Avery's origional film

[JAStewart]

I had a thought. As you all know Avery was planning on releasing a film about 9/11 that showed him and his friends finding out a conspiracy behind it, this piece was to be entirely fictional (as his current 'docu' is)

But I had a thought - wouldn't this still be totally offensive to the victims of 9/11?

 

[Rawkarma]

Absolutely. Anything that starts life in the vacuous mind of Avery is bound to offend anyone with intelligence, but primarily, and rightly, those that lost someone on 9/11.

LC was, and always has been the pet project Avery initially intended. I fail to see the distinction when Avery and Co state that LC 'was' originally a 'fictional' film -- it's never been anything but that.

 

[The Doc]

Welcome aboard Rawkarma

I'm already impressed.

Avery started writing fiction - and continued to write fiction. I also think it would be safe to say he still is.

 

[alexg]

Welcome aboard Rawkarma

I'm already impressed.

Avery started writing fiction - and continued to write fiction. I also think it would be safe to say he still is.

What do you think he believes, privately, at this point? I got the impression earlier that he knew parts of his movie were incorrect and misleading but rationalized it by some twisted path which rested heavily on 'we are just asking questions' - all the while thinking it probably was an inside job even if he didn't have the details right.

Now I'm not so sure. I wonder if he really has serious doubts but is just stuck on this course. Consider what he would be giving up were he to recant now! It would almost be like confessing to a serious crime, and maybe you could scratch the 'almost'. It would seem to be a terrible prospect for a young man to face.

Perhaps he has moved on to a more mature rationalization which has to do with attacking Bush and the neo-cons for their many 'dirty deeds' even if they didn't do 911.

I'd be interested if anyone can shed any light on this question. It facinates me.

 

[Shrinker]

What do you think he believes, privately, at this point? I got the impression earlier that he knew parts of his movie were incorrect and misleading but rationalized it by some twisted path which rested heavily on 'we are just asking questions' - all the while thinking it probably was an inside job even if he didn't have the details right.

Now I'm not so sure. I wonder if he really has serious doubts but is just stuck on this course. Consider what he would be giving up were he to recant now! It would almost be like confessing to a serious crime, and maybe you could scratch the 'almost'. It would seem to be a terrible prospect for a young man to face.

Perhaps he has moved on to a more mature rationalization which has to do with attacking Bush and the neo-cons for their many 'dirty deeds' even if they didn't do 911.

I'd be interested if anyone can shed any light on this question. It facinates me.

Every time I've seen him introduce himself or his film recently he's put barely any emphasis on the conspiracy angle, and made a big deal out of saying that the government were 'at least criminally negligent.' That's not even LIHOP. Give it time and we'll find LC:FC merely sets out to prove George Bush is an idiot. It'll probably fail to achieve even that...

 

[Rawkarma]

What do you think he believes, privately, at this point?

I think Avery believes now what he did to begin with: that there is no evidence to support the claim that 9/11 was an 'inside job'. His documentary reflects this, as it contains no evidence.

Hard to imagine even Avery could develop the belief, categorically, and unequivocally, in a conspiracy after allegedly doing some 'investigative' work on the internets. The glaring lack of any evidence in LC contradicts the statement he has made about being convinced after researching 9/11.

He knew he had nothing conclusive and he still knows this, and from his recent behavior, he is finding it increasingly difficult to defend his position on 9/11 and his documentary.

The more notoriety his film gets, the more people will question its inaccuracy. And more people will question his motives.

 

[alexg]

Every time I've seen him introduce himself or his film recently he's put barely any emphasis on the conspiracy angle, and made a big deal out of saying that the government were 'at least criminally negligent.' That's not even LIHOP. Give it time and we'll find LC:FC merely sets out to prove George Bush is an idiot. It'll probably fail to achieve even that...

Interesting. So he actually says 'at least criminally negligent'? Then he does have serious doubts and for a guy in his position to have such doubts is pretty close to a death knell. I fear those in the mvmt., more seriously committed, will convince him to just STFU about his doubts and lay low if he has nothing good to say.

 

[alexg]

I think Avery believes now what he did to begin with: that there is no evidence to support the claim that 9/11 was an 'inside job'. His documentary reflects this, as it contains no evidence.

Hard to imagine even Avery could develop the belief, categorically, and unequivocally, in a conspiracy after allegedly doing some 'investigative' work on the internets. The glaring lack of any evidence in LC contradicts the statement he has made about being convinced after researching 9/11.

He knew he had nothing conclusive and he still knows this, and from his recent behavior, he is finding it increasingly difficult to defend his position on 9/11 and his documentary.

The more notoriety his film gets, the more people will question its inaccuracy. And the more people will question his motives.

You think he never believed it? I'm not so sure. Are you saying that when his work of fiction was mistaken by many to be real he simply went along with it so he could ride the wave to whatever fame and fortune he might get from it? Lot of nuts seem to buy it, maybe he came to as well after he saw how many 'unanswered questions' he had compiled. I don't know. You make a good point.

ETA I think he probably thought that some of LC was bunk, some was speculative, some was probable, and that out of all of it there was enough that was solid for the CT as a whole to fly.

 

[Rawkarma]

Are you saying that when his work of fiction was mistaken by many to be real he simply went along with it so he could ride the wave to whatever fame and fortune he might get from it? Lot of nuts seem to buy it

Avery had an idea for a fictional film born from an avid interest in film making and ran with it. When he found the irresistible wave of enthusiasm from the twoof movement, he simply rode the wave on the sea of sheeple to present day. Nice meal ticket.

.

 

[Myriad]

Avery's one chance to use LC as the start of a film career is to disavow any intent to document the truth and claim retroactively that it was all fiction after all.

HOLLYWOOD: Our business here is to entertain people by making ◊◊◊◊ up. What do you bring to the table?

AVERY (CHOICE 1): I made a documentary exposing that 9/11 was an inside job. Turns out none of it was true. But I'll do better next time.

AVERY (CHOICE 2): I made a film about 9/11 being an inside job, and the fans like totally believed in the ◊◊◊◊ I made up, they were all into it and talked about it for months and wore t-shirts and everything.

Therefore, expect Avery to disavow the trooth in 5, 4, 3...

(Note: coundown units not specified; could be weeks, months, or years.)

Respectfully,
Myriad

 

[Ripley Twenty-Nine]

Avery had an idea for a fictional film born from an avid interest in film making and ran with it. When he found the irresistible wave of enthusiasm from the twoof movement, he simply rode the wave on the sea of sheeple to present day. Nice meal ticket.

.

I don't believe that. I believe that he actually started to believe that there was some weird stuff going on with 9/11, compiled a list of the 'anomolies' and made a movie about it. His movie essentially boiled down to, 'Hey, this is strange, isn't it?' 'How about this?' 'Hmmm... Wonder what was going on here?'.

I believe what he says; that he was just 'asking questions', because he hadn't done enough research to know that there was mundane explanations for most of it. Now he has those mundane explanations shoved in his face on a daily basis, but it's way too late for him to admit that most of his questions have been answered...

...So now all he needs is to find more questions to ask.

 

[Rawkarma]

I liken LC, with no disrespect intended to the victims and family of 9/11, and only in the manner of how irrational behavior can become prevalent, to The Blair Witch Project.

And for this reason: When I first saw the Blair Witch Project in the theater on it's opening-day -- I was browbeaten into seeing it by a female that shall remain nameless -- what first took me aback, was not the film, but the mass hysteria it generated, not only in the theater, but on the internets during that time.

The film was completely fictional, and yet the amount of people that bought it right out-of-the-boxoffice and then indulged in more irrational behavior online, was stupefying.

I read many website's that claimed to show 'real' evidence that the people in the film were indeed missing; more sites by individual's that were not, in anyway related to the movie, started making their own spinoff sites claiming the very same 'evidence' was indeed true, giving validity to the fictional evidence in the minds of many.

The website' s that purposely and with full knowledge of it's fakery, purported to show actual artifacts recovered from the scene where they disappeared, and the infamous unearthed material: the video tapes, knew what they were doing, and what they were playng to. Not long after, the same spinoff sites, made by people that were never connected to anyone that was involved in the making of that movie, were spouting ridiculous endorsements of said evidence, citing: they 'knew' it was true and they 'knew' friends, or relatives of the people connected to the actors/actress in the movie.

It is not difficult to sell something to the public, and with little to no evidence to back it up. You can just sit back and then let it run on it's own and in the minds and hands of it's devout believers.

 

[Rawkarma]

I don't believe that. I believe that he actually started to believe that there was some weird stuff going on with 9/11, compiled a list of the 'anomolies' and made a movie about it. His movie essentially boiled down to, 'Hey, this is strange, isn't it?' 'How about this?' 'Hmmm... Wonder what was going on here?'.

I think you're affording Avery far too much credit. He has zero credibility to date, and zero apologies etc. I highly doubt anyone would put together a film so blatantly dishonest -- Loose Chage, the original version -- if their motives were originally legit.

When I find myself going

Hey, this is strange, isn't it?' 'How about this?' 'Hmmm... Wonder what was going on here?

I lay off on the mass speculation and quote mining in the name of 'twoof', and formulate my opinion overtime and as the evidence presents itself.

I still firmly believe that Avery knew he had nothing, and knows he has nothing.

 

[T.A.M.]

RawKarma:

welcome aboard.

Unfortunately, what D.A. and LTW do have, is money and a certain amount of cyberspace fame, all courtesy of the 9/11 tragedy.

TAM (The Artistic Macrophage)

 

[Rawkarma]

Yes, I agree. They have gained notoriety and this has lined their pockest. Opportunists will always use even then most tragic of circumstances, such as 9/11 to line their pockets -- and with seemingly, no shame.

Money, thermite, cropped pictures won't buy you one thing, and it has much more value to me: respect.

Thanks for the welcome.

 

[sleahead]

I think you're affording Avery far too much credit. He has zero credibility to date, and zero apologies etc. I highly doubt anyone would put together a film so blatantly dishonest -- Loose Chage, the original version -- if their motives were originally legit.

Actually, Rawkarma, I believe you are affording Avery too much credit in terms of his brainpower. After all, we're talking about the man who, for a short time in the not too distant past, thought he had found the flight data recorders for flights AA11 and UA175 in a museum in Albany, New York. I think he believed much of the of the content of the original Loose Change. Don't underestimate Avery's stupidity and welcome to the forum.

 

[Rawkarma]

Noted. You have a point, and two things spring to mind: 1) he seemed to have an issue with the meaning of simile in a recent documentary, 2) in the same docu, he illustrated (with hand gestures just to bring home to point) that flight 93 should have been exposing it's tail section if it did crash there -- you could go on and on with the bs he has spouted.

That being said, giving Avery credit for 'originally starting out with genuine intent', seems unlikely to me. I find it extremely likely he knew his film was entirely fictional, not just from concept, but to the release of LC. One can imagine how he found it, and still finds it, extremely difficult to explain his conspiracy theory of 9/11 in LC, and furthermore, difficult to articulate it when he is on camera.

I would say that shouting fanciful ideas, like flight data recorders and whatnot from the twoof movement podium, is merely his way of riding that meal ticket.

You don't need to be a genius to milk the herd, and to keep the charade going.

However, here is something you won't ever catch a LC devotee ending a post with: I could be wrong.

Not likely, but it's possible.

I guess.

 

[Ripley Twenty-Nine]

That being said, giving Avery credit for 'originally starting out with genuine intent', seems unlikely to me. I find it extremely likely he knew his film was entirely fictional, not just from concept, but to the release of LC. One can imagine how he found it, and still finds it, extremely difficult to explain his conspiracy theory of 9/11 in LC, and furthermore, difficult to articulate it when he is on camera.

If that is true, then he would have to be the biggest fool in the world to have told the world that Loose Change started out as a fictional movie, then turned into a 'documentary'.

I absolutely believe that at one point, he thought he was uncovering the 'truth'. I also believe that he now knows he was mostly wrong, but is in way too deep to stop now.

 

[The Demon's Head]

If that is true, then he would have to be the biggest fool in the world to have told the world that Loose Change started out as a fictional movie, then turned into a 'documentary'.

I absolutely believe that at one point, he thought he was uncovering the 'truth'. I also believe that he now knows he was mostly wrong, but is in way too deep to stop now.

Avery probably did think he was finding incriminating evidence against the USG. Turns out, he didn't. Avery lied. Too large of a fan base for Avery to stop now.

 

[tacodaemon]

Avery started writing fiction - and continued to write fiction. I also think it would be safe to say he still is.

Hey, I'd rather see fiction (acknowledged or unacknowledged) from Dylan than more of his slice-of-life videos featuring Bermas striding shirtlessly around the Dumber Than Words homestead north of Oneonta.