Jump to content

Loose Change

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by RoyBoy (talk | contribs) at 01:13, 15 June 2007 (Reverted edits by Dainin (talk) to last version by SmackBot). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Loose Change
File:Loose Change (DVD cover).jpg
Directed byDylan Avery
Written byDylan Avery
Produced byKorey Rowe
Jason Bermas
Edited byDylan Avery
Distributed byLouder Than Words LLC
Release dates
April 13th, 2005
August 2006 (2nd Edition Recut)
CountryUnited States
LanguageEnglish
Budget$2,000
$6,000 (2nd Edition)

Loose Change is a documentary film written and directed by Dylan Avery, produced by Korey Rowe with researcher Jason Bermas. The film presents evidence for a 9/11 conspiracy theory, arguing that elements within the United States government planned and executed the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The film was released through the creators' company, Louder than Words, and received widespread attention after Loose Change 2nd Edition was featured on a Binghamton, New York local FOX affiliate, WICZ-TV (FOX 40).[1]

The accuracy and fairness of Loose Change has been disputed by the counter-video Screw Loose Change, Popular Mechanics, media outlets and independent researchers. On September 11, 2006 Dylan Avery and Jason Bermas appeared on "Democracy Now! the War and Peace Report", to debate James Meigs and David Dunbar,[2] two editors of Popular Mechanics and the book Debunking 9/11 Myths.[3] The film was edited and then re-released in a second edition, then recut again. A further "final cut" version was originally planned for release on September 11 2006, but was delayed and is now pushed back to "the weekend preceding September 11th 2007." The final cut version will be screened in key cities in the U.S. and will also be available online through pay-per-view.[4]

History

Avery had originally been planning to make a movie about conspiracy theories related to the attacks of 9/11, called Loose Change. Avery claims that he began to believe that there was an actual cover up over the 9/11 attacks during research for this film and that the genre switched to a documentary after discussion with his childhood friend Korey Rowe. Rowe, a soldier who served in Afghanistan and Iraq, became the producer of Loose Change while Jason Bermas became the film's researcher.

  • The first edition cost around $2000 to make and was released in April of 2005. It was made on a laptop. This edition of the film featured material on a device (which the filmmakers refer to as a "pod") under the fuselage of Flight 175 that struck the South Tower. The "pod" was presented as evidence that the planes in the attack were replaced with remote-controlled drones. The film openly says it doesn't know the whereabouts of the people who were on the planes, but rather uses flight records to show that the planes the government says "supposedly" crashed, are still active and taking flights.
  • The second edition, released in November of 2005 was made for $6000. This edition was heavily edited and included a new intro as well as extra footage which Avery purchased on eBay. The "pod" segment was removed.[5][6] This film also takes a different stand on Flight 93, the first edition claimed it was to be shot down by a military aircraft, while the Second Edition claims Flight 93 landed at Cleveland Hopkins Airport.
  • In August of 2006 a recut version of Loose Change 2nd Edition was released, which corrected many errors in the original release as well as removed some infringing material taken from the Naudet brothers documentary 9/11.

The documentary is available for purchase and distribution through its official website.[7] It can also be viewed for free online and downloaded at Google Video, where it held the first position in the top ranking of available videos until mid 2006.[8] According to Broadcast magazine, the film was to have a special screening at the UK Houses of Parliament on June 14, 2006.[9][10][11] However, Michael Meacher, the British MP who had considered sponsoring the screening, decided against it. Later that same month of June 2006, a former engineer from Microsoft developed a site, www.loose-change-911.com, to stream the movie in seven different languages.

After releasing the film, Avery, Rowe and Bermas set up an independent film production company called Louder than Words. The company is also a member of the 9/11 Truth Movement and holds yearly protests in New York City on the anniversary of September 11.

Crew

Dylan Avery

Avery is from Oneonta, New York. After being denied admission twice by Purchase College's film school,[12] Avery planned to make a movie about a group of friends who discover the September 11, 2001 attacks were an "inside job". Along the way Avery himself became convinced of this.[13][14]

Avery appeared on BBC's 9/11 Conspiracy Files in February 2007.

Korey Rowe

Korey Rowe is a producer of Loose Change. Rowe was born in Oneonta, New York. He is a former US soldier who served six months in Kandahar, Afghanistan and one year in Kuwait and Iraq. After leaving the military, he joined the production of Loose Change.

Jason Bermas

Jason Bermas is a graphic designer and producer of Loose Change located in Oneonta, New York. Jason Bermas also hosts his own Talk Radio Program on the GCN network Saturdays from 9-11am Central. Aside from film making he is an activist who has demanded a new independent investigation into 9/11

Presentation

Loose Change is approximately one hour and 22 minutes in length. The movie consists of a narrator speaking over still photographs and news footage relating to 9/11, with an underscore of hip-hop and other urban style music. Video and still footage used includes considerable video content from CNN, NBC, and FOX News, as well as a number of other sources.

It is narrated by Dylan Avery, who is shown only in the bonus features. The end of Loose Change 2nd Edition shows a clip from The American Scholar's Symposium that was aired on C-SPAN on June 25, 2006 at the Sheraton Hotel in Los Angeles. Jason Bermas, wearing the signature "Investigate 9/11" t-shirt that he designed is describing their plans to peacefully demonstrate at ground zero on September 11, 2006.

Content

Flyer for a screening of the film

The film begins with a brief description of suspicious motives in the past of America's leaders. This discussion includes mention of Operation Northwoods, a plan put forward during the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962 to employ fake terrorist attacks upon the United States and blame them on Cuba as a pretext for invasion of the island. Extra focus is directed at plans to switch real commercial airliners with drone planes, and tests the effect of using them as weapons, all the while seeming to be an accident.

Attention is also given to the Project for the New American Century, a neo-conservative think-tank, which released a report in 2000 titled "Rebuilding America's Defenses". In particular the film points out a line from the report stating that "the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor". That same year the Pentagon conducts the first of two training exercises which simulate a Boeing 757 crashing into the building. There is also mention that, from September 6 to September 10 an unusual amount of put options are placed on American Airlines, Boeing and United Airlines.

This is followed by an examination of the attacks on the Pentagon. The film opposes the official story of Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon, alleging that the path of destruction does not match that which a 757 would leave. In particular, it points out the size of the hole in the Pentagon caused by the crash, examining a lack of debris and landscape damage consistent with prior airliner crashes. It is also alleged that too few parts were recovered from the crash site to reliably ascertain that they were of a Boeing 757, and a certain flywheel observed at the site seemed too small to have been part of the aircraft's engine turbine. The wheel was officially declared to have been part of the APU but disputed by some experts as not to have come from the APU of a 757 but likely from an E-3. It is also claimed that Hani Hanjour, the hijacker pilot, had difficulty performing basic controls on a small Cessna at a flight school where he rented, and that perhaps not even an experienced pilot could have maneuvered the reflex angle of turn at the airspeed and altitude at which the aircraft approached without going into a high speed stall. Mention is also given to three cameras which caught the entire incident of the Pentagon that the government has refused to release in full, raising the filmmakers' suspicion further.

The next section focuses on the destruction of the World Trade Center itself. The film comes out in favor of the controlled demolition theory of the destruction of World Trade Centers 1, 2 and 7. Cited as evidence are eye witness reports from a janitor, firemen, and other people near the buildings who heard bangs, many of them describing them as explosions, as well as videotapes showing windows far below the burning floors blow out during the collapse and seismograph results recorded during the collapse compared to the collapse of other similar buildings. The film claims that WTC 1, 2 and 7 were the first steel frame buildings in history to collapse due to fire. Another allegation centers on an audio recording in which it is claimed two distinct explosions can be heard at the time of the impact. Also discussed is whether or not the official story of the collapse violates the laws of physics.

In particular, the film alleges that the fires inside the twin towers were not hot enough to bring the buildings down. An audio tape is presented in which the Captain of Ladder 7 claims that the fires can be brought under control by two lines, and it is mentioned that building 7 had taken only minor damage before its own collapse. These allegations follow a listing of buildings that burned with more intense fires than the Twin Towers and did not fall.

For Flight 93, the film ignores the more mainstream conspiracy theory of the plane being shot down to instead allege it was landed safely at Cleveland Hopkins Airport where it was evacuated by government personnel into an unused NASA research center. Evidence cited included photographs and eye-witness reports of the crash site as evidence, a corresponding evacuation at Cleveland Hopkins Airport due to another hijacked plane and the corresponding reports, oddities in the transcripts of cell-phone calls supposedly placed from the plane during the hijacking, and the sighting of the tail number of Flight 93 on an aircraft in use at a later date.

This is then followed by a more miscellaneous listing of allegations. It is asserted that cellular phone calls could not be made from American Airlines flights at the time of the crash, asking why American Airlines had to install a system in their own airplanes to allow the reception of cellular signals within the planes if they could do this regardless on September 11. It is suggested that the calls from passengers and crew were faked using sophisticated voice-morphing technology developed by the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico and that the December 13, 2001 video of Osama Bin Laden claiming responsibility for the attacks was also faked, this was done by showing a former video of Osama Bin Laden, and then showing the confession tape in what looked like a poor lookalike version of a fatty Osama. Finally, it is alleged that, of the list of hijackers initially released by the government, many were not in the planes and were alive after September 11, 2001 and may even still be alive.

In the end, the film gives out motives for people who would have benefited from launching the attacks themselves. Mention is first given to financial motives, including those of Larry Silverstein, who stood to receive a substantial insurance payout after the attacks due to a specific anti-terrorism clause, as well as other allegations of insider trading and Halliburton's benefitting from the subsequent launch of America's "War on Terror". Most of the blame, however, is placed on the aforementioned Project for the New American Century think tank and the Rebuilding America's Defenses report.

On May 26, 2006 a certified letter was sent to Dylan Avery regarding copyright and trademark infringement resulting from the use of footage from French film makers, the Naudet brothers. The letter states that Avery used, "copyrighted images from the 9/11 Film," and also states the images violate, "the Federal Lanham Trademark Act by suggesting that the Naudet brothers or Mr. Hanlon have endorsed or sponsored the controversial views in your film." The letter concludes: "Accordingly, we hereby demand that you confirm to us within three (3) business days of the receipt of this letter that you have removed all footage taken from our clients' 9/11 Film from your Loose Change Film, including from the version of your film that can be downloaded on the Internet, the DVD version of your film, and anywhere else you have used or are using our clients' footage."[15] In July of 2006 Dylan Avery announced that the recut version of the film would omit "some" of the infringing material.[16]

Criticism

Three different point-by-point critiques were prepared by 911research.wtc7.net, Internet Detectives and Mark Roberts. Two commentators run a blog called Screw Loose Change. Mark Iradian prepared an edited version of Loose Change under the SLC moniker, subtitled with criticisms drawing on work by Roberts, Screw Loose Change (which also gives credit to the video), and his own efforts. Mark Roberts also compiled a lengthy selection of interview quotes in which the Loose Change creators elaborate on the claims made in the film.[17]

Many of the critiques argue that Loose Change uses unreliable sources, oversimplified arguments and selective facts to claim that there are serious problems with official accounts of the events of September 11.

Loose Change suggests a missile hit the Pentagon yet does not acknowledge the dozens of eye witnesses at the scene who reported seeing a large commercial jet.[18] The lack of readily visible airplane debris and bodies in the Pentagon and Pennsylvania crashes is focused on by Loose Change and it uses other airline disasters as evidence there should be larger debris found. However, those crashes were accidents where pilots were trying to save their aircraft over terrain; rather than deliberately crashing them into the ground or buildings. A video of what happens to a fighter jet and its heavy engine when crashed into a concrete barrier provides a precedent for comparison.[19] Substantial amounts of debris and body parts were recovered from both crash sites as the recovery operations began.[20][21]

While some of the calls from Flight 93 were made with Airfones, the documentary asserts that other calls made with cell phones could not have happened from cruising altitudes. In the recent book Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up to the Facts by Popular Mechanics editors (ISBN 1-58816-635-X), the authors reply that Flight 93's altitude was lower and it was frequently over rural areas with powerful cell towers.[22] Commercial airlines are testing new cell phone systems as it is a cost effective replacement to the unpopular Airfone being phased out. Reception is also improved (cell calls were dropped on Flight 93), works over the ocean, decreases avionics interference and flight crews can disable the phones.[23][24]

Loose Change compares the Collapse of the World Trade Center to other notable high rise fires, but does not clarify differences in building design and size, structural damage and compromised fireproofing.[25] (However, not all the critiques agree on this point - 9-11 Research, for example, critiques Loose Change but supports the Controlled demolition hypothesis for the collapse of the World Trade Center). There is no exploration on the effect of fire on unprotected structural steel, which "loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F."[26] Kevin Ryan the "expert" source from Underwriters Laboratories for steel certification is actually a non-expert from a subsidiary for water testing,[3] Underwriters Laboratories does not certify structural steel,[25][3] and ASTM E119 certification involves intact fireproofing as conducted by Underwriters Laboratories for the NIST in 2004.[27] The NIST could find no record of any previous certification tests ever being conducted on the novel WTC floor system.[27] The NIST demonstrated the fireproofing was not intact by firing shotguns on fireproofed steel; critics find this unconvincing.[28]

The National Institute of Standards and Technology has released a point-by-point rebuttal of many common alternative theories of the WTC collapse, including theories which Loose Change used. On September 11, 2006, Democracy Now! conducted an exclusive discussion with Loose Change's creators and Popular Mechanics editors, where they debate various aspects of the documentary.[3]

Matt Taibbi of Rolling Stone has written that the 9/11 truth movement: "gives supporters of Bush an excuse to dismiss critics of this administration. I have no doubt that every time one of those Loose Change dickwads opens his mouth, a Republican somewhere picks up five votes."[29] Critics also point out the documentary quote mines sources, uses unreliable or out of date sources and cherry picks interview footage. It quotes Danielle O'Brien commenting on how air traffic controllers thought Flight 77 was a military plane based on its maneuverability; but it leaves out the end of the statement, "... you don't fly a 757 in that manner. It's unsafe."[30] Loose Change quotes the coroner, Wally Miller, as seeing no bodies or blood the day of Flight 93's crash; over the next several weeks Miller goes on to identify 12 passengers "using mostly dental records."[31] There is an interview of chief flight instructor Marcel Bernard focusing on the weaknesses of Hani Hanjour's flying skills when he took lessons at Freeway Airport; it fails to clarify Bernard's expert opinion on Hanjour's ability to hit the Pentagon. "There's no doubt in my mind that once that [hijacked jet] got going, he could have pointed that plane at a building and hit it."[32]

In addition, many within the 9-11 research community point out the film's focus upon the Pentagon crash as a weakness. Chris Farrell, the Director of Investigations & Research at Judicial Watch, warned in an interview that his organization "could be the water carriers for a honey pot operation, in which the government attracts overwhelming attention to the Pentagon issue, making it the cornerstone of the 9/11 truth movement, and then blowing it out of the water by releasing clear footage of Flight 77."[33] He stated, "Let's just call it a baited trap, it draws somebody into a situation in which they're compromised."

In a debate against Mark Roberts, creator of the "Loose Change 2nd Edition Viewers Guide" and Ronald Wieck, contributor to the American Thinker, Dylan Avery stated that:

I would be the first to admit that our film definitely contained errors, it still does contain some dubious claims, and it does come to some conclusions that are not 100% backed up by the facts.”[34]

Corrections

The original release of Loose Change Second Edition had factual inaccuracies; some of these have been corrected (or removed) in the recut Second Edition.[35] The most notable are:

  • New York's Empire State Building was not hit by a B-52 in 1945, but rather a B-25 Mitchell which is less than one-third the size of a B-52. (the first prototype B-52 would not fly for another seven years)
  • The suggestion that $167 billion in gold was stored in vaults beneath the World Trade Center was removed as it exceeded the entire amount of U.S. gold reserves by approximately $67 billion. The "$230 million in precious metals" stored at the WTC complex were in fact recovered.[36]
  • Loose Change implies 757's only have Pratt & Whitney engines made of steel and titanium alloy, when in fact the engines used in Flight 77 are Rolls-Royce engines.[37] Bollyn, an American Free Press reporter whom Loose Change references got the incorrect information from a factory in Indiana which makes engines for smaller aircraft; rather than the companies in Quebec and Derby that overhaul the 757 engines.

In response to some of these errors Korey Rowe, the producer of the "Second Edition", claimed in an interview:

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.[38]

Airings

BNN (Bart News Network) Nederland 3 and Portuguese public TV Station RTP aired Loose Change on September 10th, 2006 in prime time hours. RTP aired it again on 2: for September 17 2006. On September 11th 2006, Australian Pay TV Channel, The History Channel, showed it during prime time hours; it also aired on Israeli Science Channel (Channel 8) and the Pakistani channel Geo TV — dubbed into Urdu.

In other media

  • Samples from the Loose Change documentary can be heard in Ministry's song "Lieslieslies," which can be found on the Rio Grande Blood record. A music video for this song has also been produced.
  • George Monbiot, political activist and columnist for the Guardian, wrote an article on the improbablity of the conspiracies cited in Loose Change, and then wrote a follow-up article in response to negative comments from some of his readers.[39]
  • Vanity Fair wrote an article about Loose Change and its creators.[40]
  • Time Magazine, on conspiracy theories of 9/11, mentions "Loose Change".
  • Democracy Now! hosted a debate between the authors of Loose Change and the editors of Popular Mechanics.[3]
  • Empire magazine interviewed Dylan Avery in issue 208 on the reception of the film and the plans for the upcoming third edition.
  • American film director David Lynch has directly cited "Loose Change" for his belief that a 9/11 conspiracy exists.
  • J-Rock star Gackt gave the film 3 out of 5 thumbs up. His main complaint was its "low ecologist quota".
  • Dutch Vara television channel's program Zembla, investigated claims made in the documentary.
  • On April Fool's Day 2007, Maddox posted a page to mimic and mock the "Loose Change" video, making a website for the purpose of exposing the "Titanic sinking conspiracy," named "Unfastened Coins: 2nd Edition, Remix 8 6th Cut."[41]
  • FreeLooseChange.com is an initiative in Berlin, Germany. 100 shops, galleries, theatres and a daily newspaper office so far distributed 20000 free DVDs featuring the documentaries Loose Change and Terrorstorm by Alex Jones in German language versions. A homeless newspaper and a skater magazine promoted the DVD with free full page ads.

See also

References

  1. ^ NY FOX affiliate airs alternative 9/11 theory, "Loose Change"
  2. ^ archive.org
  3. ^ a b c d e DemocracyNow.org – 9/11 Debate: Loose Change Filmmakers vs. Popular Mechanics Editors of "Debunking 9/11 Myths"
  4. ^ Loose Change Blog
  5. ^ Google Video - Loose Change Extra Footage
  6. ^ "Click Here for Conspiracy", Vanity Fair article, by Nancy Jo Sales, August 2006
  7. ^ "Loose Change 2nd Edition". Retrieved 2006-05-17.
  8. ^ "Loose Change 2nd Edition". Google Video. Retrieved 2006-05-17.
  9. ^ "Broadcast website's article excerpt from search for loose change". Retrieved 2006-05-30.
  10. ^ "UKFilm.org". Retrieved 2006-05-30.
  11. ^ loosechange911.blogspot.com Producer's website blog
  12. ^ Web movie takes flight
  13. ^ "Interview in The John Ziegler Show (KFI AM 640, Los Angeles, CA)". Segment begins at approximately 18:10. 2006-06-23. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  14. ^ "Movie Minutiae: Loose Change (2005)". ABC News. 2006-09-15. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  15. ^ "9/11 conspiracy movie taken off the web - Copyright infringement alleged". The Independent. Retrieved 2006-06-09.
  16. ^ Loose Change Blog - First quarter. Houston by five.
  17. ^ Loose Change Creators Speak (PDF file)
  18. ^ Pentagon Eyewitness Analysis
  19. ^ 911review.com – ERROR: 'Aircraft Crashes Always Leave Large Debris'
  20. ^ 911myths.com – 757 Wreckage
  21. ^ The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press – Moussaoui trial exhibits and documents
  22. ^ Cite error: The named reference Curiel was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  23. ^ PCWorld.com – In-Flight Cell Phone Systems Gain Altitude
  24. ^ ConsumerAffairs.com – In-Flight Cell Phone System Survives Test Flight
  25. ^ a b wtc.nist.gov – Point by point rebuttal
  26. ^ Popular Mechanics – 9/11: Debunking The Myths
  27. ^ a b ScienceDaily.com – NIST Tests Provide Fire Resistance Data On World Trade Center Floor Systems
  28. ^ 911research.wtc7.net – Insulation Failures
  29. ^ Taibbi, Matt (2006). "The Low Post: I, Left Gatekeeper". Politics. Rolling Stone. Retrieved 2006-09-29.
  30. ^ 911review.com – Location of Pentagon Strike
  31. ^ PostGazette.com – Latest Somerset crash site findings may yield added IDs
  32. ^ Tracing Trail Of Hijackers
  33. ^ Judicial Watch Says More Pentagon Tapes To Come
  34. ^ http://www.debunk911myths.org/?cat=40
  35. ^ Google Video – Loose Change 2nd Edition Recut
  36. ^ Rediff.com – Buried WTC gold returns to futures trade
  37. ^ 9-11 Loose Change Second Edition Viewer Guide
  38. ^ smithmag.us
  39. ^ monbiot.com
  40. ^ http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=13037
  41. ^ Official Website for the Titanic truth movement

Criticism

Media Coverage

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Loose_Change&oldid=138257466"