I have watched the trailer and I was surprised to see that the film is still upholding myths about Flight 77 and Flight 93. The film looks very slick, but I would have hope Dylan and company would be a little more sensitive to these issues. On the other hand, with the way disinformation has been surprising us in every direction at this point, I guess I could just add this to the pile. People really seem to be jumping on the bandwagon on Blogger as well.
TruthMove Forum » TruthMove Main Forum
Loose Change: An American Coup (9 posts)
-
Posted 14 years ago #
-
Is this a new trailer? I saw a trailer recently and I didn't see anything explicit endorsing dubious FL77/93 theories. There were implicit examples I did note though, such as a CGI video of Flight 77 with a slow-down (i.e; focusing) at the part where it strikes the light poles. That did have me concerned.
Posted 14 years ago # -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUXlfBCbRP8
It seems to be leaning towards Flight 77 not hitting the Pentagon, something presented as a debate in the last one, and Flight 93 not crashing in Shanksville. There was a recent plane crash where there were photos of the crash site and the site looked very similar to Flight 93. I wish I had saved the photos. I do not think that this one even had a debris field. There was almost nothing there of that plane.
Posted 14 years ago # -
Ah, yes, I saw a different one.
Yeah, the part that "not a single piece has been positively identified to Flight 77" is a borderline-misinformative. Although no parts have been identified to Flight 77, multiple pieces HAVE been positively identified to a Boeing 757. I'm quite concerned because it seems like it'll be more of a focus. I preferred last time where Dylan more or less ignored the issue and focused on what's important: WHY was the Pentagon struck.
Then saying there's not a single documented case of a plane and all it's passengers disintegrating on impact is correct. Not a single documented case, including the case of Flight 93.
I'm much more concerned about the film than I was...say...an hour ago.
Posted 14 years ago # -
There were LOTS of parts of Flight 77 that were positively identified.
Luggage.
The bodies of the passengers.
Countless parts of the plane.
Saying that the corpses of the victims were not found in the rubble is deeply offensive to most of the 9/11 families, to the crews that cleaned up the rubble (and found the bodies) and to most of the country.
Those who have staked the reputations on the false "no plane" claim (and its many variations - other plane, etc) who are sincere can either (1) admit their mistake and move on to real evidence such as suppressed warnings and overlapping wargames, or (2) pretend the evidence doesn't exist and keep the hoax going to assuage their egos. And those who've made money promoting books and movies containing easily discredited claims would face some ethical questions about the quality of their work (if they are sincere and not on a covert payroll).
Loose Change was a great gift for the media, since they could focus on its many mistakes (whether they were shoddy research or deliberate disinformation is not the issue) and therefore discredit the entire paradigm of complicity. Whatever the motivations are (or are not) of the filmmakers, the motivation of the media to highlight shoddy claims as representative of the best of the "truth" movement is obvious.
It's not a coincidence that everyone from Fox TV to Democracy Now! focused on Loose Change and ignored Paul Thompson, Nafeez Ahmed, Mike Ruppert, John Judge, and others who tried to highlight the best evidence.
Mission Accomplished?
ps. the best list of resources on Flight 93 is still
although it hasn't been updated in a LONG time (there's no real need to).
There were a number of nearby residents who saw the plane just before it crashed, and it was flying low enough for cell phones to be able to work. It's likely it was shot down, but even if that is true, it's unlikely to make an impact in the public perception of the story -- especially if a few loudmouths are running around claiming that the plane crash never happened.
The only place on 9/11 that possibly had a missile fired was to bring down Flight 93.
Mayor of Shanksville: "I know of two people - I will not mention names - that heard a missile," Stuhl said. "They both live very close, within a couple of hundred yards. . .This one fellow's served in Vietnam and he says he's heard them, and he heard one that day." The mayor adds that based on what he knows about that morning, military F-16 fighter jets were "very, very close."
"We know there are errors in the documentary, and we've actually left them in there so that people discredit us and do the research for themselves -- the B52 (remarked to have flown into the Empire State Building), the use of Wikipedia, things like that. We left them in there so people will want to discredit us and go out and research the events yourself and come up with your own conclusions."
-- (ex) Army specialist Korey Rowe, veteran of Bush's wars on Afghanistan and Iraq, producer of Loose Change quoted in The Loose Cannon of 9/11, by Michael Slenske, SMITH Magazine. Posted August 21, 2006.
Posted 14 years ago # -
"We know there are errors in the documentary, and we've actually left them in there so that people discredit us and do the research for themselves -- the B52 (remarked to have flown into the Empire State Building), the use of Wikipedia, things like that. We left them in there so people will want to discredit us and go out and research the events yourself and come up with your own conclusions."
-- (ex) Army specialist Korey Rowe, veteran of Bush's wars on Afghanistan and Iraq, producer of Loose Change quoted in The Loose Cannon of 9/11, by Michael Slenske, SMITH Magazine. Posted August 21, 2006.
My jaw hit the floor when I read that one.
Posted 14 years ago # -
From the trailer:
"To date we have not seen a single piece positively identified as Flight 77's"
Very careful wording there.
So let's see. We have eyewitnesses who say that the plane hit the building. And there were plane parts identified at the site.
So maybe those plane parts came from that plane that people saw crash? That seems reasonable to me.
The statement above implies that something other than Flight 77 hit the Pentagon. It's not flyover, but it's no more productive a line of inquiry.
Posted 14 years ago # -
I really think Mark understood the Pentagon issue best from the start, and this is why Kevin Barrett and all the slick media productions push no plane at the Pentagon as heavily as they do -- it's the most powerful disinfo/misinfo/hype to turn average people away from the noxious conspiracy nuts.
Saying that the corpses of the victims were not found in the rubble is deeply offensive to most of the 9/11 families, to the crews that cleaned up the rubble (and found the bodies) and to most of the country.
It's very simple.
But the core of the movement "leadership" and popular films promote it non-stop and ignore evidence to the contrary.
Posted 14 years ago # -
"We know there are errors in the documentary, and we've actually left them in there so that people discredit us and do the research for themselves -- the B52 (remarked to have flown into the Empire State Building), the use of Wikipedia, things like that. We left them in there so people will want to discredit us and go out and research the events yourself and come up with your own conclusions."
I remember reading that a long while back. It's really a dumb thing to say. But I should note he's not saying they PUT errors in there on purpose, just that they LEFT them in there. The infamous B-52 error, for example, was a scripting error, if memory serves. A few years ago Dylan told me it happened because he was partially dyslexic or something to that effect.
Having said that, why you would risk alienating potentially-valuable individuals who place emphasis on critical thinking and rational analysis is beyond me. It would be like trying to convince people organic foods taste better than their chemically-influenced counterparts with a taste test, but telling them the organic ones are actually the non-organic ones and vice versa. Why would you so blatantly lie to an audience you're trying to gather to your cause?
Posted 14 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.