UPDATE 1: The second documentary Canvas aired, was not - as I had presumed when writing this post - presenting another consipracy theory, but was in fact one that tried to discover where a.o. French author and 'believer' Thierry Meyssan in his book L'effroyable imposture 'went wrong'. So yes, they did a better job than I had first expected by ringing another bell too. The question remains of course: what about the people who only watched the first documentary?
UPDATE 2: Apparently, The Canvas version of Loose Change was an edited one: the entire film can be watched at http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7218920724339766288&q=Loose+Change (thank you MJW).
With the 5th "anniversary" of 9/11coming up, undoubtedly many TV stations all over the world will know what to broadcast over the weeks to come. Our own national channel, Canvas, has already started with a number of programmes about 9/11 and "what really happened". All over the internet the most amazing 'doumentaries' can be found about how 9/11 did not happen, or about how it was an inside job, or a CIA plan and so on. Canvas aired Loose Change, one of those documentaries, last night, and are doing another one tonight.
To be honest, I was also struck with amazement when I saw the "evidence" that was presented in last night's documentary: about the hole in the Pentagon being way too small for a Boeing 757 to have impacted it, about it being scientifically impossible that the Twin Towers would collapse in approximately 10 seconds, about the fact no parts of a plain were found near the Pentagon nor in the field of Pennsylvania where the fourth plane (supposedly) had crashed, and so on. For a while I too was convinced that there is something fishy about the official 9/11 story. And even now I cannot say I am convinced that we truly know what events took place on 9/11, apart from the fact that too many lives were lost.
But on the other hand, the people who come up with these conspiracy theories certainly do not do what they claim the American government omits doing either. They do not present all the facts and seem to bring together only the pieces that suit their story, without doing the one thing that would make them resepectable and credible from a journalistic point of view: check and doublecheck, and give alle parties involved the opportunity to tell their story. Now, I can imagine there is a public for these theories. I am even sure that a lot money can be made with selling books and DVDs regarding the "truth about 9/11". So I suppose it's only normal (yeah, well...) this stuff appears on the web.
Conclusion: is Loose Change total nonsense? I don't know. The makers sure seem to be asking a number of questions that could use an answer. But is their story the whole story? The correct story? I am not convinced about that either. If you Google "9/11+truth", you will get over 33 million hits, a lot of which claim to be able to prove that 9/11 was a setup, or a conspiracy, or something along those lines. The only victim here is - as usual - the truth, which we, ordinary mortals, will probably never get to know. But the more hoaxes come to existence, the blurier the whole story becomes and the further away anybody will ever be from the truth.So disinformation rules, I guess.
Oh, something else that worries me is the fact that our national tv channel broadcast this documentary without even trying to uncover the possible hoax content of it. They just reproduced what they found without examining it critically, or without placing it in its due context. If they were students of mine, I'd tell them to come back for a resit...
Technorati : 9/11+truth+hoax
Powered by Zoundry
