Orange County Weekly Interviews Creator of '9/11 Mysteries'

Where There's Smoke, There's No Fire -

In the five years since 9/11, a growing number of Americans have become convinced that the World Trade Center was brought down by a deliberate act of demolition carried out by the U.S. government. The so-called 9/11 conspiracy movement is growing larger by the day, aided and abetted by the work of filmmakers like Sofia, a San Diego-area director who prefers we only use her first name. Sofia’s film, 9/11 Mysteries, which screens in Newport Beach on Thursday, Nov. 2, is the first installment of a planned four-part series of feature-length documentaries alleging that the 9/11 attacks were an elaborate ruse designed to bolster public support for a prefabricated war on terror.

This movie focuses not on the hijackings but on the collapse of the Twin Towers, showing relentless footage of the falling buildings side by side with archival shots of actual demolitions. It’s a technique highly reminiscent of Oliver Stone’s incessant use of the Zapruder film in JFK: “Back and to the right, back and to the right . . . ” and while intriguing, fails to offer much in the way of actual proof. JFK might have been completely wrong but it did force the government to release thousands of classified files that have helped shed light on some of the darker chapters of U.S. history.

In that vein, whatever really happened on 9/11—and after two viewings we’re still convinced it was the work of highly motivated, highly evil hijackers—9/11 Mysteries is worth viewing if only to challenge one’s own assumptions and, hopefully, lead to greater discussion of the tragedy and more accountability from our government. I recently spoke with Sofia about her film and why so many people, including herself, are willing to give bin Laden a pass for toppling the towers.

How did you get the idea to make a documentary about 9/11?

It all began with a pilot I knew who flew Boeings for 30 years. He was watching TV that day and he said you have no idea how hard it is to fly a plane into the buildings like that; the G-forces are too high, and the plane’s wingspan is 175 feet and the building itself is only 200 feet wide. When we drive a car into a telephone pole, that is easy—but planes can’t be maneuvered as easily. The guidance for a plane has to be done slowly. The way the planes veered into the Pentagon is under question. The suggestion here is that the planes were controlled by remote and remote controlled aviation has been available for 30 years. He said there is no way he could have done that with 30 years’ experience flying planes.

Check out the link for the full interview, and click here to watch '9/11 Mysteries'.

Give bin Laden a

Give bin Laden a pass??


back to FBI wanted poster

I don't have to give bin Ladin "a pass"....

...when I decid to question my own government.

Quite apparent to all who've expressed the bravery to look for themselves, The United States Government is as filthy dirty as bin Laden. However, when one dirt bag points at another... one must wonder WHY the first dirt bag has three fingers pointing back upon himself for every finger pointing at bin Laden.

"The truth shall make you free." Why not make the truth free? We live on a priceless blue pearl, awash in a universe of fire and ice. Cut the crap.

Iran: 9/11 only "make-believe
9/11 only "make-believe," Iranian government official says

dpa German Press Agency
Published: Friday October 27, 2006

Tehran- An Iranian government official on Friday accused the US of orchestrating the attacks of September 11, 2001, saying New York's World Trade Center towers were actually blown up by a bomb rather than planes hijacked by terrorists. "What we watched on the TVs regarding the slamming of two planes into the New York Twin Towers, was in fact a make-believe scene," Deputy Culture Minister Mohammad-Hadi Homayoun was quoted by state news agency IRNA as saying, in an address to the Iran-Russia Dialogue among Civilizations Conference in Moscow.

"The sky-scrapers were destroyed through bomb explosions and afterwards the massive US media propaganda and the crusade issue began," the minister said, making reference to the controversial remarks by US President George W Bush outlining a "crusade" against terrorism following the September 11 attacks.

© 2006 dpa German Press Agency

BBC Comments on its report of hijackers alive after 9/11


Check out what it says. This isn't really a retraction of the story at all. It just basically quotes the FBI (i.e. a bunch of compulsive liars) saying it "is confident that it has positively identified the nineteen hijackers responsible for the 9/11 terrorist attacks."

And as usual, we're owning the comments...

How much longer can some people play dumb?


Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero - Harvard Task Force


The article says Oliver

The article says Oliver Stone's JFK describes the rearward motion of Kennedy in the Zapruder film as "back and to the right" which is incorrect. Costner/Garrison correctly says "Back and to the left. Back and to the left." And then it says that Sophia is willing to give bin Laden a pass??? Give me a break.

Presenting this film down in Newport..Thurs. Nov. 2nd @ 8pm FREE


A few of us hold screenings every month or so... OC weekly has been great at putting those in their "special screenings" section..

anyway, our event is mentioned at the end of this article. We'll be showing 911 Mysteries down in Newport Beach, CA on the riverboat at Ami Beaucoup lounge: 151 E. Coast Hwy on Nov. 2nd Thursday @ 8pm FREE

Just physics and science, we keep the gate wide open for the curious by staying apolitical as best possible... please come out and bring that friend that's curious but not convinced. We're hoping this venue can become home for monthly screenings, with rotating films, and always discussion time after.
spread the word to those near and behind the orange curtain!

details for event:

Gov't surveillance

While I was reading this I had a thought ...

It's been shown that the government has spied on protest groups and anti-war groups, and it's practically certain that government emloyees have been paid to infiltrate the 9-11 Truth Movement as well.

Given this very un-democratic surveillance of watchdog and protest groups - guaranteed under the Constitution - wouldn't it be most plausible to say they are spying on them because they are a perceived threat to the government?

And if they were spouting non-truths, and the government were forthcoming in providing answers to questions, would they still be as threatening?

In other words, doesn't the government surveillance legitimize even more the questions that are being asked?

Gov't Surveillance

Darn straight that makes them criminal from the first FISA defying tap.

So I hope They're reading every word, listening to every phone call, and checking for the peanuts in my shit. May they choke on it.... or learn something about upholding the Constitution they swore to defend.

"The truth shall make you free." Why not make the truth free? We live on a priceless blue pearl, awash in a universe of fire and ice. Cut the crap.

incriminating silence

>legitimize even more the questions that are being asked?

They're doing that all the time by mere silence about all the critical questions.
E.g. Bush said he saw the first plane "fly into the first building" on a TV set outside the Brooker school classroom. OK, now there's a huge controversy about this, incriminating him. But if he's innocent, why does he not just clarify it in an open and honest manner?
Same goes for Silverstein and WTC7: With all the world wondering how it collapsed, why wouldn't he say something about it, when he was the owner of it? Why not some clear statement from him about what he thinks about the collapse and it's cause?
- these are of course rethorical questions, and the answer is: because they would have to lie then!

Clarification vs Silence

Good points, and I tried to ask Larry Silverstein about that in front of his office on 9-11-06, but for some reason he didn't show up. It didn't matter that day though, because I was too busy expressing my right to demonstrate in the heart of the financial district of Manhattan.

Problem is, if they try to clarify it by giving further explanations, that may just lead to more questions. Especially so, given how obtuse Bush and Silverstein are at speaking in public or on camera. They just say shit they shouldn't and that's why a lot of this stuff is so obvious.

So their only defense is to remain silent, or perhaps if the question is asked brush it aside and say it is nonsense. It's simply stall tactics, so people can use the "we won't know for sure for another 40 years" defense.

Their arrogance will be their downfall.

Gov't surveilance

Isn't it ironic that the real criminals{certain gov't agencies} would want to watch peacefull law abiding citizens?

What always puzzled me was

What always puzzled me was how the second plane to hit the WTC banks rather abruptly just at the last possible second before going into the structure. It didn't seem like something a human one second away from a horrible fiery death would have the presence of mind to do. This gives credibility to the remote-control theory. It was no doubt necessary, otherwise the wing might have sheared off and ended up outside the building. Then there'd be no guarantee of secrecy, if "ordinary" people came into possesion of parts of it, with serial numbers. It would have given away the whole operation.

Flight 77 part

There's the story that a driver near the Pentagon when it was struck had a very small (plane-) part smash through his /her windshield. It must have been a wing part since it originated from the flying 'thing' hitting the lamp poles. And the article said it was for sure not from a Boeing 757 wing, they also had photographs of it.

I always wondered as well

I always wondered as well why they just didn't simply come out and say that they believed that there may have been secondary devices in the sub structures of the towers.... like in th 93 bombing.

It would have been much more believable and covered their arses on the witnesses.

they knew there were several people reporting explosions..... can not figure it out

"Fails to offer much in the way of real proof"???

Unlike the official story, eh, which also fails to offer much in the way of real proof considering all evidence was quickly disposed of . . . damn filmmakers should have absconded with summa that steel lying around on 911 and had it tested first, I guess.

And they are comparing this documentary to "JFK" - a fictionalized account and basically finding fault with it because the government has not acted?

Well, at least they covered it. Guess they had to. They didn't attack Sofia outright, so I will give them a pass for that, but what a pathetically wimpy toad piece of journalism.

I've just got to say, sh#t on that!!

Bush Family Planning Escape to Paraquay

dont be evil.

Former Intelligence Agent Says Google In Bed With CIA
Steele also sounds off on 9/11 doubts

Paul Joseph Watson/Prison | October 27 2006

A former clandestine services officer for the CIA who also maintains close relationships with top Google representatives says that the company is "in bed with" the intelligence agency and the U.S. government. He has also gone public on his deep suspicions about the official explanation behind 9/11.
Robert David Steele appeared on the nationally syndicated Alex Jones radio show and began by voicing his deep doubts about the official 9/11 story.

While Steele stopped short of saying 9/11 was a complete inside job, he agreed that the evidence points to the overwhelming complicity of the Bush administration.

"The U.S. government did not properly investigate this and there are more rocks to be turned over," said Steele adding, "I'm absolutely certain that WTC 7 was brought down by controlled demolition and that as far as I'm concerned means that this case has not been properly investigated."

Goggle bombing

Goggle bombing from liberal websites?
We are posting a list of links that are the same in order to change what people get when they search for candidates on Google.
Google flushes every two weeks to re-index.
I've got this posted on mine on the left below my "Mother Jones" ad.

Here's the article...
Here's the code...

If you do it, don't forget to ping your site...

this is why they collapsed

Why? Because Deputy Chief

Why? Because Deputy Chief "I Still Believe In The Pancake Theory" Dunn is a drunk?

Deputy Chief Dunn (Ret.) should lay off the bottle.

"Since the end of WWII builders designed most of the concrete from the modern high-rise constriction."

The true threat to liberty comes not from terrorists but from our political leaders whose natural inclination is to seize upon any excuse to diminish them.
~~ Walter Williams, Nightly Business Report, September 2001

duplicate post removed

duplicate post removed

Thanks for this , DZ! This

Thanks for this , DZ! This was a very good interview, one that should be passed along to others.

Did anyone else notice the link immediately below the interview with Sofia to the following review written by a recent arrival from Bizarro World?

A Graphic Adaptation
A comic book based on The 9/11 Commission Report outdoes the original
Thursday, October 26, 2006 - 3:00 pm

Some choice excerpts:

"I shit you not. According to the Scripps survey, one-third of Americans are pathologically paranoid, and one out of six are, well, insane. For them, then—the conspiratorial and the crazed, and I suppose for the rest of us for whom bureaucratic prose gives us brain fade—maybe a comic book will help."

I doubt it. Bonca is beyond anything modern science can offer.

"The 9/11 Report: A Graphic Adaptation is one of those books, as comic book icon Stan Lee suggests on the back cover, which will likely be a source for future generations of high school kids to learn about the attacks, and it’s certainly an honorable, nonpartisan addition to the growing body of stuff that’s out there for adults, as well."

What a frightening thought.

The true threat to liberty comes not from terrorists but from our political leaders whose natural inclination is to seize upon any excuse to diminish them.
~~ Walter Williams, Nightly Business Report, September 2001