Please see http://www.neilslade.com/CaptainSherlockSolves911.html

T

To broaden one's perspective, this assuredly is NOT your typical 9/11 documentary, for certain. And it was not designed to be such.
 

I have relied on a good amount of symbolism, music, and non-verbal scenes that express emotions and things usually omitted in "facts only" films. It must be looked at in a broader sense, and with some intelligent insight and the ability to understand and appreciate non-verbal film expression. My apologies to anyone who doesn't understand this style of film, more common in European and Asian film production, of which I am well versed.

On top of that, the coloring, editing, and effects used in the presentation may have been enough to throw some observers for a loop. And then of course, once one person throws in a negative comment, people love to jump on the bashing band wagon.

That aside...

Please note, Dylan Avery of "Loose Change" worked with me in allowing an excerpt from his film to be used in mine. I am friends with very progressive people in the 9/11 Truth movement, and I was quite conscientious about any material or claims in my film. I have worked with Dr. Stephen Jones, and arranged for him to make an earlier appearance back in 2006 at the University of Denver for our Rocky Mountain regional 9/11 group, and I've also been very appreciative of the work of all the people like Richard Gage (whom I've also spoken with in person) at www.ae911truth.org, and who was appreciative of the film.

The film revolves around an interview with an ex-military pilot, Field McConnell, who shares little with the typical "9/11 Truther" image.  His social and political views (clearly evident from his web site if not from the film itself), are very different from my own and most likely from most persons contemplating the real perpetrators behind 9/11. But I think it was very important to show that the 9/11 issue, and the dispute with the major media and government explanation, is not limited to Democrats, Green Party members, those who would absolve the US government, and "conspiracy nut cases" (which I never thought was the case anyway).  We also used the talents of David Hawkins, a friend of McConnell to help pick and develop concepts presented in the film.

Importantly, McConnell is NOT a slick professional speaker, and it may seem initially to some that this is reason alone to dismiss the film. But, that is a fatal mistake in information gathering. We all are far too familiar with politicians and con artists who talk a great game- but underneath, they are manipulating crooks. McConnell is just a regular guy, with an extraordinary experience and skill piloting planes that few of us can ever claim to possess.

I think it is extraordinarily healthy that we see 9/11 truth through the eyes of a couple of guys "from the other side".

Even if you don't believe anything else McConnell and Hawkins proclaim elsewhere, I made a concerted effort to only keep in the film what I believed was supported by logic and hard evidence, and there were many things I refused to put in the film.

The film spends a fair amount of time looking at McConnell's background in the air force, and this was quite deliberate so as to show here was someone that was not a left wing liberal who questioned the "official" explanation of the events of 9/11.

Two particularly unique contributions of the film, especially at the time of it's release in 2007, was recognition of the role of the Canadian Air Force in the war games being enacted on 9/11- i.e. the stand down of the USAF and the transfer of protection to other military forces during that day. The other notable observation is the inherent dependence on satellite technology and surveillance, and the persons who were commanding that data during the attacks.

McConnell gives a good insider's look at the claims of plane flights that day, extremely important to come from an air-force pilot and not an arm chair internet geek, and gives a good rebuttal to "the official facts". His delivery of the scenario of multiple planes being used on that day (drone and observation planes in addition to the "missing" planes) is a hypothesis that has been embraced by a great many respected people at this current date.

I think it is a strong film specifically because of the testimony of an experience air-force pilot, and ironically because of his political/social views are so different from what we expect from someone contradicting the government/media explanation of 9/11.  For this fact alone, the film is indispensable, because at least half this country is not of the liberal- left wing school- It is imperative to those people in the middle and right side of things that even they can understand why the official/major media account of 9/11 is hogwash, and that they don't have to abandon centrist or right political aspirations to embrace the truth of 9/11.

Imagine that.

Try embracing something outside your own safe circle.


Thanks again for your consideration.
Neil Slade July 2011