Friday, August 04, 2006

Local library packed for 9/11 truth

I recently returned from a local gathering at the Bethlehem public library here in upstate New York.

"Loose Change," the popular online documentary contending that the government orchestrated 9/11, was shown before a standing room-only crowd in the library's video room. Following the film's conclusion, the crowd engaged in a lively discussion with the movie's creators, Dylan Avery, Korey Rowe, and Jason Bermas.

The region's dominant newspaper—the Times Union—was there to cover the event, along with ABC, and a few smaller publications.

I do not by any means endorse every theory presented in "Loose Change," but given the film's popularity, I decided to attend. I intended to confront the creators regarding a few of the film's misleading points, but instead of asking questions, I was busy answering them.

During the discussion, I spoke about Ptech and passed around a picture of President Bush with Abdurahman Muhammad Alamoudi, who was invited to a prayer service with Bush three days after 9/11 and who, according to the US Treasury Department, "had a close relationship with al Qaida and had raised money for al Qaida in the United States."

I spoke for less than five minutes, but afterwards, while waiting to question the filmmakers, curious attendees and members of the news media began approaching me with various questions of their own. One reporter even asked for an interview later in the week.

I was happy to meet and speak with several individuals. From members of a local peace group, to a mother and son, to an antique saleswomen. Nearly all of them seem to agree that the government was criminally complicit when it comes to 9/11, although many also believe that "Loose Change" could use some improvements.

I was so busy talking that I only had a brief chance to speak with the film's creators on their way out of the building. They seemed to be in a hurry but I had a quick line of questions in my head ready to go. My purpose was to dissuade them from promoting the theory that a cruise missile hit the Pentagon. Every consecutive question had a purpose...

"Why did you make a second edition?" I asked. "Why did you drop the 'missile pod' theory?"

Dylan Avery said they edited out the 'missile pod' theory in the second edition because there "wasn't enough evidence" to back it up.

For those who have no clue what I'm talking about, the 'missile pod' theory contends that the second plane to hit the World Trade Center fired a missile immediately prior to impact. In my opinion, this theory is completely absurd.

The original version of "Loose Change," opened with a detailed description of the 'missile pod' theory and its common talking points. I told Avery that I agreed with his decision to remove it from the film.

Next I asked Avery if there would be a third edition.

"Absolutely," he said.

My next question: "What is your exact position on the Pentagon? Do you believe there was no plane at all?"

At this point, Avery and Rowe shot each other a quick glance. For a brief second, their expressions seemed to portray uncertainty. Then Avery said he believed there was a plane, just not a commercial airliner.

"So what's with your bit on the cruise missile?" I asked, referring to the film's promotion of the theory that a cruise missile hit the Pentagon.

Avery said they were just presenting different possibilities.

I explained that it made little sense for the government to use a cruise missile to fake a hijacked airliner. Surprisingly, all three filmmakers seemed to agree.

Unfortunately, I didn't get a chance to ask my last question. The filmmakers said they had a long drive ahead of them and had to leave. Therefore I can only wonder if the 'cruise missile' theory will be included in the third edition of the film.

Hopefully they'll drop it, given the lack of evidence.


Blogger duff said...

The Pentagon issue has always been a contentious one. Some, like Michael Rupert think it is a disinfo or honey pot.
However, there is little or no evidence currently available to support the notion that a 757 hit the Pentagon. That doesn't mean there would be none if the govt released what they actually have kept hidden these many years.

But there are still many strong indicators that the Pentagon was also an 'inside job' as is detailed on the site or etc.

12:10 PM  
Blogger BuckDevlin said...

I agree there are certainly unanswered questions regarding the Pentagon, but there was a plane. Over one hundred eyewitnesses saw it.

Moreover, it would make absolutely no sense for the government to go through the trouble of orchestrating 9/11 and then use a cruise missile to imitate a hijacked airliner. Don't you think?

There were reports indicating that explosives were detonated at the same time as the impact, which if anything, suggests that the plane was rigged to explode. But this is pure speculation based on a limited number of reports.

Instead of focusing on shaky theories with little supporting evidence, the so-called "Truth Movement" should follow the money and other subjects that can be backed up.

Poor research and wild speculation contaminates legitimate evidence of criminal complicity.

The smoking guns are already out there. It is just a matter of organizing the material and getting it out to the public in a concentrated dose.

12:46 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home