Posted on 04/28/2006 1:21:50 PM PDT by RobFromGa
Just saw United 93-- I thought it was excellent. It evolves in real-time and its cuts back and forth between the Air Traffic controllers, the Military room, and the plane.
It was somewhat shocking to watch the level of confusion in terms of what was going on, but when you see what information that they were dealing with, it makes sense.
The hijackers to me came across more as fanatical than evil, and they were not turban-wearing obvious characters, they were cleaned up and I ride on planes with people like them on every flight I take.
In the movie, they are carrying out the plans of others and are obsessive in their task. We are not fighting an enemy that is likely to be reasoned with.
There is one character that I'm glad they included- he has a European *maybe French* accent and he makes a number of comments along the lines of "If we do what they say, they'll spare our lives"-- typical appeasement mentality.
Thanks to this group of heroes, many thousands of lives may have been spared and we kept the Islamic nuts from claiming the Capitol or White House as a prize.
I give in 9.5/10!
The Dems (and their mouthpieces in the media) did NOT want to acknowledge that this was Islamic terrorism on US soil. They feared what might follow. So there would be an incentive to try to cover it up as an accident
I still do not believe the official story about Flight 800, and I still think there was Islamic involvement in the OKC bombing
I was especially bemused by the "leafleting opportunity" comment. Does any rational person think that someone who chose to see this movie will be at all receptive to some moonbat leaflet claiming that it's all an evil Bush conspiracy?
Thanks 3cat&adog....that is the perfect answer. It seems that it is only different because so many want to figure out why it was "our fault" this happened...hand wringing...and why don't the muslims like us...blah..blah...blah. Those who are saying that it is too soon in the MSM have a group think mentality. They are the same ones who have been making apologies for the muslims ever since 9/11. Somehow it is too soon for this movie...but they happily promote every bloody slasher movie that contains stomach churning senseless violence.
If so, I can already hear the DUmmie howls of "Betrayal!" and speculations about how he was blackmailed/brainwashed/replaced with a clone/whatever by the evil Bush regime.
I believe we're setting up Iran and Syria to give us a reason to do just that.
God Bless America.
As a Doubting Thomas...Show me the transcripts.
My point is that when it comes to awards (and I'm talking Golden Globes, Academy), Hollywood is obviously picking films with their own political leanings to win them. For instance, the people I've known who've seen Brokeback Mountain said it was OK, but not anything extraordinary in filmmaking. Yet it was gushed over at the Golden Globes, award wise and in the running at the Academy Awards.
There was a movie issued and I can't remember its name after 9/11 where the villians were changed from Muslim terrorists to ultra right wing radicals. It was based on a Tom Clancy book.
In an industry of uber politically correct writers, actors, directors and all, Greenglass is a brave rarity.
Yet I will be surprised - pleasantly, mind you - if he and his film are honored for more than just one of the minor (for lack of a better word) awards.
That mentality creeps into FR now and then. When the Michael Moore film came out a while back, it was pretty hard to deny it's buzz and the enthusiasm for the film, and the fact that it was a huge hit (the most successful 'documentary' ever made, even though it's not really a documentary.)
But on FR, there were many people (vociferously) insisting that the movie wasn't doing well, that it was on relatively few screens, and my favorite - it was a 'hit' but not a 'huge' hit.
The kind of mental illness that plagues places like Kos impairs the judgment on FR from time to time. It happens.
Honestly, I didn't even notice the language.
"I still do not believe the official story about Flight 800, and I still think there was Islamic involvement in the OKC bombing"
I agree with you on both counts.
The impossible scenario of the explosion done in the CIA video proved beyond any doubt that there was a government cover-up. Law of Physics prevent a plane from flying even 1 foot forward with the entire forward section gone, but the CIA wanted us to believe that it could fly AND CLIMB 3000 feet in this configuration.
*Bump*
"I don't believe Couric said those quotes at all.
As a Doubting Thomas...Show me the transcripts."
I didn't either, but I've changed my mind. There are many blogs citing this statement from the Today Show, some say it was Couric, some say Lauer, some don't say what idiot it was. But they are all agreeing on roughly the same thing.
I also don't think NBC will ever release an official transcript of their hosts being that stupid.
You might be thinking of "The Sum of All Fears"
I just found a link to a description that is about as close to a transcript as we will get:
http://epc.buffalo.edu/ezines/rust/8/september.pdf
Search using "9:05" and read the section. The other amazing thing are the responses from the co-idiot, Matt Lauer.
I remember the comment being made, or something very close to it, but I seem to remember it being Lauer that made it.
While I don't recall who said it, I do remember watching TV after the first plane hit, and remember "air traffic screwup" being the explanation that was floated
...but he still has to critique it for his millions of listeners, and many of them, with children, want to know the contents.....OK.
His organization, after all, is called Focus on the Family
Why not?
bfl
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.