Which 9/11 program should be the first to be shown on TV?

[StopThe9/11CoverUp]

I don't know what the rest of you think, but maybe before we all send e-mails letters asking for Loose Change to be broadcast, perhaps we could vote on what program should be the eye opener for people seeing it for the first time?

I personally think 9/11 Eyewitness would be best shown first as it uses Eyewitness footage of all 3 buildings coming down and includes all the scientific info too. The sound of the booms on the footage is quite haunting but undeniable, as is the pyroclastic flow demonstration.

Because Loose Change covers many of the theories about 9/11, there are many sites that discredit the program because of some of the weaker points in it. Plus there is a site called screw Loose Change ( a poor crack at debunking it by picking on trivial points). So I think it best that the first program to be shown should be a very strong one, with ALL of the strongest points. While at the same time leaving people to ask to see more and being able to find more ie: live footage of survivors talking to newscrews about 7th floor explosions.

What do you guys think the first program on Mainstream TV should be? And why do you think that your choice would be best?

Look forward to your replies!!

Ade.

[SHERITON HOTEL]

I think '911 Mysteries' has to be first choice, followed by a debate between 911 official story proponents (if you can find one) and 911 truthers.

[scubadiver]

I personally think it has to be "Press For Truth". Do we want to ease people into 9/11 or shock them!

[Stefan]

I agree with scuba- press for truth is the most proffesionally produced and also the easiest to start with. It will lead people to want to look further into 9/11 for themselves.

Loose change can be too easily undone by some smart alec pointing to just a couple of the small inacuraacies and huge asusmption it makes and discreding the rest of the good info. It will polarise and scare many people off.

The bredth of loose change can also be a bad thing- it deals with a lot of stuff there is no obious answer for but provides one. The latest copy I saw still talks about computer voice sythesising programmes as a fact (I'm not saying they weren't used- but them existing is not proof they were used), talking about cruise missiles and the pentagon (far from clear what hit the pentagon) and many other fringe areas.

I think sticking with the simple stuff is best-

I actually like "Improbable Collapse" quite a lot- seems more sober than others, and touches some areas other films doesn't- it goes into the NIST tests quite well and reveals how they prove nothing.

9/11 Mysteries is the most in depth but is kind of cheesey in it's presentation, which might turn a lot of people off.

[StopThe9/11CoverUp]

excellent this is good feedback guys, we need to be reading from the same page with what we want to do and this is a good way to start.

Press for truth is very impressive I agree and I would be more than happy if this was the first program aired.

You can almost see people after watching it thinking " The US Administration knew about it?" before they even see Eyewitness or mysteries.

Instead of writing or e-mailing TV networks asking them to show it. Do any of you think it would be a good idea if (after we decide on 1st show) we each sent a letter WITH the dvd on masse to the networks?

Ade.

[marky 54]

[StopThe9/11CoverUp]

Yes there is the chance they would edit it. But unlike people not knowing that the naudet program had been edited all of us WILL know it has been edited. That would work for us because then we have a little bit more proof that people are trying to cover certain things up. It would actually be good thing!!

Which reminds me, i must search for the uncut unedited naudet program.

Ade.

[wickywoowoo]

The problem with trying a "subtle" approach to 9/11 is that Michael Moore did a subtle approach with his 9/11 movie but it was too subtle (purposeful or not, I am not sure) and people took it as incompetance and not anything more.

It would need to be a program that hits hard but with provable, documented fact or at least very strong argument so 9/11 Mysteries or 9/11 Eyewitness (the original) seem ideal choices.

I haven't seen the new version of 9/11 Eyewitness but I read on the site that it includes new evidence that "WMD's were used". Is Rick Siegel a no planer?

[Light Infantree]

911 Mysteries (Demolitions) is only the 1st of 3 (or more?) movies that are planned. It deals mainly with the towers and the probable cause of collapse. Though I think it is the best made film currently available I am not so sure its the '1st choice' as such. Perhaps the 'best' movie has yet to be made?

When ever I am recommending 911 films to anyone I tend to go for Loose Change first followed by 911 Mysteries as its such a great spirited film - the end is very moving and motivating to get out and do some truthing. Its great to consolidate one area of research (dems) after first seeing a global overview (LC2)

As for the question of which movie to push for? Does it really matter that much? The fact we are knocking on the doors of the media is a good for a start. But to play along if you held a boxcutter to my throatl I would say LC2 as it covers more ground and opens with False Flag Terror which draws in the viewer superbly.