pause, and then a collapse.

    You have comments regarding explosions coming from the base of the building.

    People seeing windows blowing out before the collapse started

    etc etc etc ...

    When does a "theory" finally stop being labeled "crazy" and "wacky" ?
    I know there is disagreement about what it takes to become real "truth",
    but seriously, how much evidence, how many first hand accounts does one need, before they admit that it isn't simply "insanity"?
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?
  • ECM
    ECM Posts: 1,687
    ug... why do I read the Moving Thread....

    People believe what they want to hear.....
    wishlistfoundation.org
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    Evil Closet Monkey wrote:
    People believe what they want to hear.....

    And does this only apply to ideas, and information independent of the mainstream? :confused:
  • DriftingByTheStorm
    DriftingByTheStorm Posts: 8,684
    Evil Closet Monkey wrote:
    ug... why do I read the Moving Thread....

    People believe what they want to hear.....

    I love you too, E.

    Though,
    I always thought you kind've did resemble Danny Bonaduce.
    [if you watch the movie, you'll get the joke]

    ;););)
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?
  • DriftingByTheStorm
    DriftingByTheStorm Posts: 8,684
    Evil Closet Monkey wrote:
    People believe what they want to hear.....

    speaking of hearing what you want to believe \ believing what you want to hear:

    here it is:
    listen here.

    "That building is about to blow up."

    Uh.
    I mean.
    What is there to say?
    I don't have to strain my ears to hard to hear what i want to believe.
    First responders were clearly told that the building was coming down.

    Given that the governments own report, vis a vis NIST, states that their BEST hypothesis of what caused the collapse only had a SMALL PROBABILITY of occurance, how -- outside of being warned -- did these firefighters KNOW it was "ABOUT TO BLOW UP" ?

    You can't have it both ways.
    Either it is easily explainable (clearly not) and everybody knew inherently,
    or it is a big mystery, and those that knew must have been TOLD.

    It can't be a total mystery that everyone just knew!

    :(
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?
  • dunkman
    dunkman Posts: 19,646
    http://www.implosionworld.com/Article-WTC%20STUDY%208-06%20w%20clarif%20as%20of%209-8-06%20.pdf

    thought this was an interesting document.
    oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
  • polaris
    polaris Posts: 3,527
    dunkman wrote:
    http://www.implosionworld.com/Article-WTC%20STUDY%208-06%20w%20clarif%20as%20of%209-8-06%20.pdf

    thought this was an interesting document.

    interesting ... this was a response to it ...

    http://911research.wtc7.net/reviews/blanchard/index.html
  • DriftingByTheStorm
    DriftingByTheStorm Posts: 8,684
    dunkman wrote:
    http://www.implosionworld.com/Article-WTC%20STUDY%208-06%20w%20clarif%20as%20of%209-8-06%20.pdf

    thought this was an interesting document.

    And here, sir, is a debunking of that Protec debunking article [looks like Polaris beat me to it. bravo!]. I think you'll find that the argument against the arguments in the article you linked to are, in fact, stronger than those arguments presented in your original link.

    Also, on the topic of educated individuals with questions (and some answers),
    it would behoove you to watch the two following movies:

    Improbable Collapse
    9\11: Blueprint for Truth

    Both of these movies (and Improbable Collapse does an impeccable job) thoroughly explain away the possibility of the NIST ("official") version of collapse.

    The information presented makes it VERY hard for one to argue that the buildings fell due to fire and gravity.

    You will learn that even NIST's own studies and proceedures disproved their very own assertion.

    You will also hear an interview with one of the 14 architects of the Trade Center towers, and his incredulity regarding their "collapse". He comes right out and said it makes no sense.
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?
  • dunkman
    dunkman Posts: 19,646
    polaris wrote:
    interesting ... this was a response to it ...

    http://911research.wtc7.net/reviews/blanchard/index.html


    yep.. interesting also.

    i just dont buy the controlled explosions theory. weirdly enough there is a 9/11 documentary coming on BBC this weekend... it'll be interesting also :)
    oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
  • dunkman
    dunkman Posts: 19,646
    DriftingByTheStorm wrote:
    And here, sir, is a debunking of that Protec debunking article [looks like Polaris beat me to it. bravo!]. I think you'll find that the argument against the arguments in the article you linked to are, in fact, stronger than those arguments presented in your original link.

    Also, on the topic of educated individuals with questions (and some answers),
    it would behoove you to watch the two following movies:

    Improbable Collapse
    9\11: Blueprint for Truth

    Both of these movies (and Improbable Collapse does an impeccable job) thoroughly explain away the possibility of the NIST ("official") version of collapse.

    The information presented makes it VERY hard for one to argue that the buildings fell due to fire and gravity.

    You will learn that even NIST's own studies and proceedures disproved their very own assertion.

    You will also hear an interview with one of the 14 architects of the Trade Center towers, and his incredulity regarding their "collapse". He comes right out and said it makes no sense.

    yep, i could watch them all but not one of them will explain how those buildings collapsed... the architect is one of 14 architects and he said he is incredulous... what about the other 13... have they said anything.. perhaps they think it could have collapsed in such a manner.
    * The collapse of the World Trade Center twin towers initiated where the planes hit the buildings. Controlled demolitions always are initiated at the bottom of a building, to take advantage of maximum gravity forces.

    * If the World Trade Center collapsed due to controlled demolition, as the theory goes, the explosive charges would have had to survive the crash of airplanes into the buildings. (at ~500 miles per hour)

    * When a controlled demolition occurs, you hear the very loud and very distinct sound of the charges going off. These will repeatedly go off, in a quick, regular pattern, for 10+ seconds prior to the structure collapsing. While some people heard what "sounded like an explosion" at the World Trade Center, this is not what they heard or described. Nor is any such sound of demolition charges going off heard in any videos of the collapse.

    * The detonations in a controlled demolition go off in a very regular pattern, not at all like the random squibs seen on 9/11. Those squibs are the result of pockets of air (the building is ~70% air in volume) being collapsed, with pulverized gypsum (drywall) and other material being forced out.

    * Blasting caps, detonating cord, and other such evidence were not found in the World Trade Center debris.


    for every theory there is a debunking... for every debunk will be another debunk.. its pointless.

    for every one of you who think the building was blown up there will be a genuine expert on demolition techniques who will say it wasnt... no offence to anyone on here but you are not experts in this field... all we are experts of are copying and pasting.
    oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
  • DriftingByTheStorm
    DriftingByTheStorm Posts: 8,684
    dunkman wrote:
    yep.. interesting also.

    i just dont buy the controlled explosions theory. weirdly enough there is a 9/11 documentary coming on BBC this weekend... it'll be interesting also :)

    It is already out. It's on youtube.

    9/11: Conspiracy Files

    not suprisingly, it is a load of crap.

    To its credit (although not really, since most of these hitpieces follow the same MO) it does explain away certain very limited arguments presented by some members of the movement, however none of these elements are critical (or even moderately important) to the crux of the "inside job" argument.

    Watch it for your self.
    But realize that it disproves VERY little.

    Ok. Flight 93 didn't land in Ohio (at least it wasn't the plane reported in the media)

    That lake is NOT 8 miles from the crash site of U93.

    and Jews DID die on 9/11.

    Wow.
    You got us, BBC.

    The jig is up.
    We're totally wrong!

    :rolleyes:
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?
  • dunkman
    dunkman Posts: 19,646
    DriftingByTheStorm wrote:
    It is already out. It's on youtube.

    9/11: Conspiracy Files

    not suprisingly, it is a load of crap.

    To its credit (although not really, since most of these hitpieces follow the same MO) it does explain away certain very limited arguments presented by some members of the movement, however none of these elements are critical (or even moderately important) to the crux of the "inside job" argument.

    Watch it for your self.
    But realize that it disproves VERY little.

    Ok. Flight 93 didn't land in Ohio (at least it wasn't the plane reported in the media)

    That lake is NOT 8 miles from the crash site of U93.

    and Jews DID die on 9/11.

    Wow.
    You got us, BBC.

    The jig is up.
    We're totally wrong!

    :rolleyes:


    no its another new one about the 3rd tower.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/conspiracy_files/

    this 9/11 stuff appears to be your bag baby. so i'm out... i dont know enough about it by a long way... its hugely interesting though.. but i will never accept that an elite group of already rich americans would sanction the deaths of many hundreds of people in order to get richer... naive? possibly... but i'm also a realist... and the idea is just fantasy.
    oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
  • DriftingByTheStorm
    DriftingByTheStorm Posts: 8,684
    dunkman wrote:
    yep, i could watch them all but not one of them will explain how those buildings collapsed... the architect is one of the 14 who said he is incredulous... what about the other 13... have they said anything.. perhaps they think it could have collapsed in such a manner.




    for every theory there is a debunking... for every debunk will be another debunk.. its pointless.

    for every one of you who think the building was blown up there will be a genuine expert on demolition techniques who will say it wasnt... no offence to anyone on here but you are not experts in this field... all we are experts of are copying and pasting.

    dunkman.
    please just watch IMPROBABLE COLLAPSE.

    You don't have to watch ANY other 9/11 movie.
    Just watch that.

    You will learn (and see tons of direct quotation from NIST itself) that NIST's own tests ... they even built a scale model of WTC 7 and set it on fire ... could not back up the claims of "pancake collapse".

    THEIR MODEL DIDN'T EVEN COLLAPSE!
    These are your experts, and they could not even rig a test to match their assertions!

    Their own document states that out of their sampled pieces of steel, only TWO PERCENT had discoloration indicative of reaching even MODERATE temperature.

    That means only TWO PERCENT of the steel even got to 400-600 degrees F.
    NOT EVEN CLOSE TO HOT ENOUGH TO BRING DOWN A BUILDING, and nowwhere NEAR enough of the steel affected to warrant such a catastrophic collapse.

    You will see that even their own report says that the redundancy and quality of construction of WTC 7 made such a collapse an anomalous improbability:
    NIST P143 wrote:
    The results established that this type of assembly was capable of sustaining large gravity loads, WITHOUT COLLAPSING, for a substantial period of time relative to the duration of the fires in any given location on September 11.

    Now i don't know about you, but that sure doesn't read to me like any sort of glowing validation of "pancake theory".

    Sounds like the governments very own scientists are completely miffed by the collapse, and are left scratching their heads.

    But please,
    feel free to continue thinking for yourself.

    i can only encourage such action.

    But REALLY do so, and really inform yourself.
    Don't just bury your head in one side of the argument.
    ;)
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?

Categories