The NY Observer: "Conspiracy Theorists" at United93 premiere

...and every kind of '9/11 truthseekers' or 9/11 truthlings are still invading the messageboard of Universal Pictures:

Well done everyone!! Thanks to Nico for sending this in:

By 6:30 p.m. on Tuesday, April 25, four news vans, an immensely long red carpet and a gaggle of conspiracy theorists had gathered around the Ziegfeld Theater for the Tribeca Film Festival’s premiere of United 93. People calling themselves part of the 9/11 Truth Movement distributed leaflets—they were quickly banned across the street—and yelled at a man walking his dog. (What????)

Jason Bermas wore a maroon hoodie with white letters that read “Investigate 9/11.” He spoke into his friend Dylan Avery’s camera at the entrance to the red carpet: “This film is totally ‘nonfiction’”—yes, he made scare quotes with his fingers—“based on the 9/11 Report.”

Sorry for the off topic

Sorry for the off topic post... I know I do that a lot...

What Category Are You In?

Man... Even the bluescreen


Even the bluescreen hologram mob are on the united 93 forums...

They're probably saying that flight 93 was really an eagle, CGI'ed to a 757...

I'm getting my tin-foil hat back on... :)


a007, It goes to show there

It goes to show there is much unease about the Flight 93 story. I was talking on the phone tonight with my brother and he brought up how annoyed he was about the Flight 93 movie. He's not into re-investigating 9/11 (not yet) but the Flight 93 story just never sat well with him.

At the time, back in 2001, didn't it seem like our leaders in Washington just glommed onto a Dateline story (Todd Beamer and the telephone operator)? And then, all of a sudden, it was fact that they saved Washington, DC. ________________

We're looking for strong,

We're looking for strong, conclusive and easy to prove evidence here and the no plane thing has got to go. It's standard disinfo to divide, conquer and stagnate the argument. Nico is either an agent or incredibly stupid or both.

Wrong, Anonymous. It's that

Wrong, Anonymous. It's that anti-no-plane thing -- a fungus among us -- which has got to go. It's not only incredibly stupid and evidence-denying (and thus intellectually dishonest), but it protects and serves the interests of the government whose huge horrible lies we've (supposedly) seen through.

The only images of the first and third impacts refute the lying government's unsubstantiated contention that it was Flights 11 and 77 which hit the North Tower and Pentagon.

Much of the work of the fake 911 truthers has been aimed at getting honest 911 truthers to disregard and ignore the evidence (including the government's own evidence, which hoists the lying government by its own petard) which breaks the lying government's "plane" theories.

Blue screen hologram

Blue screen hologram crowd?

Maybe you also belittled the crazy

Or was it the Wargames-fantacists

Remember when there were the
Arabs-did-it nutters?

If I was you I would be careful in what unbelievable theory I exclude.

Maybe you agree that 911 was a


operation, in order to BUMSTEER
everyone into believing a

I personally find Nico Haupts
writings concise. I still feel bad admitting this, but I presume the feeling is inside me, and refers to my stupidity rather than Nico, who I never met to examine his state of mind.

I presume I would actually sympathise with him and say to him: "Is krass, ey"

My suggestion to you all is to PROVIDE A SECURE PLACE for ANONYMOUS insider-whistleblowing.

Some sort of SSL-proxy-chain to publish on a web-page.

What the 911truthers would REALLY need is not more dumb-farts like you and me ranting on-and-on, and knocking each other... but someone who was there when it happened who can give us some details of what they saw.

IMHO some wonderful weapons were used to disintegrate EVIDENCE, like the hole of flight 93 and the hole inthe pentagon.

Furthermore DOESN'T IT SEEM STRANGE THAT OF ALL ThE BUILDINGs that terrorists could have used to bring home the message that they hate freedoms the pentagon is not high on that list?

For me the pentagon HAD TO BE HIT because it contained the OPPOSING TEAM. IMHO the "remote-controllers" were sitting in there.. on their desks, being horrified at what they did, and then they had to die to stop them from talking and to give a warning message to all others not to talk.

I find it altogether possible that the planes that flew into the WTC were not what we think, and CGI was used. I would like to see the RENDERING MISTAKES being focussed on more properly. DYLAN AVERY, can you do something video-wizardly?

There's a column by James

There's a column by James Pinkerton in today's New York Newsday about United 93 that really ticked me off. He claims that "the film puts the lie to the elaborate conspiracy theories about the 911 attacks". He seems to think that because the movie depicts all these air traffic controllers and military personnel franticly trying to deal with the hijackings, there was no conspiracy. He thinks that they would all have to be in on the plot, and someone would have said something in 4 1/2 yrs. What a dunce. Someone should send him a letter and explain that with all the war games going on, these valiant people couldn't do their jobs properly. They didn't have to be "in on the plot".

But here's a counterpoint

But here's a counterpoint piece from the Philadelphia Daily News:

"How does it feel to get

"How does it feel to get laughed at and sent to the fringes by the grown-ups?"

I suspect you know just how it feels ;)


the Philadelphia Daily News

the Philadelphia Daily News sucks for the most part, its kind of like The New York Post in the sense that its very right wing for the most part,and kind of tabloidish, but they have done some good work on 9/11 truth before. a guy named Will Bunch was one of the first(maybe the first) MSM journalists to question if Flight 93 was shot down.

I'm not in Philly, and I

I'm not in Philly, and I don't read the Philadelphia Daily News online. The post I sent came from Will Bunch's blog, called "Attytood".

oh, so this didnt appear in

oh, so this didnt appear in the print version of The Daily News? damn. oh well, he still got a piece on how he thought Flight 93 was shot down printed shortly after 9/11. Will Bunch is the man for sticking to it.

The easily disproveable

The easily disproveable claims have been with us (or around us, perhaps) since day one. The next phase of the attack is to make them more prominent than ever, and be sure that they are easily singled out as "the typical 9/11 Truth Movement people."

This is all going according to plan, along with the character assassinations of McKinney, Weldon and Sheen. Not only is the message rendered questionable by association, others who may have considered coming out see the damage done to reputations and careers.

I'd love to see more Hollywood types be brave. Unfortunately, all you have to do to scare someone nowadays is threaten to take away their parking spot at the studio.

I find it altogether

I find it altogether possible that the planes that flew into the WTC were not what we think, and CGI was used. I would like to see the RENDERING MISTAKES being focussed on more properly. DYLAN AVERY, can you do something video-wizardly?
And I find it altogether conclusive that trying to get the public to buy into CGI planes will KILL this movement.

The average Joe doesn't even know what 'rendering' is. Most touchdown passes are not Hail Mary's. You don't need every reciever in the end zone, just one GOOD ONE. Start with building 7 - an easily proveable LIE. The rest of the bullshit house of cards will fall faster than the towers.

If you don't see that, you're either of very low intelligence, or your whole purpose here is to be seen as blatantly controversial and technically-complicated as possible and thereby 'render' the entire movement that way by association.

And you don't seem to be of low intelligence.

i agree, the no plane

i agree, the no plane pushers are dangerous and unstable for the most part.or worse.......

Blimp & Ha: Take your

Blimp & Ha: Take your no-planes at the WTC stuff to the Star Trek site where it belongs. Stop using this stupid wedge issue to discredit the truth movement!

Chris: Will Bunch described


Will Bunch described this as a preview of something that WILL run in the actual newspaper.

The fact that real planes

The fact that real planes were used seems obvious to me however I welcome a healthy debate about that happened on 9/11. Most of you seem to be more concerned with "The Movement" than "the truth."

I hear you saying: You are either with The Movement or you are against it. This completely marginalizes anyone who has questions about 9/11 but doesn't sign on to your agenda.

Perhaps that is your

Perhaps that is your intention, to marginalize, but you will want those people to stand with you when the time comes for a show of hands...

Anonymous: I might, but I've


I might, but I've already had a 911 Truth letter posted in Newsday within the last year, and there may be a quota in place.

Gothamite, why not send

Gothamite, why not send James Pinkerton an e-mail of your post?

darryl, I think you're

I think you're misreading people here. Theres no agenda other than reopening the investigation of 9/11.

Jon Gold, et al. I've been

Jon Gold, et al.

I've been having an ongoing debate in the highly visible SternFan Network bulletin board.

I'm trying hard to locate the exact 9/11 Commission Report quote which corrects the "Let's Roll" to "Roll it", explaining that Beamer was actually refering to a dining cart.

Does anyone have this page number?

Take your no-planes at the

Take your no-planes at the WTC stuff to the Star Trek site where it belongs. Stop using this stupid wedge issue to discredit the truth movement!

your assertion of motives is disheartening at least, and infuriating! and always from someone named anonymous - if I am truly a discredit to the truth movement, or what I am increasingly perceiving to be the 1/2 truth movement, then perhaps my IP should be blocked - until then, I leave you with this::

Despite the 'official' version of events stating that WTC2 was hit by a hijacked Boeing 767-200 there is no photographic evidence to support this. Each picture of the supposed UA175 aircraft analysed in this article shows that some kind of unexplainable defect, be it a 'pod', a defective port wing, lighting anomalies or just an airframe that bears no resemblance to a Boeing 767-200. When the UA175 images are analysed comparatively we see glaring inconsistencies in airspeed, airframe symmetry, lighting, descent path angle and airframe attitude.

no planes theory is a red

no planes theory is a red herring. I definitly agree with Rupert on this one.

The physical evidence will never be made availible to anyone who is questioning the official story, and even if we took the government to cour tfor lying dont you think they would have enough disposable income to counter our experts with their own but 10 fold?

Unless we have pieces of the plane, or physical proof there is no point in focusing in on such a thing, especially when it is based on perceptual speculation, not fact.

some people in the 911 truth movement are as bad and as blind as the official story supporters. They really do make the rest of us look like conspiracy nutters, and i myself am so conpiratorial that i think this is all designed on purpose by disinformation agencies. They want us to latch onto and believe in rediculously unprovable theories, that way the entire movement can be painted as a bunch of whackos.

for instance what if they do release a video of the plane hitting the pentagon?

will all the pentagon no plane supports be screaming "CGI CGI", i mean to me thats just asking for trouble.

the pod missle people i

the pod missle people i suspect have been duped by disinformation agents. 911 in plane site seems to have started the ball rolling on this. Luckily loose change removed the pod and flash references from the 2nd edition.

i just feel like there is so much *provable* anamoly and inconsistency with the official story that there is no need to latch onto such speculative beliefs.

the pod missile people have

the pod missile people have been duped by the photo of flight175 taken just before the impact with wtc2 which shows the existence of a pod. and a flash. a flash, by the way, that flight11 also exibited - just because loose change removed it doesn't mean that it wasn't there -

of course there is much *provable* anamoly and inconsistency with the official story - but what exactly is the obstacle to proving it? the media.

the pod missle people i

the pod missle people i suspect have been duped by disinformation agents. 911 in plane site seems to have started the ball rolling on this. Luckily loose change removed the pod and flash references from the 2nd edition.
There's a good example - I personally still believe in the pod and the flash. I see it, it makes sense, I believe it.

But it seems to be only borderline believable for some people. Fine - leave it as an unproven possibility and move on. It's not critical. It's the same as hanging your proof of 9/11 on the "competancy of George Bush." It has nothing to do with reality, Bush didn't draw up the plans.

And stop debating is it was "Roll it!" or "Let's roll!" Another useless debate, both answers of which confirm the official bullshit.

The only question I have is - if United 93 wins an oscar for Best Screenplay, who will accept the award - Cheney, Pearle or Rumsfeld?

for instance what if they do

for instance what if they do release a video of the plane hitting the pentagon?
robbie martin
Then we'll know at that moment that we've all just dropped tabs of acid.

"A plane", yes. But there is no video of Flight 77 hitting the Penatgon, or we'd have seen it by now. Talk about your quick end to the whole debate.

If this surfaces, it'll be from Industrial Light & Magic. If you saw King Kong and believed it, then you'll be convinced.

-- "for instance what if

-- "for instance what if they do release a video of the plane hitting the pentagon?" --

Exactly the point! This would be great news for anyone truly interested in "The Truth", but bad for people more concerned with "The Movement". This is why I say "The Movement" has an agenda other that the truth.

If we have to claim martians kidnapped flight 93 in order to get the evidence released, then so be it!

i agree with you robbie

i agree with you robbie

Other than being an

Other than being an immediate turn-off to potential new truthers, no planes at the WTC is a "honey pot."

"A honey pot, in intelligence jargon, is a tempting source of information or 'dangle' that is set out to lure intended victims into a trap. Ultimately the honey pot is violently and maliciously discredited so as to destroy the credibility of anything stuck to it by association." Michael Ruppert, "Crossing the Rubicon," p. 184


it's pathetic really, that

it's pathetic really, that the official fairytale can be discounted by something as humorous and obvious as the pentalawn and still serious discussions of controlled demolition and obvious govt. complicity are blocked and discredited. by the mcmedia.

anonymous, no one's asking

anonymous, no one's asking you to promote anything - just consider that such "high tech imagery machines" are employed on a regular basis - the first-down line in a televised football game for instance.

James, how about focusing on

James, how about focusing on realistic issues: NORAD no where to be found on 9/11???, Cheney war games; Silverstein WTC-7 “pull-it”; AA77 steered into reinforced, mostly empty part of Pentagon; suppression of evidence/investigation before, during & after 9/11; put option/short selling stocks on United and American Airlines, etc.

James Ha jump off a building

James Ha jump off a building please.


I dont give a flying fuck if you have all the good intentions in the world. You keep on repeating the most outlandish theories that have been debuked over and over. Alright, so a 757 has a missile attached to its underbelly, shoots it a split second before impact, oh yeah, and it's a huge fucking hologram.

Are you really that stupid, or are just being paid to be really stupid?

*DEBUNKED* I realize 9/11


I realize 9/11 blogger has a open mind toward all theories, but please, let's discuss those in the realm of reality.

debunked over and over by

debunked over and over by whom?

how about focusing on realistic issues

so, I should stop handing out copies of in plane site, confronting the evidence, and loose change? -

you guys truly are feeble-wits if you're so easily distracted - in fact I'm of the opinion that the two of you are disinfo agents! - good day.
I said good day!

WTC starring nick cage ha. I

WTC starring nick cage ha. I wonder who plays larry?

damn the jig is up.

damn the jig is up.

Chris: Will Bunch described


Will Bunch described this as a preview of something that WILL run in the actual newspaper.
Gothamite | 04.27.06 - 11:18 am | #
nice. hopefully soon?

Jeffery Westhoff 'United 93'

Jeffery Westhoff

'United 93' respectful, compelling, well-done

[published on Thu, Apr 27, 2006]

In dramatizing the events of "United 93," the first major film about the Sept. 11 attacks, writer-director Paul Greengrass makes two wise choices.

First, he lets "United 93" play out in close to real time. The film lasts only slightly longer than United 93's brutally shortened flight.

Greengrass ("The Bourne Supremacy") doesn't front-load the script with biographical details of the passengers and crew, nor does he bother with exposition. We know what happened that day; we need no prologue.

Second, and most crucially, Greengrass didn't cast "United 93" with name actors. A few are recognizable from recurring roles on recent sitcoms, but no face is famous enough to jar us out of the movie's realism. This would be a much different, much less electrifying, film with Charlton Heston as Federal Aviation Administration operations manager Ben Sliney bellowing, "Where are those fighter jets?"

In fact, Sliney plays himself, recreating the emotions he felt and decisions he made that morning – his first day on the job, believe it or not. Many of the air traffic controllers and military commanders caught up in that day's tragedies also play themselves, adding to the verisimilitude Greengrass constructs with quiet authority.

We expect "United 93" to commemorate the people aboard the flight, one of four hijacked that day, who sacrificed themselves to prevent the terrorist pilot from slamming the 757 into the U.S. Capitol.

"United 93" also honors the many heroes and patriots behind the scenes. Air-traffic controllers and Sliney's team at the FAA's operations command center in Virginia discover very early that flights have been hijacked. They act quickly and do all the right things. So do military flight commanders at the Northeast Air Defense Sector in upstate New York.

But among the many horrors of the day, civilian and military flight controllers find themselves unable to communicate. The FAA complains they need the military's help, and the military complains the FAA isn't cooperating. Maybe they still would not have prevented the jets from hitting the World Trade Center and Pentagon, but coordination would have improved their chances.

We get a portrait of dedicated members of our government doing incredible work in a desperate situation, but struggling because they receive no leadership.

"I can't defend the whole Eastern Seaboard with only four planes," shouts the frustrated Maj. James Fox, also playing himself.

What is staggering, sickening even, is that hours pass and the attacks have ceased before anyone in the FAA or military hears from the president, head of the federal government commander in chief of the armed forces. Greengrass doesn't directly accuse the Bush administration of negligence, he just presents the facts. They speak for themselves plainly enough.

For the first hour or so, "United 93" cuts between the passengers on the flight, still unaware the world below them is panicking, and the air controllers who see the little blips on their screen transform into weapons of mass destruction. Situated directly across the Hudson River from Lower Manhattan, those in the control tower of Newark International Airport (where flight 93 originated) have a ringside seat for the World Trade Center's destruction.

A flight that began with mundane details – a flight attendant worries they don't have enough sugar packets – becomes a call for courage. Once the passengers and flight attendants plot a strategy to retake the plane, Greengrass forgets the control centers and stays inside the plane.

We are struck by how quickly the passengers must act. Not incidentally, we also are struck by how incredibly stupid the hijackers are to allow the passengers to make phone calls. Otherwise, the passengers wouldn't hear the news about the World Trade Center and almost certainly wouldn't guess their plane would be used as a missile.

Greengrass never resorts to exploitation. Even Todd Beamer's famous statement, "Let's roll," is underplayed. We know the ending, yet its swiftness is unexpected and wrenching.

"United 93" is not easy to watch, but it is respectful and compelling. Audiences might not be ready to see it, but Greengrass chose the right time to make what will last as a precise, necessary document of our era.

– Jeffrey Westhoff can be reached at

We need to counter this myth

he just presents the facts.

he just presents the facts. They speak for themselves plainly enough.

hunt the boeing: shanksville edition

I think the photos speak for themselves plainly enough.

Interesting NO PLANE

Interesting NO PLANE discussion.

I admit that it could hurt the Movement.
But will it hurt the truth? no.

Nothing can hurt the truth. The truth is just what it happens to be.

I agree that the PERCEPTION MANAGEMENT is more powerful than the truth.

A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.
Mark Twain

You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you can not fool all the people all of the time. possibly NOT by Abe

How could it be anything else, since 1916 there is a PERCEPTION MANAGEMENT INDUSTRY in the USA. (listen carefully, multiple times to ALEX CAREY mp3 on TUCRADIO click here) for an in-depth.

Back to the topic at hand.

Nico Haupt has made an interesting page. It should be given proper scrutiny to the same extent than the government fable of arabs piloting is read and refuted. I find it more believable, harder to refute.

look, the NO PLANES theory is just that, a theory. But its not entirely new. You truthMovement gatekeepers (hehe) have already bought into TWO no-plane-events, Pentagon and Shanksville.

I still think we need some insiders giving us hints. Hence I repeat:

we need a proper anti-secrecy-anti-spook device, a short HOWTO on ABSLOLUTE ANONYMITY POSTING,listing the tools needed, set up a SSL-PROXY-ANONYMIZER-CHAIN... maybe inside a parallel internet space


But I have absolutely NO HOPE that anyone takes my suggestion seriously or even stops for a minute to think how they could help. The trouble is that young people are too stupid and cock-sure and old people are afraid to loose cushy job/pension and property.
Only the social safety of a modern socialist country (like France or Germany!) could provide for it, yet there the incentive to change anything is too low.

over and out