Jump to content

Loose Change

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Shogunu (talk | contribs) at 01:55, 28 December 2006. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

File:Screening color.jpg
Flyer for a screening of the film

Loose Change is the highly controversial internet film written and directed by Dylan Avery, produced by Korey Rowe with researcher Jason Bermas. The film presents a wide array of 9/11 conspiracy theories to set forth the claim that elements within the United States government planned and executed the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center in New York City. The film was released through the creators' company, Louder than Words, and received wide attention after Loose Change 2nd Edition was featured on a Binghamton, New York local FOX affiliate, WICZ-TV (FOX 40).[1] It is one of the most watched films on the Internet, with over 10 million viewers in 2006.[2]

The accuracy and fairness of Loose Change has been disputed by 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,[1] two editors of Popular Mechanics and the book Debunking 9/11 Myths.[3] The film has been edited and re-released in a second edition, then recut again removing some of the inaccuracies that were in previous editions. A further "final cut" version was originally planned for release on September 11 2006, but was delayed and is now pushed back to February or March 2007. Template:911tm

History

Avery had originally been planning to make a fictional movie about a possible conspiracy 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 Compaq Presario 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. It came under heavy criticism for its inclusion.
  • 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 due to space limitations.[4][5] 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.[6] 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.[7] According to Broadcast magazine, the film was to have a special screening at the Houses of Parliament on June 14, 2006.[8][9][10] However, Michael Meacher, the British MP who had considered sponsoring the screening, decided against it. Later that same month of June 2006, an 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

File:Ltwguys.jpg
Jason Bermas, Dylan Avery and Korey Rowe of Louder Than Words

Dylan Avery

Dylan Avery is director, narrator and a producer of Loose Change. Avery is from Oneonta, New York. After being rejected twice by Purchase College's film school,[11] 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.[12][13]

In June of 2006, he appeared at the 9/11 + The Neo-Con Agenda Symposium in Los Angeles, California.[14]

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 and a webmaster, located in Oneonta, New York.

Presentation

Loose Change is approximately one hour and 22 minutes in length. The movie consist of a narrator speaking over still photographs and news footage relating to 9/11, with an underscore of hip-hop and other urban style beats. 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

The film begins with a brief description of suspicious motives in the past of America's leaders. This discussion inclused mention of Operation Northwoods, a plan put forward during the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962 to employ fake terrorist attacks in 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. It is alleged this may have been what drove the planes into the buildings on the day of the attacks.

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. It is also claimed that Hani Hanjour, the hijacker pilot, had difficulty performing basic controls on a small Cessna at the flight school he trained, and that perhaps not even an experienced pilot could have maneuvered the turn angle at the airspeed and altitude at which the aircraft approached without stalling. Mention is also given to three camers which caught the entire incident of the Pentagon that the governemnt has refused to release in full, raising the filmmakers's 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. Other allegations center on an audio recording in which it is claimed two distinct explosions can be heard at the time of the impact as well as 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 a fireman 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 stood for longer.

For Flight 93, the film ignores the more mainstream 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. 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 afforementioned 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

You must add a |reason= parameter to this Cleanup template – replace it with {{Cleanup|December 2006|reason=<Fill reason here>}}, or remove the Cleanup template.

File:JasonBermasInvestigate.jpg
Jason Bermas at the American Scholars Symposium on C-SPAN

Three different point-by-point critiques were prepared by 911research.wtc7.net, Internet Detectives and Mark Roberts. A commenter at Screw Loose Change named Mark Iradian prepared an edited version of Loose Change, subtitled with criticisms drawing on work by Roberts, Screw Loose Change, 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, Loose Change Creators Speak (PDF file).

Others take a more humorous approach, such as suggesting that if Loose Change were true, it would be highly unlikely that the creators would still be alive.[17]

What many of the critiques agree on is 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 openly 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]
  • Loose Change appears skeptical about the lack of readily visible airplane debris and bodies in the Pentagon and Pennsylvania crashes and 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. However, 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), they point out Flight 93's altitude was lower and it was frequently over rural areas with powerful cell towers.[2] Commercial airlines are testing new cell phone systems since it's 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.[22][23]
  • 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.[24] (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."[25] 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,[24][3] and ASTM E119 certification involves intact fireproofing as conducted by Underwriters Laboratories for the NIST in 2004.[26] The NIST proved that the fireproofing was not intact by firing shotguns on fireproofed steel.

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] American humorist Maddox, author of the satirical humor website The Best Page In The Universe, wrote an article on his website that lampooned and criticized the video and its producers.[17] 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."[27]

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."[28] 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."[29] 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."[30]

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."[31] He stated, "Let's just call it a baited trap, it draws somebody into a situation in which they're compromised."

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.[32] The most notable are:

  • The 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.[33]
  • 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.[34] 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.[35]

In other media

  • Samples from the Loose Change documentary can be heard in Ministry's song, "Lies Lies Lies", which can be found on the Rio Grande Blood record. A music video for this song has also been produced.
  • Vanity Fair wrote an article about Loose Change and its creators.[36]
  • Time Magazine, on conspiracy theories of 9/11, mentions "Loose Change".
  • Portuguese public TV Station RTP showed the documentary on the 10 of September, 2006 in prime time hours, and again in 2: on September 17 2006.
  • Australian Pay TV Channel, The History Channel, showed it during prime time hours on September 11 2006.
  • Democracy Now! hosted a debate between the authors of Loose Change and the editors of Popular Mechanics.[3]
  • The editors of the magazine Popular Mechanics published a book dealing with many of these theories called Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up to the Facts.
  • A Pakistani channel, Geo TV, showed Loose Change - dubbed into Urdu - on the fifth anniversary of 9/11.
  • Empire magazine interviewed Dylan Avery in issue 208 on the reception of the film and the plans for the upcoming third edition.
  • South Park's 10th-season episode Mystery of the Urinal Deuce is based on the widespread popularity of 9/11 conspiracy theories like in Loose Change.
  • American film director David Lynch has directly cited Loose Change for his belief that a 9/11 conspiracy exists.
  • Dutch Vara television channel's program Zembla, investigated claims made in the documentary.
  • A spoofing group known as Spoon and Suger mocked Loose Change in a popular web video known as T.R.U.T.H.

See also

References

  1. ^ NY FOX affiliate airs alternative 9/11 theory, "Loose Change"
  2. ^ a b Curiel, Jonathan. (2006) THE CONSPIRACY TO REWRITE 9/11. San Francisco Chronicle.
  3. ^ a b c d e DemocracyNow.org – 9/11 Debate: Loose Change Filmmakers vs. Popular Mechanics Editors of "Debunking 9/11 Myths"
  4. ^ Google Video - Loose Change Extra Footage
  5. ^ "Click Here for Conspiracy", Vanity Fair article, by Nancy Jo Sales, August 2006
  6. ^ "Loose Change 2nd Edition". Retrieved 2006-05-17.
  7. ^ "Loose Change 2nd Edition". Google Video. Retrieved 2006-05-17.
  8. ^ "Broadcast website's article excerpt from search for loose change". Retrieved 2006-05-30.
  9. ^ "UKFilm.org". Retrieved 2006-05-30.
  10. ^ loosechange911.blogspot.com Producer's website blog
  11. ^ Web movie takes flight
  12. ^ "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)
  13. ^ "Movie Minutiae: Loose Change (2005)". ABC News. 2006-09-15. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  14. ^ http://www.americanscholarssymposium.org/
  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. ^ a b There is no 9/11 conspiracy you morons
  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. ^ PCWorld.com – In-Flight Cell Phone Systems Gain Altitude
  23. ^ ConsumerAffairs.com – In-Flight Cell Phone System Survives Test Flight
  24. ^ a b wtc.nist.gov – Point by point rebuttal
  25. ^ Popular Mechanics – 9/11: Debunking The Myths
  26. ^ ScienceDaily.com – NIST Tests Provide Fire Resistance Data On World Trade Center Floor Systems
  27. ^ Taibbi, Matt (2006). "The Low Post: I, Left Gatekeeper". Politics. Rolling Stone. Retrieved 2006-09-29.
  28. ^ 911review.com – Location of Pentagon Strike
  29. ^ PostGazette.com – Latest Somerset crash site findings may yield added IDs
  30. ^ Tracing Trail Of Hijackers
  31. ^ Judicial Watch Says More Pentagon Tapes To Come
  32. ^ Google Video – Loose Change 2nd Edition Recut
  33. ^ Rediff.com – Buried WTC gold returns to futures trade
  34. ^ 9-11 Loose Change Second Edition Viewer Guide
  35. ^ http://smithmag.us/2006/08/10/korey-rowe-the-loose-cannon-of-911
  36. ^ http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=13037

Media Coverage

Louder than Words on MySpace.com

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Loose_Change&oldid=96851779"