Fight fire with fire, or idiocy with logic: JREF project?

If there is a human failing that most endangers and inhibits the growth and security of societies it has to be complacency. Complacency is a mindset, but from this particular mindset sometimes comes an insidious outgrowth; that of certainty.

Certainty can be simultaneously comforting and deadly. On one fair autumn morning the populace of a perfectly normal place, citizens and government alike, relaxed and embraced certainty as they had every morning prior. On this morning they were certain of many things, but here are a few specific ones:

They were certain that murderous political/theological radicals, or terrorists, were a strange people in a far off strange land.

Certain that their airports were secure.

Certain that any threat on an airliner would have to be on an airplane coming from a less secure foreign airport.

Certain that the primary threat to air travelers lives was from remotely or time detonated bombs.

Certain that if a plane was hijacked the hijackers would not be able to fly the plane and would thus not be inclined to kill the pilot.

Certain that the pilot being left alive and at the controls would switch the transponder to the 7500 frequency alerting the FAA of the hijacking.

Certain that the hijackers would want to go to a remote airport and thus that there would be time to plan a reaction.

Certain that the hijackers would need the passengers alive as collateral for whatever demands they would make.

Certain that since the hijacking would be largely for publicity there would be no need to try and hide the airliners whereabouts.

Certain that at the end of it all the hijackers would want to walk away from the event alive.

These were the things that the perfectly normal people, in that perfectly normal place, were certain of on that perfectly normal morning, Tuesday the 11th of September, 2001.
 
Last edited:
My opinion...

If you are going to make a film that is worthwhile, and will reach your target audience, you need to beat the truthers at their own game.

I think you need to make in know up front that the film is not about "defending BUSH", it isn't about "helping Cheney". You need to spin it so the audience knows that you are like them...you have your doubts about Iraq, you have your misgivings about the BUSH admin, and the USG...you know there were warnings...

TAM:)
 
T.A.M. said:
My opinion...

If you are going to make a film that is worthwhile, and will reach your target audience, you need to beat the truthers at their own game.

I think you need to make in know up front that the film is not about "defending BUSH", it isn't about "helping Cheney". You need to spin it so the audience knows that you are like them...you have your doubts about Iraq, you have your misgivings about the BUSH admin, and the USG...you know there were warnings...

TAM:)
Click to expand...

That's a very good point, TAM, although I would avoid the use of the word, "spin". It is not spin to simply tell the truth (the real truth, not "troof" or "Truth", etc.)

Troofers seem to think in black and white terms only - they seem to think that if you are not a troofer, you are, by default, a Bush-lover, a neo-con, a government lackey, a paid shill, etc., and they cannot seem to comprehend that one's political views do not necessarily (or rationally) have any bearing on one's critical thinking skills or one's view of the events of September 11, 2001.

(A good example of this, in reverse, was the 9/11 Mysteries video, in which the opening scene had that chubby guy dishonestly profess to be a "Republican" in order to try to spin that piece of crap video as factual via the unwritten subtext that "Hey, if even I, a U.S. Republican, can see this, it must be true, and you should believe me because I'm a Republican.")

That said, I agree with you that the message that this is not about Dems v. Repubs; that it is not about Libs v. Conservatives, is important. It's about facts and evidence v. conspiracy theories that have no basis in reality, but yes, many (if not most) of us who insist upon facts and evidence are not Bush supporters.
 
Travis said:
If there is a human failing that most endangers and inhibits the growth and security of societies it has to be complacency. Complacency is a mindset, but from this particular mindset sometimes comes an insidious outgrowth; that of certainty.

Certainty can be simultaneously comforting and deadly. On one fair autumn morning the populace of a perfectly normal place, citizens and government alike, relaxed and embraced certainty as they had every morning prior. On this morning they were certain of many things, but here are a few specific ones:

They were certain that murderous political/theological radicals, or terrorists, were a strange people in a far off strange land.

Certain that their airports were secure.

Certain that any threat on an airliner would have to be on an airplane coming from a less secure foreign airport.

Certain that the primary threat to air travelers lives was from remotely or time detonated bombs.

Certain that if a plane was hijacked the hijackers would not be able to fly the plane and would thus not be inclined to kill the pilot.

Certain that the pilot being left alive and at the controls would switch the transponder to the 7500 frequency alerting the FAA of the hijacking.

Certain that the hijackers would want to go to a remote airport and thus that there would be time to plan a reaction.

Certain that the hijackers would need the passengers alive as collateral for whatever demands they would make.

Certain that since the hijacking would be largely for publicity there would be no need to try and hide the airliners whereabouts.

Certain that at the end of it all the hijackers would want to walk away from the event alive.

These were the things that the perfectly normal people, in that perfectly normal place, were certain of on that perfectly normal morning, Tuesday the 11th of September, 2001.
Click to expand...

Holy hand-grenades batman!

Opening monologue, played with images of hijackers walking through customs etc?

Who wants to do the voiceover?
 
I wouldn't want to do any voice-overs in english, at least not until the Chef-accent goes retro.
 
Undesired Walrus said:
Holy hand-grenades batman!

Opening monologue, played with images of hijackers walking through customs etc?

Who wants to do the voiceover?
Click to expand...

Wow, playing that over the black and white security footage is exactly what I had in mind.

Is everyone cool with my idea for the title, Precisely Ordered Irrationality? Or should I keep that for my own project?

In case anyone is wondering, the idea springs from what so many of the 9/11 Conspiracy Theories make me think of them; as irrationality nicely and precisely ordered for the unaware to consume.
 
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=86350

The simplicity of this thread (cause of black smoke) made me think. We need to keep in mind the the target audience and not make something that's going to blow right over their heads.

Although I find most threads informative we do tend to get carried away sometimes with the technical aspects. Although that's fine for here I fear that it will only confuse an already confusing subject for many.

I think this should be considered when a potential script is made and perhaps a collective review would be in order.
 
I will write up the script and offer it up for collective review.
 
Great stuff perps!

I look forward to seeing it.

Quick Question: Is there some scale model that can be built and thus filmed that can demonstate, however minimalist, the collapse of the WTC? Some science experts here would be of use in how to achieve such a model....

Although if someone can build a 110 floor steel framed skyscraper, cool..
 
Woohoo, things seem to be getting in order. Though unfortunately it seems that there is little left for me to do! I guess I'll just be one of those who reviews the script now.
 
Undesired Walrus said:
Great stuff perps!

I look forward to seeing it.

Quick Question: Is there some scale model that can be built and thus filmed that can demonstate, however minimalist, the collapse of the WTC? Some science experts here would be of use in how to achieve such a model....

Although if someone can build a 110 floor steel framed skyscraper, cool..
Click to expand...

Scale model = Bad. A computer simulation would be better, but is probably beyond many of the members here, if not in technical detail in time available to dedicate to the project.

But scale models are bad, because they cannot accurately portray the collapse of the Twin Towers. This is for all the same reasons as we frequently mock the truthers suggestions of building scale models to 'test' the collapse.
 
Folks;

So far we have a concept on how to approach our audience, and an offer (greatly appreciated) to write the script.

Should we not brainstorm on an outline of topics, facts, evidence, etc...to use?

Or have I missed that conversation somewhere?

TAM:)
 
For instance, perhaps the opening should be just a brief recalling or go over of what happened that day, then we take the audience back a little to give them some background on Al-Qaeda activity prior to 2001.

I think all the warnings the admin (Clinton and Bush) were given in the months and perhaps a year or more prior to 9/11 including the available PDB docs should be covered. We are not trying to say there were no warnings, and I think by being honest, and making obvious the mistakes, etc...it will add legitimacy to the piece as a whole.

TAM:)

I guess what I am trying to say is this. If we make this, it will be MOST effective, if we include alot of the truthers arguements within, but not in an adversarial way, rather, in an educational way. For instance, bring up the CIA link to Al-Qaeda, but clarify when it occured, what elements of the Afghan Fighters were involved, etc...

Defeat the truther arguments not just through saying they are false, but through educating the audience on what the actual truth on each matter is.
 
Last edited:
T.A.M. said:
For instance, perhaps the opening should be just a brief recalling or go over of what happened that day, then we take the audience back a little to give them some background on Al-Qaeda activity prior to 2001.
Click to expand...

Often what amuses me about the Truthers is their complete ignorance of Islamic extremists and the history.

I propose some extracts from Mawdudi's extremist interpretation to the Koran (He had every single line and interpreted it to justify political ends). We could have it over the hijakers going through customs, videos of planes taking off, people ON THE OBSERVATION DECK OF THE WTC!! And then some Syed Qutb remarks... With Adagio for strings or soemthing....

I'm brilliant huh?
 
Undesired Walrus said:
Often what amuses me about the Truthers is their complete ignorance of Islamic extremists and the history.

I propose some extracts from Mawdudi's extremist interpretation to the Koran (He had every single line and interpreted it to justify political ends). We could have it over the hijakers going through customs, videos of planes taking off, people ON THE OBSERVATION DECK OF THE WTC!! And then some Syed Qutb remarks... With Adagio for strings or soemthing....

I'm brilliant huh?
Click to expand...

After that we finish with the Islamist's rantings done to Adagio for Strings and follow American 11. All from the ATC and NEADS POV.

So it starts with Boston Center getting no response when they instruct AA11 to "proceed to three five zero feet" but never get a response. Then they see the transponder get turned off, the plane drifts off course and then they hear that strange transmission.

Then NEADS is notified and we follow their efforts to track down the plane from their POV.

Phone calls start coming from the plane and those would be heard as everyone tries to put together the pieces that's going on.

Then we show how ATC and NEADS loses AA11 while it was on a trajectory heading for JFK airport.

Then in lower Manhattan we get a shot Jules Naudet raising his camera in response to the noise of the plane flying over and tracks it.

We hear Flight Attendant Amy Sweeney's voice:

"I see water. I see buildings. We are flying low. We are flying very, very low. We are flying way too low. -pause- Oh my God, we are way too low."

All goes silent

The explosion, still silent, from the impact is seen as a reflection in the lens on Naudet's camera.

All fades to black.

Then a title card.

8:46:40 AM


Then we jump to Afghanistan in order to cover the history of Bin Laden and his first crusade against "heathens."
 
Last edited:
Great stuff Travis.

People, if anyone wishes to make a rough copy of what is outlined here, and wishes to subject it to 'peer review' then be more than welcome.

Also, is that phone call released?
 
I think the call was taken down as notes by those on the other end of the call.
 
I'd write up a rough draft but my copy of CeltX is on the fritz...if anybody has had a problem with the latest version of CeltX (it doesn't do anything...I double click and it just does...well, nothing) and knows how to fix it, it would be greatly appreciated.

In the 'history of Islamic terrorism' section might I suggest a brief mention of the US embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania, and also the bombing of the WTC in 1993. Something to bring home the fact that this isn't some 'new' phenomenon, and that the WTC wasn't exactly an unlikely target.
 
I came into this discussion a little late so I will, with apologies, touch on a couple of subjects.

It is my own inner Sunday headshrinker instinct to believe that the modern conspiracy movement is generated by the uncovering of some secret knowledge. Whether it be the federal reserve, 911, Bohemian grove, or the street plan of Washington D.C. there is a code to be cracked. The common "sheeple" do not know this code so they must be told. If they don't believe then they will be swept up in the great coming and engineered economic collapse. It is near religion these beliefs. Refutation can be easily found but they persist. I think that it is because of some weird desire to hold "Special Knowledge"

My greatest complaint about the modern day conspiracy theorist is that they have legitimate concerns about civil rights, the nature of the world, and the future that all of us should have. But then they go an color it with crazy. It discredits their previous semi ration arguments.

Then there are those like Texe Marrs who is so incredibly out there that I just want to give him a hug. How can someone who is obviously so smart believe in such weird things that he does? I only hope that when my inevitable dementia comes it will be in such a classy and entertaining way
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom