Monday, May 01, 2006

Fast & Loose?



I was watching the intro to Version 2 of Loose Change, when I caught something interesting. Avery has made a habit of filming newspapers and magazine articles, so that when he says "the New York Times wrote..." it's there in front of you. But check out the film at 6:09-6:15. He says:

"September 10, 2001: Newsweek reports that a number of top Pentagon brass cancelled their flight plans for the next morning."

He zooms in on the supposed text, but here's a screen cap just before the zoom:



What's that funny thing up at the top left? It's a little blurry in the film, but isn't that "Blog This!" You can see the same thing at the top left of this blog. That's right, Avery's presenting something to you as coming from Newsweek that's actually coming from a blog. The whole thing is only a 5 second segment, and he quickly dissolves to discourage you from discovering that on your own, but here's the blog:



I think you can see there have been a few changes to the blog (most notably the removal of the Blog This! part and the "Headline" that proved Avery's point, but the blogroll looks remarkably similar--911 Conspiracy, New World Order, plus of course the "Free Press International" bit.

He said he was citing Newsweek and instead he was citing a blog which claimed to have a transcript of something Newsweek said before they "removed it from their website", as you could read if you were Evelyn Woods. So let's stop the tape:



"Newsweek removed the story from the internet, but you can read the transcript below." Transcript? That's a bunch of hooey--you only transcribe what is initially provided in an oral format. If you copied and pasted it, then why didn't you also screen capture it? And anyway, Avery doesn't even trust the transcript enough to show us the passages he thinks are so critical--the "headline" (which is really the blog title) is supposed to be enough. And he certainly doesn't trust us enough to tell us "the truth" even as he supposedly believes it--that Newsweek was not standing by the story even if we assume it was written at one point.

No kidding, now I see why even some of the nutbar 9-11 conspiracists oppose this movie. The good news is that it seems to possess rich veins of falsehood and deception for anybody willing to dig.

We'd like to get some more volunteers to tackle specific claims in the movie. We'd especially like to find some people willing to transcribe small (say 5-10 minutes) segments of the two different versions of the movie.

4 Comments:

At 24 January, 2007 22:10, Anonymous Anonymous said...

One thing I notice is that the creators of "screw loose change" and other opposers of these "Conspirator theorist" appear as if they are attacking these people and that is there only mission. Where as these so called "conspiracy theorist" seem sincere. They seem like they are truly trying to find out what is behind the questions left unanswered of 911 and the lies the Government has been telling(weapons of mass destruction?). These people seem sincere in there intention to save the American constitution which I know has been stripped, "suspended" and altered temporarily and or permanently. That fact does not take a "conspirator theorist" nor a genious, a physics major, a demolitian team, or Shirlock Holmes to figure out.
Why even the way you refer to these people as conspirator "theorist" is an attack in itself and you are well aware of it. They seem like truth seekers if you ask me. They(the many organizations who have been smart enough not to blind follow the fishy governmenting body running this country) got a lil toooo much attention to thier call which began looong B4 911 and now there is a war against them as an attempt to discredit them. There is a (religios)saying that at the end of time, people will believe the liar over the truthful. So not to worry creators of "screw loose change" and other oragnization against these conspiracy "theorist", you will win your battle by majority. The truthful almost always suffer as they strive. Their reward is not always in this life.

 
At 24 January, 2007 22:13, Anonymous Anonymous said...

One thing I notice is that the creators of "screw loose change" and other opposers of these "Conspirator theorist" appear as if they are attacking these people and that is their only mission. Where as these so called "conspiracy theorist" seem sincere. They seem like they are truly trying to find out what is behind the questions left unanswered of 911 and the lies the Government has been tellin (weapons of mass destruction?). These people seem sincere in there intention to save the American constitution which I know has been stripped, "suspended" and altered "temporarily" and or permanently. That fact does not take a "conspirator theorist" nor a genious, a physics major, a demolitian team, or Shirlock Holmes to figure out.
Why even the way you refer to these people as conspirator "theorist" is an attack in itself and you are well aware of it.
They seem like truth seekers if you ask me. They(the many organizations who have been smart enough not to blind follow the fishy governmenting body running this country) got a lil toooo much attention to thier call which began looong B4 911 and now there is a war against them as an attempt to discredit them.
There is a (religios)saying that at the end of time, people will believe the liar over the truthful. So not to worry creators of "screw loose change" and other oragnization against these conspiracy "theorist", you will win your battle by majority. The truthful almost always suffer as they strive. Their reward is not always in this life.

 
At 17 May, 2007 18:36, Blogger Truth said...

Got a tiny url for the Newsweek article?

 
At 05 March, 2010 07:45, Anonymous Anonymous said...

http://www.newsweek.com/id/76065/page/4


paragraph "Ever since....

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home