I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

People are voting emotionally.

Good movie, but best of all time? Hardly . . .

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

People that disagree with this film use words like 'lies' and phrases like 'conspiracy theorists' to describe it. One even claims that this film disrespects the victims of 911! On the contrary, I believe it's those that go with the status quo and believe everything they hear in the news and everything their politicians tell them is the gospel truth, that disrespect the memory of the dead! I am not saying that this film has it all right. More questions are asked than answered, but on the whole, I believe the point of this film is to get you thinking and talking with an open mind. It asks a lot of the viewer. It's almost uncomfortable to watch because most of the points covered leave you with a reasonable doubt with regards to the official version of the events of 911. There is more to the story of 911 than we have been told, this film should leave you wanting to learn more about the truth, as long as you have an open mind and are not averse to having your preconceived ideas challenged!

Obviously, EVERYTHING should be taken loosely, especially when it comes to events as sensitive as 9/11 -- but I am shocked at how many people are choosing to not even question one ounce of what happened that particular day. It's exactly why America is in the state it's in -- no one wants to "rock the boat" or see another point of view, even if it means effecting an event that forever rocked our security as a nation.I am further shocked that the people who are so quick to disregard even an ounce of this information haven't even bothered to research "the lies" even a little. If even 1/3 of what is said in the movie is true, isn't that enough to further investigate?

This 'film' should have been named "Playing Fast and Loose with Truth". It would be more accurate.The top lies from Loose Change via http:// screwloosechange. blogspot. com/2006/05/ top-lies-and-deceptions-of-loose. html 1. Claim: Charles Burlingame, an ex-Navy F4 pilot who worked in the Pentagon, participated in an exercise simulating crashing a 757 into a building in October 2000, before retiring to take a job at American Airlines, Truth: Charles Burlingame started working for AA in 1979 and retired from the Naval Reserve in 1996, 4 years before these supposed exercises took place.2. Claim: Investors with prior knowledge of 9/11 made millions buying put options on airline stock.Truth: Both the 9/11 committee and business journalists investigated this claim and found nothing unusual. Much of the investment also involved purchasing airline stock 3. Claim: Plane crashing into World Trade Center was identified as a windowless cargo plane.Truth: The man who claimed this, Marc Birnbach, was over 2 miles away at the time 6. Claim: The official explanation for flight 77 at the Pentagon is that the intense heat from the jet fuel vaporized the entire plane.Truth: No official has made that claim, and in fact numerous pieces of the plane, including the bodies of the passengers, and the black boxes were found 7. Claim: A spokesman for Rolls-Royce stated that engine parts found at the Pentagon did not belong to any of their engines.Truth: The spokesman stated specifically that he was not an engineer and was not familiar with the engine in question.8. Claim: Karl Schwarz President and Chief Executive Officer of Patmos Nanotechnologies LLC and I-Nets Security Systems, identified the engine as being a JT8D turbojet engine belonging to an A-3 Skywarrior.Karl Schwarz is a proved fraud and conspiracy theorist, with no known background in technology or avionics. His companies are shell corporations with no employees or products. Furthermore, the A-3 Skywarrior never used a JT8D engine. The engine in question is consistent with that of the Rolls-Royce RB211 used by the 757.9. Claim: Employees at the Pentagon were seen suspiciously carrying away a large box shrouded in a blue tarp.Truth: The blue tarp was a tent, used to aid in the crash response. Source 10. Claim: The damage to the Pentagon was completely inconsistent with a Boeing 757? Truth: Studies by NIST, the ASCE and Purdue University, including computer simulations show that the damage was perfectly in keeping with a crashing airplane. Source There are many more that can be read at the website Screw Loose Change

I'm a fan of both X-Files and 24 and I found this movie very entertaining. OK, sarcasm aside, I'm not saying these guys are wrong or right. I'm simply saying that as a documentary this film is sloppy and pretty much just propaganda.First I'd like to look at this film as a documentary and not involve the debate it's part of. To put it simple; it's propaganda. As a documentary this film is sloppy and bad. The film makers have one thing in mind; to present the fact as they see it suit their cause and try to convince and convert the viewer. Where as a real documentary would try to give a more objective presentation of all the facts, dig into the stuff and try to present various explanations and in cases of speculation leave that for the viewer to figure out. Loose Change does not at all present or theorize about any other number of plausible explanations for some of the phenomenas, but presents only one side of a story and does what it can to promote the film makers views and blacken the other side.So much for the way of presenting the facts, but the facts, or rather lack there of, they present is far from concrete nor convincing. Their conclusions are based on poor quality pictures and TV images (not necessarily poor as in bad quality, but poor as you don't really see anything) and witnesses (which is known to be very unreliable evidence) rather than any actual hard facts.It has some nice things to it too. There is a nice drive in the presentation and it keeps the viewer watching. The editing is nice enough, but over all is no technical wonder.All together it's a horrible flick and more or less just propaganda. It does not at all work well as a documentary and has an amateur feel to it. However, because it works really well as propaganda and I imagine has a lot of people will be convinced by it I'll give it two stars. Because I'm no fan of propaganda in general I would not recommend this movie and I would advise anyone who watches it to look at it with a critical eye.The only thing they actually manage to prove is that yes, the government is holding back information about certain parts of the events that took place, but that's not really breaking news. The only ones who are naive enough to believe blindly in the "evidence" presented in this "documentary" are the ones who are naive enough to believe the government would go public with everything. Of course the government will hold back information and details in a case like this. Not so much to keep it's own people from learning the truth, but to keep foreign and hostile intelligence from learning what they know.