In the shadow of the towers, censorship rears its ugly head

A controversial documentary entitled Loose Change, which alleges that the American government participated in the 9/11 attacks, and which was scheduled for viewing on RTÉ this month, has been cancelled at short notice.

The withdrawal of the low budget film has prompted various conspiracy theories of its own, with the internet abuzz with rumours of an online campaign by disgruntled bloggers bombarding RTÉ with emails, in an effort to cajole the national broadcaster into dumping the documentary.
It has also been claimed that RTÉ would have faced legal action if they had aired Loose Change, amid accusations that the filmmakers might not have secured permission to use copyrighted television news footage incorporated into the documentary.
However, when hotpress spoke to the film’s European distributor, Tim Sparke, he was adamant that RTRs decision not to show it is blatant censorship. “RTÉ contacted us last October and they were very enthusiastic about the film and said they wanted to buy it,” he said. “Three weeks ago RTÉ ran trailers for the film. Then it was suddenly dropped. I understand there was a major campaign to take it off the air. Clearly, huge pressure was brought to bear on RTÉ. I have great respect for them as a broadcaster and we salute them for going as far as they did.”
But RTÉ has dismissed Sparke’s claims. They say the film, which is being edited at the moment for its third version, is simply not ready for airing on television.
“Loose Change is in preparation. RTÉ has decided to postpone any decision on transmission until we have had the opportunity of looking at the new edition. It does not seem to make sense to broadcast a version which the programme-makers themselves recognise needs amendment and alteration. As to a possible date of transmission, RTÉ has to wait until we have had an opportunity of assessing the third edition,” says Peter Feeney, Head of Public Affairs Policy at RTÉ.
However, Sparke insists that RTÉ were “100% aware” of the inaccuracies when purchasing the rights to screen it.
“There are naturally deficiencies in the documentary because, as an investigative film, you can’t possibly be in possession of all the information – especially with something this big. But RTÉ were 100% aware of all of this from the onset,” proffers Sparke.
This is not the first time that a screening of the documentary has been pulled in controversial circumstances. A special screening of Loose Change was scheduled to take place in the UK’s House of Commons last June. “It was organised by ex-cabinet Minister, Michael Meacher MP, who felt fellow MPs needed to see what had ‘really happened’ on September 11. However, he had to withdraw the screening at the last minute,” claims Sparke.
Loose Change was strung together from existing news footage, fresh interviews with survivors of 9/11 and expert commentaries, by aspiring film directors Dylan Avery, Jason Bermas, and Korey Rowe, a former American solider who served in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The feature-length documentary was produced on a Compaq laptop with the aid of two design software programmes, Adobe Premiere Pro 7.0 and Effects 6.5. “The first version of Loose Change, including the laptop, footage, and other expenses, cost only $2,000,” explains Avery. “The laptop cost $1,500.”
The original version of the film was completed in 2005, but they were unable to get a distribution deal for it and opted to make it available on the internet. Loose Change has since then become an internet phenomenon, with an estimated 100 million worldwide downloads.
“We agree that our movie can’t answer all the questions that millions of people now have. Loose Change is the most downloaded film in Internet history and this is the strongest argument for an honest public debate, and a truly independent inquiry,” points out Avery.
Loose Change is not the first film to ask difficult questions about the 9/11 attacks; there are numerous documentaries and articles online offering similar theories. But perhaps the popularity of Loose Change is because it appears to have amalgamated the majority of plausible theories into one narrative thread.
The film questions the official findings of the 9/11 Commission Report and puts forward the hypothesis that the terrorist attacks were carried out by the Bush administration. “Our own government might have been directly responsible for the attacks themselves,” says Avery now.
Last year, the actor Charlie Sheen, son of Martin, similarly said that he believed the US Government had orchestrated the 9/11 attacks. A follow up CNN poll, declared to be the biggest ever undertaken by the channel, showed that 83% of Americans agreed with Sheen.
In the documentary, the eyewitness account of a janitor, working in the Twin Towers, says that he heard an explosion in the basement – before the first plane struck. He then graphically describes seeing an injured colleague running towards him with “his skin peeling off his arms”. This story corresponds with the reports of firemen interviewed for the documentary, who tell of similar explosions occurring on different levels, all the way through the tower, before its collapse – or, as the film suggests, its perfect implosion.
The documentary, which makes compulsive viewing, also claims that an estimated $160 billion dollars of gold, which was secured in the Twin Towers vaults, was secretively moved by military personnel before the attack. Again, this is supported in the documentary by an eyewitness, who said he feared he would be shot if he questioned what these military personnel were doing. After the clean-up of the Twin Towers, only approximately $200 million worth of gold was found, which is not loose change!
The film has been attacked for inaccuracies, with The Guardian recently denouncing it as a “virus sweeping the world. It has become an epidemic. Scarcely a day passes without someone possessed by the sickness.”
However, the filmmakers have now secured financial backing to complete a third version of the film. Avery says they felt a new version was needed to rectify inaccuracies and to include new material to back-up their contentious theories. “The plan is to have the movie done and in theatres by summer,” Avery told hotpress, “so we don’t compete with Spiderman 3. The Final Cut is exactly that – the final cut. I’m done making 9/11 films. I want to punish those responsible and move on with my life.”
Avery is adamant that the new version they are currently working on will confound the film’s critics. “All I can say is, stay tuned for the Final Cut. That’s how we’re responding,” he concludes.

The film can be downloaded at http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7866929448192753501