Alex Cox in Guardian on F93

[Ally]

Go on Alex


Flight 93: special internet edition

Alex Cox
Thursday May 11, 2006
The Guardian


United 93 is the second film about 9/11 released in the past six months - the first being a TV movie called Flight 93, hence the title change. Both films tell the same story: the official version of the events on board the third plane seized by hijackers on September 11 2001, as presented to the president by the Kean Commission.
The official reception to Paul Greengrass's film was ecstatic. Mainstream critics adored it. Columnists, rightwing and liberal alike, applauded its gravitas and sensitivity. It was described as unifying, and uplifting, at a time when the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are going badly. The studio, Universal, opened a web forum, for fans to discuss the picture.


The result highlights the difficulty of trying to manage online "buzz". Although the mainstream media treated the Kean Commission report with reverence, its name is mud on the web. On the internet, Kean's version of events has been dissected from all sides. His report is likened to that of another discredited commission: the Warren one. Posts on the message board were believed to have run as high as 10 to one against the film.
The internet pullulates with blogs and sites and forums dedicated to "alternative" 9/11 scenarios. Very occasionally, one of them leads to a page about the conspiracy of George Bush and alien reptiles, but many more are considered and informative, with copious hyperlinks (the 9/11 timeline at www.cooperativeresearch.org, for example). One writer and researcher, Michael C Ruppert, is convinced that the atrocities were orchestrated by the Bush administration, from the White House and then the Bunker, on account of a fear of "Peak Oil".

To a sober Englishwoman, ma'am, I know this may seem strange. But a lot of Americans believe it (or something like it): polls tell us that 70% of them don't trust the "official" version, which may explain some of the stick United 93 has been getting on the internet.

The internet posters want us to pay attention to the evidence they say the Kean Commission, and the films, ignored: specifically, that of people on the ground who saw flight 93 tailed by another aircraft, and the apparent explosion of the aircraft in mid-air (which would suggest it was shot down by the air force - something Donald Rumsfeld briefly said, apparently in error). Several eye-witnesses say they heard the plane explode in the air. The "Flight 93 Crash Theory Home Page" claims a secondary debris field eight miles from the crash site: its sources are CNN and a Pennsylvania newspaper.

One blogger says it is as though Greengrass had taken the British government's report on Bloody Sunday and made it the basis for his own movie. Another mutters darkly about Britannia getting overly involved with Uncle Sam, faking dossiers just to please him, going to war to keep the romance alive, even descending to make patriotic American films in a London studio ... All of which made Universal's United 93 discussion forum a pretty interesting site - at least until May 3, when Universal abruptly shut it down.

(PS: Universal last year released the Iraq war movie Jarhead, and this year is set to bring The Battle of Fallujah, starring Harrison Ford, to our screens. It is also a subsidiary of the military-industrial-nuclear contractor GE)

www.alexcox.com
http://film.guardian.co.uk/news/story/0,,1772434,00.html

[Andrew Johnson]

Oops - he mentions nothing about WTC7 etc - only reptiles. What a shame. Referring to things "being on the internet is" also misleading. Is this on his forum then?

[James C]

I think this is quite exciting. To make the front page of the film section of The Guardian is better than nothing.

http://film.guardian.co.uk/

OK, so reptiles and such like are mentioned but one has to start sowing the seeds. To mention WTC7 when discussing Flight 93 would not be appropriate since joe average will dismiss it as irrelevant.

Good on you Alex.

Interesting that he introduces the subject of peak oil. Something that many people on this site condemn the discussion of.

[grahamb]

I've been reading the posts here for a month or so and find it all very interesting.

Have you read this from the Guardian 7 May? She swallows the offical version hook line and sinker, but makes some good points about the next war.

http://film.guardian.co.uk/features/featurepages/0,,1769595,00.html

Graham

[Andrew Johnson]

Oh! I missed the link to the Guardian. Hmm well - we'll see! I hope that "seeds" have been sown rather than "eggs laid"!!

[TimmyG]

well atleast the guardian is starting to take notice

this is a good thing

we need to push more rational arguements at them and pursuade them to not consider the reptile folk to be part of the 9/11 truth movement

[kookomula]

I've been reading about 9/11 for sometime and until you mentioned it have not read anything re. F93 and WTC7.

This is a good article and surely a step closer to what we have being waiting for. From reading the boards in the US I do really believe that they are making things happen over there now. Maybe they cannot be ignored any longer.

This is the first thing I came across re. F93 and WTC7:

Was Flight 93 targeted for WTC 7?

Browsing the 'net tonite i came across a page by Barry Chamish ( first time i've encountered him ),
who stated that Flt 93 was to take out Larry Silversteins building 7...

This makes sense to me....all the other planes hit their targets (assumption, of course ),
and WTC 7 was definitely prepped ala the same collapse scenario as the Towers.

So, it might have played out like this:
- Flt 93 took off 41 minutes behind schedule....the passengers figured out what was going to happen, and stormed the cockpit,
resulting in the crash...
-OR-
- Some one got nervous about Flt 93 being late, and took it out as a precaution so that the passengers couldn't retake the plane.

The delay in WTC 7 collapse was due to them figuring out what to do, since their diversion (Flt 93) was gone.

i haven't browsed all of the ATS 9/11 posts, so don't know if this has been covered...many good posts amongst all the threads i have looked at, tho.

Other miscellaneous questions.....
Does the 757/767 cockpit cabin door open into the cabin or out into the galley?

Any fueling/maintenance records for the planes used on 9-11 that showed they were at the airports?
The BTS discrepancy thing.....

[Andrew Johnson]

koo,

Never heard that F93 was targeted for WTC7. There is a rumour it was targeted at the Capitol, but someone in the military sussed what was going on and ordered a shoot down.

In any case, I think it would have been a very difficult flight path to target 7 - although once the towers were down, it might have been easier!

[ian neal]

Welcome James

[ian neal]

[TimmyG]

hey. I don't hate people who believe in reptoids and such. I welcome these people to the discussion.

but when adressing the media I just feel we have to make it clear that we are either completely independent individuals... or if we are writing on behalf of a 'group' we have to make it clear where we stand. And that where we stand should be based on as much real evidence as possible.
There's enough I feel, to bring this out into the open and expose the real perpetrators of 9/11

Illuminati reptiods and such may well exist, i've just not seen any significant evidence to suggest they do.

hmm.. i see what you're saying tho. To me it's kinda a tricky one. I'm keen to get the truth out and some of these more extreme reality theories are pretty baseless and provide an excuse for people to dismiss anything remotely non-mainstream. At the same time I don't want to dismiss people because they have different beliefs

maybe i should have said 'repitile theories' as opposed to 'reptile folk'