Adam Larson / Caustic Logic
The Frustrating Fraud
6/26/07
Previously having shied away from the issue directly, superstar documentarian Michael Moore recently gave a video interview to 9/11 Truth activists that expressed support for their inside job beliefs. Two reporters from We Are Change.org and Infowars.com captured the interview and published it on June 20. This interview is big news on the internet in 9/11 circles for what the Infowars-affiliated Jones Report called Moore's “clear departure from the 'government negligence' picture he painted in his film Fahrenheit 9/11.” Since he made that film about three years ago, Moore told his interviewers, he’s had firefighters tell him of “explosions” at the World Trade center. He remarked that official investigations thus far “haven’t even told us HALF the truth,” and expressed hope for a new investigation.
Google video link to interview
Then he said “lemme just give you one thing that I’ve asked for for a long time,” and turned to and lingered on the Pentagon attack. Noting the well-surveilled nature of the area, he told the interviewer “I wanna see the video, I wanna see a hundred videos that exist of this. Why don’t they want us to see that plane coming in to the building?” This is of course the prime driver of suspicions over that strike – the fact that we haven’t seen it, except two low-res and dubious frames and trace only in another of the four videos released so far. Video masterlist Moore is aware of the other lines of questioning as well – the precision approach that we’re told took the plane into the Pentagon’s ground floor but without marking the lawn: “to hit a building that’s only five stories high that expertly uhh, I believe that there will be answers in that videotape and we should demand that tape.”
Moore talks animatedly about Pentagon video secrecy The usual implication of video secrecy opponents is that they must be hiding something contrary or embarrassing. Personally I’m not so sure the tape would show us much other than what the witnesses and building damage have been saying so far. Even a precision guided 757 looks the same on video. But Moore is too vague on this to be called a fraudster just yet and to his credit, he neither agreed nor disagreed with the interviewers about another major no-757 issue - the ever-shrinking entry wound. When asked if he was aware the “the [impact] hole is about eight feet wide,” he said “I’m not very good at the physics [inaudible], but believe me, I intend in my own way to find some answers. Thank you for whatever you’re doing.”
This could prove interesting. If Moore adds his weight to the cameras issue, we may just finally see better what they’re hiding. Now taking bets! Oddly enough, Scott Bingham at Flight77.info, a pioneer in the video release field, is not terribly sanguine about this development:
Michael Moore wants to see the the 100 or so videos from cameras that ring the Pentagon. In our original lawsuit we asked for every video the government has. If there are indeed 100 or so videos with some of those showing the plane in flight as Moore suggests, I don't know how a person can (working within the system) get those videos if the government states they don't exist (as they have stated within our lawsuit). Again, I think the "9/11 Truth Movement" should focus its efforts away from the soup that is the 9/11 Pentagon story.
Source: http://www.flight77.info/
---
2 comments:
I have my own suspicions for why the Pentagon won’t release the videos and to M. Moore's credit, he seems to hint at one of them here.
1. The idea of a hijacker hitting the ground floor of a building—when he had NEVER flown a real 757 before defies probability. It's almost impossible to believe.
2. The odds of an amateur astoundingly hitting with pin-point accuracy the ground floor of the Pentagon would be an anomaly that would be suspicious enough on its own. It would imply that remote control technology was used, and that therefore 9/11 was an inside job. Although M. Moore does not directly say this, my reading of his statement seems to almost suggest that the official story of a hijacker doing this is not very credible.
3. Given these two above facts, and the fact that the government also hides evidence relating to every area of the 9/11 attack, including videos of the WTC collapses and WTC 7, The 9/11 "omission" report, The NIST "no molten steel" report, and others; releasing the videos would end the speculations, and would force many skeptics to focus on other, much more credible and incriminating aspects of the 9/11 attacks.
Thanks for the thoughts Arabesque. Hope all is well.
All good points... I certainly don't mean to be harsh on the man, as his questions are valid, or at least understandable. The astounding piloting however is already by definition part of the official story, and was done by a 757. If this is what is hidden in the videos, how would seeing it prove anything? They'd just say again that's Hani controlling this precision missile.
It would be nice to have yet more evidence, but I doubt it'd help the hardcore fraudsters who'd still scream fake if they happen to see a 757 and it'd likely keep going. The fraud lives in all environments, and seems to thrive in evidence-free climes even better than in the mainstream of reason.
While I'm all for releasing the videos and seeing them all, whatever they show and however well. I also agree with Bingham we shouldn't be placing much weight on hopes of video revalations there.
Post a Comment