If you want to see a man who lies so much that he almost believes himself then watch the acting genius that is Alex Jones.Behold a man who managed to dupe thousands of uninformed people by making himself seem like a loud honest Texas family man. Behold a man who serves his capitalist Koch masters so well that he doesn't go a day without badmouthing communism and socialism. Behold a man who respected the conservative tool Glenn Beck and then, after Beck called him a psycho, began to talk a little less respectfully about Beck. Behold a man who tries to exploit every opportunity to make himself more popular, the way he did with the 9/11 truth movement. Behold a man who constantly quotes the British intelligence project Wikipedia. That deceiving man is Alex 1776 Jones, a true American patriot who constantly violates the constitution. Alex Jone is the reason why the word DECEPTION was invented.

I've never seen the original Loose Change, but after hearing so much about it and having seen Zeitgeist, The Power Of Nightmares and Freedom To Fascism i figured it was about time i gave the big one a whirl.This "Final Cut" seems like half a film. It's a well organised, neatly structured pseudo-documentary that effectively breaks down the events of September 11th 2001 into easily digestible nuggets of information. Many many fingers are pointed at the 9/11 Commission's official report and the questions that were, or were not in most cases, asked of key witnesses. Important stuff indeed for good investigative journalism is one of the keystones of a free democratic society, able to challenge its rulers on the balance of probabilities and reasonable doubt. In fact, coming away from this film one is puzzled at why the official explanation is still trumpeted around as a gospel account of the tragedy. Undeniably convincing, cannily constructed, this really puts the administration under an uncomfortable spotlight. So why did I only give it 2 out of 10? The reason is simple. All the mud is hurled across the fence, all the holes pointed out and many reasoned logical arguments are deployed in debunking the commission's account of events. But not one alternative is presented. This would be bad enough alone but further than this there are no attempts made to suggest why such a conspiracy could or would exist. There're the usual collection of experts and statistics, but in a film hoping to be taken seriously this seems little more than cheap gimmickry utilised in the hope of enforcing the shakiest of arguments. Aspersions are cast as to credibility, but the frightening prospect of the inside job, oft hinted at, is unsatisfactorily left hanging in the air without following it to its own damning conclusions.Ultimately the hole in this argument is context. No context is given to the intelligence that was or was not ignored and no context is really given to the circumstances the administration and/or the FAA and FBI were operating under.I'm not saying it's wrong. I'm saying that the polarised, one-dimensional presentation so totally devoid of context severely undermines most if not all of what is trying to be said.

A few years back I watched the internet phenomena Loose Change (2nd Edition) and was impressed a group of college kids could piece together such a convincing argument/conspiracy theory about the attacks of 9/11. That's not to say this argument was a flawless one, in fact, it was wrought with innuendo, hyperbole and a handful of logical gaps. Regardless of its shortcomings, LC strung together a staggering amount of coincidences, so many that any reasonable/logical person would be compelled to ask the incredibly important question: what really happened on 9/11?Last night I watched Loose Change Final Cut, expecting it to be a less didactic re-vision of the first two editions. I was wrong. The Final Cut is a completely new reinterpretation of what went down on 9/11, with new evidence, new footage, new questions and a refined journalistic emphasis on fact vs. fantasy. FC is not only a dramatic improvement over its predecessors, it's a documentary that stresses how far the truth movement has come and how much the filmmakers involved have matured.In the years between the 2nd Edition and the Final Cut, writer/director/editor Dylan Avery has taken painstaking efforts to correct inaccuracies, remove hyperbole, and counter his critics/detractors with a damning pile of evidence that simply cannot be ignored. Instead of leaping to wild conclusions (as he did in the 2nd Ed.), Avery soberly lets the (readily available, yet widely ignored) facts speak for themselves. In the end the viewer is left shaking his/her head in disbelief by the volumes of questions the government of the United States of America should be forced to answer in a court of law. The bottom line here is that where there's smoke, there are usually liars and the overwhelming amount of evidence stacked up that contradicts the findings of The 9/11 Commission Report, causes pause for very serious concern.While the Bush administration may or may not be directly linked to the attacks, there is no doubt they should be forced to prove (in court and under oath) what exactly their role was. Will any of these players ever be forced to reveal the truth? Probably not since they not only create the laws of this land, they also enforce them...legally and (debatably) illegally. Perhaps one day we'll live in a country where the government fears its people, but until that day Loose Change Final Cut proves we have should fear our government...if not for anything other than their ineptitude.As a sidebar, I watched "Screw Loose Change" in an attempt to form as objective a stance on this topic as possible. Unfortunately the maker of SLC was never a student of The Art of Reasoning and thus, would not only make a pitiful lawyer, but also proves to be incredibly incompetent as a documentary filmmaker. Unfortunately, SLC wears its bias on its sleeve and loses all credibility as a result. In SLC's zeal to refute everything contained within LC 2nd Ed., it jumps logical barricades with shameless ease. One example: SLC attempts to refute LC 2nd Ed.'s first bit of evidence: the presentation of declassified files of operation Northwoods. SLC's contention is that LC "does not display any effort whatsoever to connect the two events, instead it merely describes Northwoods." Instead of making a very basic observation that LC is merely attempting to establish a trend/pattern in the actions of the US Government, SLC asks LC to do something it later attacks it for: reaching unfounded conclusions through leaps in reasoning. Perhaps SLC will follow the lead of LC and go back to the drawing board in an attempt to make a better, more truthful film. If not, SLC is destined for the garbage heap while LC Final Cut will likely end up being studied in Journalism courses.http://eattheblinds.blogspot.com/

That once again - people get an idea in their heads, fabricate the truth, and go full-force onto the internet where people gobble up everything they say and take it to heart.First and foremost - if you're looking for absolutely no evidence (other than youtube quality videos, and well-edited snippets of information) to deduce what occurred on September 11th, then look no further. Now, I'm not here to say what did or didn't happen that day - I'm here to review a "documentary." Bottom line - this movie is for the most impressionable of people. Dylan Avery's "facts" have been refuted time and time again by the most credible and unbiased of sources, yet he continues making these flicks and people continue eating them up.The one thing this movie can teach you - is to always question. However, for someone who is so convinced that the government is lying to its people about one of the worst atrocities in American history, its a very introverted causality when he turns that paranoia into fabrications. If you want an accurate, intellectual account of what some truthers believe happened on 9/11 - steer clear of Loose Change. There are many more reputable films/documentaries/interviews that might quell that need for a conspiracy better.This one isn't, and shouldn't be, it.