Bronze-level articleLoose Change

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Some dare call it

Conspiracy

link=:category:
Secrets revealed!
The revealers
There is a virus sweeping the world. It infects opponents of the Bush government, sucks their brains out through their eyes and turns them into gibbering idiots...the disease is called Loose Change.
George Monbiot

Loose Change is a 2005 "documentary" movie produced by Dylan Avery, Korey Rowe, and Jason Bermas that has received widespread attention on the Internet — and that does not bode well for evaluating the intelligence of the billions that use it.

Through monstrously poor logic it attempts to "prove" that the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks were a false flag operation carried out by the United States government, specifically by high ranking members of the Bush administration. Claims made by the movie have been proved false so many times that there have been several updates in which bogus claims have been removed, although the hypothesis has been unaffected. No one knows why it is called "Loose Change," though that is theorized to be the sound you hear whenever the people who produced it shake their heads.

Contents

[edit] Claims

Among the more outrageous claims put forth are:

  1. That the World Trade Center towers did not fall because planes flew into them (although they begrudgingly admit that planes did fly into them, but not the Pentagon), but because explosives were placed in the towers causing them to fall.
  2. That the Pentagon was hit by a cruise missile, not an airplane.
  3. That United flight 93 did not crash in Pennsylvania, but landed in Ohio, where all the passengers were removed and disappeared.[1]

[edit] Criticism

There is some sanity in the world, at least.

Loose Change wins the "Occam's Duct Tape" award for widely circumventing the simplest, most logical explanation in order to put forth some truly insane ideas. The producers of the movie assert that 9/11 was a set-up in order for the US to justify a war in Iraq, but fail to explain why the government would carry out such a ruse, but then not incorporate into their elaborate scheme any connection to Iraq. Surely if they could build such a story from the ground up, they could have made some of the (presumably fake) "hijackers" Iraqi, so there would be some sort of connection.

Furthermore, the producers seem to labor under the idea that if the towers had not fallen, people would not have supported a war. While they denied that planes crashed into Arlington (the Pentagon) and Shanksville, PA, too many cameras caught the second plane flying into the World Trade Center for them to be able to plausibly deny that — though they undoubtedly considered it. However, as the first plane happened to be caught in the background of a separate documentary being filmed in New York, passing it off as a "cruise missile" would have been tricky. But, according to the producers, the Bush administration was not convinced that the hijacking and destruction of four planes would be enough to get the (evidently overwhelmingly pacifist?) people of the United States riled up for a war. No, the towers had to fall, or people probably wouldn't even notice.

To that end — the theory goes — they risked the entire plan by planting explosives in the World Trade Center buildings, despite the fact that this would be an enormous risk, and if discovered, would not only foil the plan, but lead to investigations that would bring down the administration, having almost every member of said administration facing down a firing squad, and completely destroy the Republican Party. Even though thousands of innocent lives were to be lost in the crashes themselves, and the towers would obviously be evacuated, the Loose Change wingnuts would have us believe that it was absolutely necessary that the towers came crashing down, or Bush wouldn't get his war. Weird — yet people believe this.

Also left unexplained is what, exactly, the story is with United 93. They say it landed in Ohio (and the plane itself was still in service after 9/11), but all the passengers would have had to be killed, locked away in secret prisons, or completely brainwashed. Wouldn't it have been easier to crash the damn plane? They obviously did it with at least two others.

In a spectacular display of poor journalistic skills, the producers of the movie were caught citing the American Free Press, a far-right rag published by former members of the anti-Semitic group the Liberty Lobby, as a direct source for at least one of their claims.

Avery and Bermas were further publicly humiliated on an episode of Democracy Now! by the writers of Popular Mechanics' 9/11 conspiracy theory debunking piece James Meigs and David Dunbar.[2]

[edit] See also

[edit] External links

[edit] Footnotes

  1. Though the film doesn't say it, it clearly implies that David Blaine was involved.
  2. Exclusive 9/11 Debate: Loose Change Filmmakers vs. Popular Mechanics Editors of "Debunking 9/11 Myths", Democracy Now!, Sep. 11 2006
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Community
Tools
support