New! Operation Terror - 9/11 Conspiracy Dramatization Film

Check out this new film called "Operation Terror", a fictional dramatization of what may have happened on 9/11 based on the inside job theory.

Trailer:



Film website with ordering info:

www.operationterror.com...

Synopsis:

James McCullough from the mysterious “Council” gives a special assignment to CIA agent Aaron Delgado to attack the World Trade Center and the Pentagon and pin the blame on Muslim Terrorists. Delgado and fellow agents, Phillip Singer and Chase Jordan, work with a group of unsuspecting engineers to develop unmanned jets that will hit their assigned targets.

The Army and the FBI begin to uncover the plot, forcing Delgado to intervene. The CIA agents also have to deal with an increasingly suspicious George Poole, the lead engineer working on the drones, who becomes skeptical on how the remote controlled planes will be used. A battle between good and evil ensues as the plot to attack America becomes a hard-hitting reality.



Favorable reviews on IMDB:

www.imdb.com...

Poster:

Finally, someone is daring to challenge the official 9/11 myth/narrative. From the clips it sounds fairly close to being the truth as I perceive it of what happened that day.
Hard to believe anyone in Hollywood would touch the subject however.
Be that as it may hopefully it will get more people asking questions and demanding a real investigation.
Thanks for sharing this.

I think I know what I'm getting everyone for Christmas this year.
I wonder if they ever read "The Best Government Money Can Buy" I gave them a few years back?

15d.) Cross-Posting: You will not cross-post content from other discussion boards (unless you receive advance written permission from TAN or their agents). You will not post-by-proxy the material of banned members or other individuals who are not members, but have written a response to content within a thread on these forums.

Terms and Conditions of Use--Please Review

My worries with this are that it could possibly be too dramatized and sensationalized so it will further debase the inside job theory.

Like, what if the first time you hear of the 911 inside job theory is from some sensational source like Alex Jones or something? It would completely put you off into researching it any further, I think that's called disinformation. Just think of things like, "The Fourth Kind", same deal.

Does that make sense?

Originally posted by OutonaLimb
9/11 was completely faked.

www.cluesforum.info

Wakey wakey time!

*From your link

Our ongoing analyses and investigations suggest that NO one died on 9/11.

Really? Come on, that is exactly what I am talking about. How is anyone ever going to believe that 911 was an inside job when we have sensationalism like this.

Just though I would post this review from IMDB, was very well written.

This is a low budget movie, made for about $100,000 (in 2011 dollars). And is the first feature film by the producer Art Olivier.

Considering those facts, the production quality is amazing. Disregarding them, is it worth your time? Probably, yes.

It is fictional account, but is very well tied to facts and events associated with 9/11. The film weaves a speculative tale that provides a credible (or at least interesting) alternative explanation for the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center. Strong believers in the goodness of government will find the cognitive dissonance disturbing, and will shut their minds to the speculative plot line. Anyone with an open mind and ignorant of 9/11 conspiracy theories will find it interesting, but a bit hard to follow in places. 9/11 conspiracy theorists will find it fascinating.

The pacing is brisk, the acting is not bad, and the storyline intricate. Not a dramatic masterpiece, but a great vehicle for provoking thought and discussion, and fun to watch. I liked it better than Atlas Shrugged I. For most people, it is well worth the $20 cost of the DVD. Forget about seeing in the theater, it is too controversial for distribution in the U.S.

www.imdb.com...

Originally posted by WWu777
Check out this new film called "Operation Terror", a fictional dramatization of what may have happened on 9/11 based on the inside job theory.

Without watching the film, I can see right away that this will be an extreme exercise in intellectual laziness. Such "inside job" claims universally have to be, since for them to promote their claims they need to sweep a lot of inconvenient facts under the rug so than noone can see them. They cannot explain the glaring holes in their claims, so they simply pretend they do not exist.

-A number of passengers and crewmembers of the hijacked aircraft called out and reported the planes were hijacked. Not "the planes started flying on their own" or "the planes are acting like someone else is controlling them", but "hijackers took over the plane and sealed themselves into the cockpits".

-The US governnemt showed the classified intelligence proving the 9/11 attack was staged by Islamic terrorists to our NATO allies, and after they compared what we showed the to what their own intelligence services were reporting, they found it credible and invoked article V in the first time in NATO's history.

-Not to mention, that Islamic fundamentalists don't exactly need to be framed of anything. Between slaughtering athletes at the 1972 Olympics, hijacking three passenger jets simultaneously to the Jordanian desert and blowign them up, blowing up the Marine barracks in Beiruit with a suicide car bomb, attempting to sink the USS Cole, and even hijacking an Italian Cruise liner, Islamic fundamentalists have shown they genuinely have enough blood on their hands as it is.

It's a great plot as spy thriller fiction, but as it is certainly going to be poorly tied to the actual facts and events of the 9/11 attack, it is unrealistic to see this any anything but escapist entertainment.

reply to post by WWu777


The term "drones" seems to imply a lack of living passengers outside of the agents charged with pulling off the attack. Did anyone else get this impression?

Originally posted by OutonaLimb
9/11 was completely faked.
Wakey wakey time!

This whole trailer looked photoshoped,

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by WWu777
Check out this new film called "Operation Terror", a fictional dramatization of what may have happened on 9/11 based on the inside job theory.

Without watching the film, I can see right away that this will be an extreme exercise in intellectual laziness. Such "inside job" claims universally have to be, since for them to promote their claims they need to sweep a lot of inconvenient facts under the rug so than noone can see them. They cannot explain the glaring holes in their claims, so they simply pretend they do not exist.

-A number of passengers and crewmembers of the hijacked aircraft called out and reported the planes were hijacked. Not "the planes started flying on their own" or "the planes are acting like someone else is controlling them", but "hijackers took over the plane and sealed themselves into the cockpits".

-The US governnemt showed the classified intelligence proving the 9/11 attack was staged by Islamic terrorists to our NATO allies, and after they compared what we showed the to what their own intelligence services were reporting, they found it credible and invoked article V in the first time in NATO's history.

-Not to mention, that Islamic fundamentalists don't exactly need to be framed of anything. Between slaughtering athletes at the 1972 Olympics, hijacking three passenger jets simultaneously to the Jordanian desert and blowign them up, blowing up the Marine barracks in Beiruit with a suicide car bomb, attempting to sink the USS Cole, and even hijacking an Italian Cruise liner, Islamic fundamentalists have shown they genuinely have enough blood on their hands as it is.

It's a great plot as spy thriller fiction, but as it is certainly going to be poorly tied to the actual facts and events of the 9/11 attack, it is unrealistic to see this any anything but escapist entertainment.

edit on 1-11-2012 by GoodOlDave because: (no reason given)

Actually, you missed something under your nose. Those phone calls on 9/11 from the hijacked planes could NOT have happened. No cell phone calls are possible at 30,000 feet. The government can pay experts like Popular Mechanics to say otherwise, but you can test this yourself. When you are in flight, turn on your cell phone and you will see zero signal. There's no way around it. Above 8,000 feet, cell phones have no signal, even today. There's no way around that. That's a huge glaring hole you ignored.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by WWu777

 

The term "drones" seems to imply a lack of living passengers outside of the agents charged with pulling off the attack. Did anyone else get this impression?

Yes, the clips showed that the people on the flights were taken off and drone planes were used. Otherwise, normal planes can't move at 400mph at sea level or hit skyscrapers. No one on a flight simulator was able to replicate the attack. What does that tell you? Plus the planes were aluminum, and aluminum can't cut through steel buildings.

reply to post by WWu777


Then obviously, we must ask what happened to the civilian passengers who supposedly died in the crashes. What happened to them? Mass execution, to tie up loose ends? What does ATS think?

And another point I really, really want to make - I believe this point should be recognized, and I really hope that someone in the industry will eventually see it and understand it. If too many movies speculating on alternative versions of 9/11 are made, it will muddy the waters to the point that, should we actually hit it on the head, we will be unable to recognize it. Furthermore, the more alternative views that are introduced, the more likely the public will roll their eyes and say, "Yet another outlandish theory. Who would've guessed?"

Basically, the more movies that are made, the more it will look like we are trying to shoot in the dark without having any idea of what we're aiming at. We will look desperate and uninformed. And in all honesty, that's exactly the impression we want to avoid at all costs.

Originally posted by WWu777

Actually, you missed something under your nose. Those phone calls on 9/11 from the hijacked planes could NOT have happened. No cell phone calls are possible at 30,000 feet. The government can pay experts like Popular Mechanics to say otherwise, but you can test this yourself. When you are in flight, turn on your cell phone and you will see zero signal. There's no way around it. Above 8,000 feet, cell phones have no signal, even today. There's no way around that. That's a huge glaring hole you ignored.

No, actually, the huge glaring hole YOU are ignoring is that only a portion of the calls made out to the victims were by cell phone. In cases like Renee May (flight attendant on flight 77) she used the plane's own airphone to call her mother, and airphones are most certainly capable of making connections (or else they wouldn't have been on the planes to begin with). In the case of flight 93, the majority of calls were actually from airphones, and since their conversations matched the details that the people using the cellphones were giving, they have to be considered legitimate. Granted, in cases like Barbara Olson it appeared that she tried to call out on her own cell phone several times unsuccessfully as her cell number recorded a connection time of 0 seconds, but that just means she switched to one of the airphones.

Besides, Rene May's mother (forgot her name) defininitively identified the voice of her daughter, and Barbara Olson left a trail of connections from the phone operator to Ted Olson's secretary to Ted Olson himself, so unless you want to wallow in fantasy voice changing gadgets or throw around blind accusations of everyone from Ted Olson to Renee May's mother to even the phone operators of being sinister secret agents, this is a poor argument and you will gain no milage out of it.

Originally posted by WWu777
Yes, the clips showed that the people on the flights were taken off and drone planes were used. Otherwise, normal planes can't move at 400mph at sea level or hit skyscrapers. No one on a flight simulator was able to replicate the attack. What does that tell you?

It tells me that the producers of this flick have to fall back on the intellectually lazy "everyone is a sinister secret agent" excuse to make their scenarios float. I daresay the surviving relatives of the victims of the 9/11 attack would certainly be disgusted to the point violence if they knew these producers were accusing their family members of being accomplices to mass murder. Especially the parents of that 14 year old girl who was on a field trip to California that died on flight 77.

Also, I would very much like to know where the heck you were told "planes weren't able to hit skyscrapers" since it's in the historical record that a world war 2 bomber hit the Empire State building and went halfway in, despite the plane travelling only half the speed, half the size, and hitting a concrete reinforced steel building. The claim sounds suspiciously like the self serving rubbish Rob Balsamo is pushing on that damned fool conspiracy web site of his, and after the stunt those characters pulled here on ATS, "self serving" and "damned fool conspiracy web site" are descriptions that every ATS moderator is thinking as well.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
Basically, the more movies that are made, the more it will look like we are trying to shoot in the dark without having any idea of what we're aiming at. We will look desperate and uninformed. And in all honesty, that's exactly the impression we want to avoid at all costs.

With all due respects, I have to tell you that ship has already sailed.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


Just more proof that we would rather shove our heads in the sand than believe that our own government would kill its citizens to protect its own hind end.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


A phone call can be faked, there is always the possibility. You must admit that. It's just a phone call.

But, a building (7) collapsing into its own footprint at free-fall speed, from fire and minimal structural damage to one half of one of its sides, is quite impossible. There is no possibility of this being the case.

reply to post by Son of Will


Is there no way to digitally recreate 9/11 and see how it would unfold, given the factors that we know?

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

Just more proof that we would rather shove our heads in the sand than believe that our own government would kill its citizens to protect its own hind end.

OR. more proof that someone who sees sinister secret gov't plots behind everything from the rising prices of gasoline to some native in Borneo falling off a cliff while hunting pigs in the jungle will instictively see a secret gov't plot behind the 9/11 attack as well.

You cannot deny that is a possibility as well.

Originally posted by Son of Will
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

A phone call can be faked, there is always the possibility. You must admit that. It's just a phone call.

A phone call, maybe. One or two phone calls, I'll even give you that for argument's sake. Successfully faking ALL of them, no. No way, no how, and certainly not when it leaves evidence all over the place as in the case of phone records showing a trail from Barbara Olson to phone operators to secretaries to Ted Olson. Plus, I need to remind you that the call from Fight attendant Betty Ong (flight 11) was recorded and is freely available to anyone who cares to Google it, and not even the most stark raving paranoid lunatics among the 9/11 conspiracy theorists (cough cough Alex Jones cough) have been able to discredit it as being faked. Perhaps you can be the first.

But, a building (7) collapsing into its own footprint at free-fall speed, from fire and minimal structural damage to one half of one of its sides, is quite impossible. There is no possibility of this being the case.

...which begs the question, how do you know there was only minimal structural damage? Were you physically there yourself or are you simply repeating this from one of those damned fool conspiracy web sites?

The reason I ask is, when we see right from the video that the penthouse toppling over six seconds before the rest of the building did, it's pretty self evident the building suffered a hell of a lot more catastrophic failure than just minimal structural damage.