Filmmaker Calls 911 Attacks "a Hoax"

[Linda]

Filmmaker At Pentagon on 9/11 Produces Movie Exposing the Lie

by Henry Makow Ph.D.


'On Sept. 11 2001, filmmaker Paul Cross was doing post-production work in Washington DC when he heard about the "terrorist" attack. He visited the crash-site five hours after impact and could plainly see the official story was a lie.

"There was no passenger jet wreckage; the lawn wasn't scorched; lamp posts, fences and construction materials in the path of the jet were untouched." Cross told me. "If this was a hoax, then the attack on the World Trade Centre was also a hoax"."

Cross, 45, characterizes his pre-9-11 self as a "flag- waving patriot" who "voted Republican all my life."

He was crushed. "I love my country. I was in mourning for weeks, literally in tears for what has become of this country."

He decided to alert his fellow citizens by making the feature film "Severe Visibility" about a Pentagon accountant, Major Stanley Kruter, who is slightly injured in the attack. He "has his head buried in the sand" but questions the official story when approached by a British investigative reporter.

Cross opted to make a feature instead of a documentary because he felt documentaries preach to the converted. He wanted to reach ordinary Americans who could identify with the cognitive dissonance his hero experienced as he tried to comprehend the implications of the hoax and its mass acceptance.

Cross raised over $500,000 from friends and family. Many actors etc. wanted to participate and worked for less.

Cross wrote, directed and starred in the 90-min. feature. The film describes his own coming to terms with political reality.

Cross insists he identifies with the investigative reporter, not Kruter. But in an uncanny way, his own life now resembles the accountant who refused to pretend he saw a passenger plane.

Cross can't find a distributor for the movie. He can't get it shown at film festivals in the US.
They say their corporate owners or sponsors would not permit it.

"I feel like I am in Nazi Germany the way some people in Hollywood are reacting to it. What is everyone so afraid of? Everyone seems to like the film but... most of the distribution companies I have approached... don't want to release a film with so strong a statement."

He can't get interviews or reviews in the mainstream press. This is tangible proof of how art and information are controlled in our supposedly "free" society.

(Many politically sensitive movies never see the light of day. For eg. director Henry Bean had to show his wonderful movie, "The Believer" about a Jewish neo-Nazi, to a rabbi and some matrons at the Simon Wiesenthal Center in LA. They didn't like it and it never reached theaters.)

Paul Cross has received hate mail, and death threats. "The truth hurts," Cross says. "People can't face it."

But the film has been embraced abroad. "The media tells people the truth in other countries," he said.

Cross has joined the select minority of Americans who awoke on 9-11. We are the child who says the Emperor has no clothes surrounded by conformists who won't believe their own common sense and eyes.

The other 9-11 movies like "Flight 93" and "World Trade Centre" are propaganda. They perpetuate the myths that 9-11 shattered. Oliver Stone is a shadow of the man who made "Platoon" and "JFK."

THE FILM

"Severe Visibility" is hard to watch. Cross said he meant it so. He wanted viewers to confront what happened on Sept 11, 2001. He wanted them to mourn the innocent victims and the demise of freedom.

The main character has a childish faith in his country. He addresses his diary to Thomas Jefferson as if the founding fathers were pristine. The dialogue and action are stilted. There isn't much of a plot and Cross is pretty long-winded. Incongruously, Kruter doesn't change the blood-stained bandage on his forehead.

I have passed the "cognitive dissonance" phase. I wished Kruter had been less naive and had told his interrogators, "Hey, I wasn't looking out the window."

Christ said: "See, I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. So be as cunning as serpents and as innocent as doves." (Mathew 10:16)

In spite of all this, the film is for some undefinable reason quite gripping. Kruter becomes a symbol of the much-lied-to and-abused American people. I was glad the film ended but I was also glad I had seen it.

"Severe Visibility" contains a lot of information about the Pentagon attack. For example, the 9-11 scenario had been rehearsed as a "terror exercise" numerous times. This is why the military allowed it to take place. (As if the "terrorists" would have been privy to this information.)

CONCLUSION

We have been colonized by an alien financial power, the London-based central banking cartel and their instruments, the colonial elite: corporations, intelligence agencies, government, the two political parties, universities, Freemasons, the churches, organized Jewry, Marxist Jews; Neo Cons; feminists, foundations; think tanks, and of course the mass media.

The "truth will set you free" so they suppress it.. That's why we must honor and support courageous if flawed works like "Severe Visibility." The only deterrent against another false flag terrorist attack, possibly leading to martial law, is for everyone to know the truth about 9-11.
--------
Paul Cross will be interviewed Sunday 10 PM CT June 1 on my Internet radio show at www.republicbroadcasting.org
--

See also my "Are Bush, Mossad Behind 9-11?"

and "The Zionist Protection Racket"




http://www.severevisibility.com/

http://www.savethemales.ca/

[TonyGosling]

Cross told me. "If this was a hoax, then the attack on the World Trade Centre was also a hoax"."

That doesn't actually follow.

[kbo234]

Cross told me. "If this was a hoax, then the attack on the World Trade Centre was also a hoax"."

That doesn't actually follow.

Tony.......

........how likely is it that a faction within the US governmental apparatus would carry out a false flag attack against themselves at exactly the same time that real terrorists carried out a real attack on the World Trade Centers in New York?

Are you tired?

[Dallas]

Cross told me. "If this was a hoax, then the attack on the World Trade Centre was also a hoax"."

That doesn't actually follow.

Tony.......

........how likely is it that a faction within the US governmental apparatus would carry out a false flag attack against themselves at exactly the same time that real terrorists carried out a real attack on the World Trade Centers in New York?

Are you tired?

Of course you're right, but if I've learned anything in the years since I realized that the 9-11 attacks were a hoax, it's that debunkers will take any little slip like that and make you look completely retarded if you don't spell it out for them in irrefutable, unavoidable terms.

[kbo234]

Thanks but Tony isn't a debunker, he runs this site.

[TonyGosling]

The US rogue network may have wished to 'enhance' the puny efforts of Osama Bin Laden in his Bora-Bora cave.

Cross told me. "If this was a hoax, then the attack on the World Trade Centre was also a hoax"."

That doesn't actually follow.

Tony.......
........how likely is it that a faction within the US governmental apparatus would carry out a false flag attack against themselves at exactly the same time that real terrorists carried out a real attack on the World Trade Centers in New York?
Are you tired?

[scienceplease]

This thread should be in the news section.

I'd like to ask the film maker a few questions... for starters:
a) how did he get into the Pentagon after the crash - no-one else was allowed?
b) could he describe the crash site in more detail?
c) some wreckage was removed - did he see any of it - could he describe it?

[Dallas]

Thanks but Tony isn't a debunker, he runs this site.

That's great, I wasn't able to read that for myself.</sarcasm> Do you really not see my point?

[karlos]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxO-CfNMYYQ[/youtube]

[John White]

Cross told me. "If this was a hoax, then the attack on the World Trade Centre was also a hoax"."

That doesn't actually follow.

I agree tony

We look at the evidence for each seperate instance that together comprise the events of 9/11 in isloation from each other as well as one picture

"If it supports the offical story we get to see it"

Under that maxim its the areas of 9/11 that we havnt seen where the real truth of 9/11 waits to be exposed: and at the Pentagon we have seen desperatly little, and at shanksville practically nothing at all: it cannot yet be properly established that any plane crashed there

Establishing those facts is key to what 9/11 Truth is about: or the abscense of them!

Trying to pointless debunk the mass of evidence from New York simply to support a pet conspiracy theory is not

[kbo234]

Thanks but Tony isn't a debunker, he runs this site.

That's great, I wasn't able to read that for myself.</sarcasm> Do you really not see my point?

I'm not sure I do.

[kbo234]

Cross told me. "If this was a hoax, then the attack on the World Trade Centre was also a hoax"."

That doesn't actually follow.

I agree tony

We look at the evidence for each seperate instance that together comprise the events of 9/11 in isloation from each other as well as one picture

"If it supports the offical story we get to see it"

Under that maxim its the areas of 9/11 that we havnt seen where the real truth of 9/11 waits to be exposed: and at the Pentagon we have seen desperatly little, and at shanksville practically nothing at all: it cannot yet be properly established that any plane crashed there

Establishing those facts is key to what 9/11 Truth is about: or the abscense of them!

Trying to pointless debunk the mass of evidence from New York simply to support a pet conspiracy theory is not

I must be tired myself. I really am failing to understand the gist of what people are trying to say on this thread. Unless it is something that is too obvious to pick up on?

[scienceplease]

I must be tired myself. I really am failing to understand the gist of what people are trying to say on this thread. Unless it is something that is too obvious to pick up on?

I agree. Meaning is so often lost... the thread is supposed to be about this movie. The producer made some pretty amazing claims. I would like them substantiated... (as per my previous post)

a) how did he get into the Pentagon after the crash - no-one else was allowed?
b) could he describe the crash site in more detail?
c) some wreckage was removed - did he see any of it - could he describe it?

[Dallas]

Thanks but Tony isn't a debunker, he runs this site.

That's great, I wasn't able to read that for myself.</sarcasm> Do you really not see my point?

I'm not sure I do.

What I'm getting at is that is important for Tony and the rest of us to be extremely careful about using flawed logic, as those who *are* debunkers are looking for any little loophole to declare all of the truths we are trying to bring to light to be false, insane, etc.