Tuesday, March 20, 2007

DAVID LYNCH, LOOSE CHANGE, AND 9/11 QUESTIONS

TROUBLING QUESTIONS FROM A MAKER OF TROUBLING FILMS
Adam Larson
Caustic Logic/The Frustrating Fraud
December 20 2006


I’m a long-time fan of legendary director of psychological cult thrillers David Lynch. I never have seen Blue Velvet all the way through, but loved what I saw, and have also appreciated his work on The Elephant Man, Lost Highway, Mulholland Drive, and his old TV show you may remember, Twin Peaks. Wild at Heart in underrated and over-hated, Dune wasn’t right on mark but not bad either, and I recently saw his surprisingly bizarre 1977 classic Eraserhead. I’ve always felt a vague connection with Lynch, who grew up at least partly here in Spokane, which may have helped him visualize the world of Twin Peaks and other ventures. Spokane is the hub of an area many here call the “Inland Empire” so you can understand my disappointment to learn that his latest film INLAND EMPIRE (his first all-digital film and set for release soon) is about LA, not Spokane.

Gene Sharp
David Lynch, troubled by the 9/11 disinfo witout even seeing it as disinfo
It’s not the only disappointment Lynch has handed me lately. He paused in his crusade for transcendental meditation recently to come out as a 9/11 skeptic, which many found instantly encouraging. In a December 3 interview he cited the documentary Loose Change as having loosed this change in his own mind. His Dutch interviewer, apparently at Lynch’s request, showed a several-minute clip – one of the better stretches - of the New York demolitions and the coverup of the flight data recorders, both more compelling cases than the average Loose Change tripe. She asked if he found their case convincing, and to his credit he seemed mildly skeptical: “Its not so much what they say, it's the things that make you look at what you thought you saw in a different light […] you don’t have to believe everything in the documentary to still have questions”

But he comfortably cited precisely their evidence with apparently no independent research. He cited the three collapses in New York as being rather suspicious, especially given Silverstein's "pull it" quote (supposedly de-bunked now). He also called on three bits of flawed evidence at the Pentagon:

“And Those things for me, that bother me, is the hole in the Pentagon being too small for a plane, the lawn isn't messed up, and the government's not showing the plane hitting when many cameras photographed it.”

I love Lynch’s works and he himself seems like a cool and smart guy, but he’s stepped on my turf here and I must put in my two bits. I’ve already explained why the video is totally wrong on the entry wound, and just posted on the unmarked "pentalawn" issue. As for the hidden video, that is worth attention, but should not be slapped down alongside those other two without first reading my post on the issue.

Some will praise Lynch’s bold move, others will wonder if the mental illness and confusion of his films has rubbed off on him and clouded his thinking with paranoia. I would say his paranoia is right on mark and of the "heightened state of awareness” variety so needed in our country. But something - perhaps a transcendent meditative stupor or perhaps celebrity isolation – keeps him from taking it all seriously enough to check his facts first. I like to think these are the reasons for his boosting Loose Change rather than a conscious collusion with the disinfo campaign.

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

Well common', he's an artist not a reporter. He only made a couple comments and he seems to be thinking what most people think when they learn of the other possibilities of 911.

Caustic Logic said...

Of course you're right. He has no more pull here than the average citizen. And we all don't matter, right? Of course we do, one at a time, one at a time, it adds up. If we could know what was really going on we could be powerful. So we get woke up to 9/11 Truth, as Lynch did, by watching Loose Change. That's worse than starting your historic career by watching Disney's Pocahontas. It can work to trigger the first thoughts, but then you need a whole lotta backtracking before you intersect with truth to a meaningful degree. Few do this, and their illusions freeze with that powerful video presentation. They like the certainty. And it's sad to see it over and over again.

ntg said...

Actually, his scepticism regarding 9/11 has everything to do with his religious belief in Transcendental Meditation. The group claims that the Maharishi predicted 9/11 and that practice of TM would solve all the world's problems, including terrorism. You can also see:
http://politics.netscape.com/story/2006/12/06/film-director-david-lynch-goes-public-with-9-11-questions

BG said...

You are participating in an ad hominem smear against Lynch with this post. Not impressive.

Caustic Logic said...

ntg - Thanks for the thoughts! This is intriguing and I shall look into it. I'm curious about the claims of the Maharishi's predicton - perhaps another ignored warning? Also curious precisely what he supposedly predicted - terror attack, inside job, or just some mysterious event to make an artful film about? I'll check it out.

Caustic Logic said...

BG: Hold on, lemme double check what "ad hominem" means... Ah... Latin "against the man," personal attack, smear campaign. Yeah, I can see how you might say that. Sometimes my Caustic overshoots my logic. But not by much. I mean, I didn’t even mention how this might impact his viewership for INLAND EMPIRE and how many Truthers will need to see it now looking for hidden messages. I have no doubt others are smearing him, but that was not my own intent. My intent was only to let people know that I think he is wrong on these points, and my links explain why. The reason I’m guessing is because I’ve studies it more.

I don’t mean to drag Lynch into this, but he’s stepped into it and explicitly on my turf – the hijacking of the 9/11 Truth Movement by the no-plane at the Pentagon theory. I can’t say whether he did this to promote his movie or to voice his real concerns, but I’ll admit to using the episode to promote my new website dedicated to my own real concerns.

Thanks again for another comment and thanks for spurring me to figure out what Ad Hominem means. I don't usually use Latin phrases - perhaps an inborn resentment of all things Roman inherited from any number of aggrieved ancestors. Or I'm just lazy...