Jump to content

Loose Change

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Timharwoodx (talk | contribs) at 08:48, 19 August 2006 (→Flight 93: - accuracy, Flight 93 witnesses claim only an aircraft - no-one claims any passenger bodies were found at the site, as LC highlights). 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 documentary

Loose Change is a documentary written and directed by Dylan Avery which presents an alternative explanation of events during the September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attacks. The film attempts to compensate for the perceived inadequacy of government investigations and the 9/11 Commission Report. It alleges that the attacks were not the result of terrorism but a series of cleverly executed events carried out by the US government. It was released through the creators' company, Louder than Words, and received wide attention after being featured on local FOX affiliate, WICZ-TV (FOX 40). [1]

History

Avery had originally been planning to make a fictional story about a possible conspiracy related to the attacks of 9/11. This fictional story was also called Loose Change. It was during his research for this project that he began to believe that there was an actual cover up over the 9/11 attacks and the project switched to a documentary after discussion with his childhood friend Korey Rowe, an army specialist who served in Afghanistan and Iraq, who became the producer of Loose Change. They were also joined by researcher Jason Bermas. The first edition cost around $2000 to make and was released in April 2005. The second edition, released in 2006 was made for around $6000 and includes extra footage which Avery purchased from Ebay.[2]

The documentary is available for purchase and distribution through its official website. [3] 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. [4]

According to Broadcast magazine, the film was to have a special screening at the Houses of Parliament on June 14th, 2006. [5][6][7] However, Michael Meacher, the British MP who had considered sponsoring the screening, decided against it. [8]

Content

The film is partitioned among six sections:

"Timeframe"

  • Includes background information of Operation Northwoods, a plan put forward in the days of the Cuban Missile Crisis to employ fake terrorist attacks in Cuba as a pretext for invasion of the island. It also planned to switch out real commercial airliners with drone planes, and tests the effect of using them as weapons, all the while seeming to be an accident. It then brings to light certain events that could be evidence of this practice being used in the attacks of September 11, 2001.

"Pentagon"

  • Alleges that American Airlines Flight 77 could not have crashed into the Pentagon and that damage sustained to the building may have been caused by a cruise missile or a smaller military aircraft. It defends this by examining the size of the hole in the Pentagon caused by the crash, examining the lack of debris consistent to prior airliner crashes, and showing that certain pieces of debris are inconsistent in size or shape to the corresponding parts on that type of aircraft.

"World Trade Center"

  • Suggests that the actual collapses of the World Trade Centers 1, 2 and 7 were not triggered by the plane crashes but by a series of explosions within the buildings that were detonated shortly before each building collapsed, and supports this with eye witness reports from a janitor, firemen, and other people near the buildings who saw and heard things consistent with controlled demolitions; videotapes showing flashes in windows far below the burning floors prior to the collapse, and seismograph results recorded during the collapse compared to the collapse of other similar buildings. The movie also claims that all the buildings came down at near free-fall speed and that, therefore, the official story that the buildings pancaked is impossible without breaking the laws of physics.

"Flight 93"

  • Suggests that United Airlines Flight 93 did not crash in rural Shanksville, Pennsylvania but actually landed safely at Cleveland Hopkins Airport where it was evacuated by government personnel into an unused NASA research center. Uses photographs and eye-witness reports of the crash site as evidence, suggesting that they show a lack of debris or severity of damage to site, 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. Also that the United Airlines plane was not scheduled to fly on September, 11, 2001.

"Oddities"

  • Asserts that cellular phone calls could not be made from American Airlines flights at the time of the crash. The film cites as evidence a later system installed in American Airlines planes which allowed the reception of cellular signals within the planes. It questions why such a system would be needed if cellular transmissions were already possible within commercial airliners.
  • Suggests that cell phone 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 admitting guilt was also faked.
  • Asserts 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.

"Cui Bono"

  • Outlines possible motives for the attacks.
  • Alleges that Larry Silverstein stood to benefit significantly from the destruction of the towers from an extensive insurance policy.
  • Alleges that some investors engaged in insider trading with an apparent foreknowledge of the eventual destruction of the towers.
  • Suggests that billions of dollars in gold bars were secretly transported away from the World Trade Center before the Twin Towers collapsed.
  • Alleges that neoconservative think-tank, the Project for the New American Century, whose members include Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Jeb Bush, Paul Wolfowitz, and John R. Bolton might have been involved, and cites the group's own manifesto, Rebuilding America's Defenses, as a possible indicator of motive for the attacks.

On May 26, 2006 a certified letter was sent to Dylan Avery regarding alleged copyright and trademark infringement resulting from French film makers, the Naudet brothers. The letter alleges that Avery used, "copyrighted images from the 9/11 Film," and also allege 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." [9]

Factual inaccuracies corrected in recut version

In August 2006 a recut version of Loose Change was released, which corrected errors in the original release. Since the film was produced for a mere $6,000, Dylan did not have the luxury of large teams of fact checkers at his disposal, as would be the case for a Hollywood production. The below points refer to the original version of Loose Change, and not the current version.

The film states that New York's Empire State Building was hit by a B-52 in 1945. It was actually a B-25 Mitchell, an aircraft less than one-third the size of a B-52 (the first prototype B-52 would not fly for another seven years). The authors have since acknowledged this error and apologized.

The film suggests that there is a rumour claiming $167 billion in gold was stored in vaults beneath the World Trade Center, and that only $200 million of that amount was recovered. This amount would have exceeded the entire amount of U.S. gold reserves by approximately $67 billion, and would be about 56% of the world's gold reserves in September, 2001. In fact, all of the approximately $230 million in precious metals stored in the vaults beneath the WTC was recovered. [10]

The film focuses on the wrong type of engine for Flight 77. Bollyn, the reporter of American Free Press that Loose Changes uses, had contacted the factory in Indiana which makes engines for small planes like the Cessna Citation and Global Hawk, rather than the plant in Quebec that overhauls the 757 engines or the factory in Derby, England. Loose Change implies 757's only have Pratt & Whitney engines made of steel and titanium alloy. This is incorrect, because the engines used in Flight 77 are Rolls-Royce engines. (Note) In the Second Edition however, it is clearly mentioned that Pratt & Whitney has redirected Loose Change to Rolls-Royce.

[11]

Criticisms

Two different point-by-point critiques were prepared by 911research.wtc7.net and Mark Roberts. A commenter at Screw Loose Change named Mark Iradian prepared a video version of Loose Change, subtitled with criticisms, drawing on work by Roberts, Screw Loose Change, and his own efforts.

In the introduction to his "Loose Change Second Edition Viewer Guide," Mark Roberts states, "I counted 81 errors of fact (statements like 1+1 = 3). In addition, I counted 345 instances of conjecture not supported by evidence, logical fallacies, uses of images that do not support the conclusions being drawn, and other flubs. And that’s only counting errors of commission. The errors of omission are much more serious." Roberts does not cite references for many of his statements, thus sustaining the debate.

American humorist Maddox, author of the satirical humor website The Best Page In The Universe, wrote an article on his website that criticized the video and its producers. [12]

Pentagon crash

Loose Change has been criticized as disinformation even by some within the 9/11 Truth Movement, which disagrees with some aspects of the official version of events on the day of the attacks. [13] A primary concern of many in the movement is the promotion by documentaries such as Loose Change and In Plane Site that a commercial jet did not hit the Pentagon. [14] [15] [16] [17]

Critics of the documentary's proposal that a cruise missile or a small aircraft may have been the cause of damage to the Pentagon, despite the nearly 100 documented accounts from witnesses on the scene [18] who reported seeing a large airliner. Some witnesses specifically noted seeing a 757, while only two witnesses, located some distance from the scene, reported seeing a small plane. Loose Change does not mention the large body of witness reports in support of a commercial jet. Not a single witness at the scene has ever reported seeing a missile. [19] 59 passengers were aboard Flight 77 when it crashed into the Pentagon. [20] There were no survivors.

The group Judicial Watch successfully obtained, from the Department of Defense, video footage of the airliner striking the Pentagon taken from relevant, though quite distant, security cameras at the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. On May 16 2006 the group released videos from the two cameras on their website with hopes to "...put to rest the conspiracy theories involving American Airlines Flight 77..." The producers of Loose Change assert that the videos released only bolster their claims that Flight 77 never hit the Pentagon because a Plane is not visible in any of the footage that was released.[21]

Chris Farrell, the Director of Investigations & Research at Judicial Watch, warned in an interview [22] 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." He stated, "Let's just call it a baited trap, it draws somebody into a situation in which they're compromised."

The film took a quote out of context in order to claim that air traffic controllers at Dulles International Airport thought that Flight 77 was a military plane. The quote used to support that claim is, "The speed, the maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all thought in the radar room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that that was a military plane," O'Brien said, "you don't fly a 757 in that manner. It's unsafe." The italicized part was left out of the documentary. [23]

The film states that five light posts were knocked over by Flight 77 and suggests that a plane hitting a single light pole would crash, citing the example of a Gulfstream II headed to Houston saying it crashed because it hit a light pole. The film suggests the pole ripped the wing off. In fact the Gulfstream II jet crashed and a TV reporter noted it had clipped a light pole while crashing. Light poles are designed to detach on impact to save lives if cars crash into them. [24]

World Trade Center collapse

Main article: Collapse of the World Trade Center

The documentary focuses on the combustion temperature of jet fuel (1517 °F / 825 °C) which is much lower than the melting point of steel (2777 °F / 1525 °C). Despite this fact it fails to note that "steel loses 50 percent of its strength at 1,200 degrees F [650 °C]." [25] While the steel components of the WTC were certified to ASTM E119 requiring them to be exposed to ~2000 °F for several hours; [26] this is a test of specific materials under controlled conditions and does not reflect the performance of "assemblies under actual fire conditions." [27]

As temperatures rose in the buildings, the remaining core columns softened and buckled, shifting much of the burden to the building's exterior. The floors, which largely remained intact outside the impact zone, reacted by pulling the exterior columns inward, adding to the extreme stress on the exterior columns. In the north tower, as fires consumed office furniture and other debris, softening the steel in the exterior columns, they gradually started to bow inward and then buckle. [28]

This buckling and the resulting floors falling could be heard as "secondary explosions" and "crashes" prior to the collapse. As the Twin Towers had strong outer shells and light weight trusses for floors, that would force the collapse inward as the towers were — structurally speaking — 95% air because of their open floor designs. It would allow the interior of the building to collapse first; so that debris, floors and elevators could fall inside the tower and blow out windows ahead of the exterior collapse. While FEMA's initial report concluded the floor trusses gave way and created a pan-cake effect; a comprehensive report by the NIST concluded the WTC collapse occurred because the columns failed first. [29] Either way the Twin Towers open floor design, greater height (wind and structural loads), their supporting columns and fireproofing being compromised by the initial impact; is significantly different from all the notable high-rise fires used as comparisons in the documentary.

While the World Trade Center suffered a major fire that lasted three hours in 1975, [30] it progressed relatively slowly and originated on the lower floors which had new intact asbestos fireproofing to protect the steel. Despite this there was some buckling in the floor trusses. [31]

Flight 93

Loose Change cites a study in which cell phone calls were increasingly difficult, if not impossible, to get through up to and at an altitude of 32,000 ft (9 750 m). According to air traffic controllers in Cleveland, who alerted their counterparts at John P. Murtha Johnstown-Cambria County, Flight 93 headed south and then east and began a steady descent from an altitude of over 20,000 feet (6 100 m) to less than 6,000 feet (1 830 m). [32]

The documentary asserts cell phone calls could not be made from an airplane, and cites new cell systems being tested after 9/11 in planes as compelling evidence in support of that position. Though the film briefly mentions that calls can be and were made using the plane's installed GTE Airphones, it does not explore this further; especially noted as lacking is the ratio of calls placed with this system as opposed to cell phones, despite the fact that many of the cited calls were made using the in-flight phone system. Although cell phone calls are entirely possible at lower altitudes, it could cause interference with the airplane and ground based cell phone networks. [33] [34] The new in-flight systems allows phones to work over the ocean and at lower power levels as the signals are relayed using a satellite uplink; making interference far less likely. It also enables the flight crew to disable cell phones when necessary. This provides additional safety mechanisms and at the same time improves quality of reception.

Loose Change suggests that Flight 93 landed in Cleveland instead of crashing or being shot down in Pennsylvania, and that passengers were subsequently secretly evacuated to an empty NASA research building. A number of members of the 9/11 Truth Movement say that there is no evidence for such a claim, and that many witnesses reported seeing and hearing a plane at the crash site, although notably none claim any actual passenger bodies were found at the crash site. [35] [36] [37]

Loose Change asserts that the above state voice modulation technology was touted as being able to recreate voices in almost "real time." William M. Arkin, writing for The Washington Post, argues that while it is true that the technology does exist, it would seem that in order for voice manipulation technology to take place as Loose Change suggests, the voice needs to be recorded, not live. [38]

Wikipedia as a source

Wikipedia was used as a source for some information. Critics allege that the use of Wikipedia is ill-fitting for a documentary [39] as it is not totally reliable and easy to vandalize. The majority of the articles cited appear to be unvandalized and match the producers' claims of their content. One noteworthy exception is a passage in the World Trade Center article regarding the gold repository beneath the buildings. As of December 28, 2005 the article matched the producers' claims, but the article has since been revised and the passage removed. Though subsequent revisions have edited the gold claims back in, they have generally been removed afterwards due to a lack of credible sources.

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.[40]
  • Vanity Fair wrote an article about Loose Change and its creators.[41]
  • The parody site Loose Trains mocks the video and its methodology. Having combed through oral reports from 9/11, they highlight any mention of trains and present a crudely doctored photo, attributing the collapse to a conspiracy by the railroads. The anonymous author, tongue in cheek, describes himself as "A Seeker Of TRUTH!"

References

  1. ^ NY FOX affiliate airs alternative 9/11 theory, "Loose Change"
  2. ^ "Click Here for Conspiracy", Vanity Fair article, by Nancy Jo Sales, August 2006
  3. ^ "Loose Change 2nd Edition". Retrieved 2006-05-17.
  4. ^ "Loose Change 2nd Edition". Google Video. Retrieved 2006-05-17.
  5. ^ "Broadcast website's article excerpt from search for loose change". Retrieved 2006-05-30.
  6. ^ "UKFilm.org". Retrieved 2006-05-30.
  7. ^ loosechange911.blogspot.com Producer's website blog
  8. ^ Loose Change ForumsResponse from Parliament regarding the showing.
  9. ^ "9/11 conspiracy movie taken off the web - Copyright infringement alleged". The Independent. Retrieved 2006-06-09.
  10. ^ Rediff.com – Buried WTC gold returns to futures trade
  11. ^ 9-11 Loose Change Second Edition Viewer Guide
  12. ^ There is no 9/11 conspiracy you morons
  13. ^ "'Loose Change' An analysis", by Michael B. Green, 911research.wtc7.net, retrieved March 1, 2006
  14. ^ Pentagon Attack Errors, 9-11 Review, retrieved March 1, 2006
  15. ^ Why the No-757 Crowd is Making an Ass out of Itself, Joël van der Reijden, retrieved March 1, 2006
  16. ^ The Pentagon attack: the "no plane" theories discredit 9/11 skepticism, oilempire.us, retrieved March 1, 2006
  17. ^ Flight 77.info, retrieved March 29, 2006
  18. ^ Pentagon eyewitnesses 'It was a plane bomb,' Eric Bart, retrieved April, 2006
  19. ^ "Eyewitness Accounts Describe Jetliner Approaching Pentagon", 911research.wtc7.net, retrieved March 1, 2006
  20. ^ "Remember American Airlines Flight 77"
  21. ^ loosechange911.blogspot.com – Defense Department Releases September 11 Pentagon Video to Judicial Watch
  22. ^ Judicial Watch Says More Pentagon Tapes To Come
  23. ^ [1]
  24. ^ "Utility Poles - Description of Strategies". AASHTO/NCHRP Strategic Highway Safety Plan. Retrieved 2006-05-17.
  25. ^ Shermer, Michael (2005). "Fahrenheit 2777". Scientific American. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  26. ^ http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0411/S00177.htm
  27. ^ http://www.techstreet.com/cgi-bin/detail?product_id=143
  28. ^ Lipton, Eric. (October 2004) FreeRepublic.com – Study Suggests Design Flaws Didn't Doom Towers
  29. ^ "Key Findings of NIST's June 2004 Progress Report on the Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster". Fact sheets from NIST. National Institute of Standards and Technology. 2004. Retrieved 2006-07-28.
  30. ^ LetsRoll911.org – Flashback from February 13th, 1975
  31. ^ Progressive Review – TWIN TOWERS 'NEVER FIRE-TESTED'
  32. ^ A Sky Filled With Chaos, Uncertainty and True Heroism
  33. ^ PCWorld.com – In-Flight Cell Phone Systems Gain Altitude
  34. ^ ConsumerAffairs.com – In-Flight Cell Phone System Survives Test Flight
  35. ^ "How Did United Flight 93 Crash?". August 1, 2003. Retrieved 2006-05-17.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: year (link)
  36. ^ "The Crash of Flight 93". 9-11 Research. Retrieved 2006-05-17.
  37. ^ "Eyewitness Reports". 9-11 Research. Retrieved 2006-05-17.
  38. ^ When Seeing and Hearing Isn't Believing
  39. ^ "The 9/11 deniers." Farhad Manjoo, Salon.com. June 27, 2006. http://salon.com/ent/feature/2006/06/27/911_conspiracies/index4.html
  40. ^ LiesLiesLies – Music video
  41. ^ http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=13037

Commentary

Debunking

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Loose_Change&oldid=70558723"