In ten days of bloody fighting in the Ardennes forest, the fate of the war in Europe was sealed. The Battle of the Bulge left the Wehrmacht in tatters and the road to Berlin clear for the advancing British and American forces. For six months, the Germans staved off the inevitable, despite incessant bombing and the surrender of over a quarter of a million soldiers. But, by May of 1945, the Soviet flag flew over Berlin, Hitler was dead, and the war was over.
One of the most compelling stories of World War II concerns the origins of the unlikely alliance between the Axis powers. While many people imagine that the union was forged along the lines of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend,” the real story is far more complicated. LAST SECRETS OF THE AXIS picks up where the popular HISTORY CHANNEL special THE SAMURAI AND THE SWASTIKA left off, examining the remarkable historical confluence that led to the rise of German-Japanese cooperation. At the heart of story is Karl Haushofer, a geography professor (and the man who coined the term “geopolitics”). The program explores the professor’s convoluted role, following him from the origins of the Reich to the Nuremberg Trials. LAST SECRETS also reveals details of many overlooked engagements, including a coup in Iraq, backed by German and Italian forces, that had the long-term goal of establishing a Persian Gulf base for Japanese submarines! From unsung battles to back-room dealings, this is a compelling examination of the LAST SECRETS OF THE AXIS.
Loose Change (2005, 2006, 2007) is a series of documentary films written and directed by Dylan Avery, produced by Korey Rowe and Jason Bermas and distributed by MercuryMedia International. The films assert that the September 11, 2001 attacks were planned and conducted by elements within the United States government, and base the claims on perceived anomalies in the historical record of the attacks. The first film, Loose Change, was originally released through the creators’ own company, Louder Than Words, and received widespread attention after Loose Change 2nd Edition was featured on a Binghamton, New York local FOX affiliate, WICZ-TV (FOX 40).[1]
The original film was edited and re-released as Loose Change: 2nd Edition, and then subsequently re-edited again for the 2nd Edition Recut, each time to tighten the focus on certain key areas and to remove what the filmmakers have learned to be inaccuracies and copyrighted material. Loose Change: Final Cut, deemed “the third and final release of this documentary series”[2] was released on DVD and Web-streaming format on November 11, 2007.[3] This installment is a completely new film; using almost none of the same content appearing in the previous Loose Change versions.
The film’s main claims are considered false by many media outlets,[4] independent researchers,[5][6] and prominent members of the scientific and engineering community.[7]
Contents
1 History
2 Presentation
2.1 Revisions
2.2 Impact
3 Crew
3.1 Dylan Avery
3.2 Korey Rowe
3.3 Jason Bermas
4 Content of 2nd Edition Recut
5 Criticism
6 Airings
7 In other media
8 See also
9 References
10 External links
History
Loose Change originated as a plan for a fictional film, on the advice that to make a successful film a filmaker must offer the audience something they want to watch, and as the concept advanced through research into footage and resources for the film, the film became a documentary.
In May 2002, Dylan Avery began researching the 9/11 attacks and based on his research he concluded they were not a terrorist attack involving only members of Al Qaeda, but rather that they were an attack orchestrated by members of the United States government.[8]
In April 2005, the first edition of Loose Change was made available for free on the Internet and was given a limited DVD release to certain video stores. It cost around $2000 to make, and was made primarily on Avery’s laptop computer, featuring a distinctive soundtrack produced by DJ Skooly. Avery’s childhood friend, Korey Rowe, left the service of the United States Army in June 2005 to assist with the marketing of the movie.[8]
Soon after this, Avery decided that “there was new information that needed to be added and improvements made”, and so began creating Loose Change: 2nd Edition. Korey Rowe assumed the role of producer, and Jason Bermas, a graphic designer, worked as production assistant. This edition cost around $6,000. It was originally released in December 2005, but was re-released in June 2006 as Loose Change: 2nd Edition Recut. Before the release of this edition, Avery, Rowe and Bermas set up an independent movie production company called Louder than Words, an organization that identifies with the 9/11 Truth Movement.[9]
In March 2007, Mark Cuban reportedly told the New York Post that he was having discussions about distributing Loose Change, with Charlie Sheen narrating.[10][11]
The third and final edition of the movie, Loose Change Final Cut, was released in November 2007. According to the Loose Change website, this edition “is substantially different from Loose Change and Loose Change 2nd Edition Recut in the way it presents the information surrounding 9/11/2001. However, it remains true to the spirit that has made Loose Change what it is today.”[2] Professor David Ray Griffin was brought on as script consultant, and radio host Alex Jones and Tim Sparke of Mercury Media served as executive producers. Due to an estimated cost of $200,000, this version is the first not to be available for free online, although it is in fact available for free on Google Video in a lower quality version, currently having amassed nearly 30,000 hits. This edition is also substantially longer than previous versions, at over 2 hours in length.
Presentation
Loose Change: 2nd Edition Recut is one hour and 22 minutes in length. The film consists of Dylan Avery narrating over photographs and news footage relating to 9/11, with an underscore of hip hop and other urban style music. Avery does not appear in the video itself, though is shown in the bonus features. Video and still footage used includes considerable video content from CNN, MSNBC NBC, and FOX News, as well as a number of other sources.[12] The end of the film shows a clip from The American Scholar’s Symposium that was aired on C-SPAN on June 25, 2006 at the Sheraton Hotel in Los Angeles. Jason Bermas, wearing the signature “Investigate 9/11″ t-shirt that he designed, is describing their plans to peacefully demonstrate at Ground Zero on September 11, 2006.
Revisions
Although each version of the film asserts that the events of 9/11 were essentially an “inside job”, there were significant revisions between the particular theories that different editions posited. For example:
The first edition, Loose Change, suggested that there was an unusual device (which the filmmakers refer to as a “pod”) under the fuselage of the plane that struck the South Tower of the World Trade Center. The “pod” was presented as evidence that the planes involved in the attack were replaced with remote-controlled drones. Official flight records were also presented as evidence that the aircraft involved are still in active service, though it is stated that the producers do not know what happened to the passengers of the flights. This information is omitted from all subsequent versions.
While the first edition asserted that Flight 93 was shot down over Pennsylvania, Loose Change 2nd Edition and Loose Change 2nd Edition Recut theorise that Flight 93 was actually flown to and landed at Cleveland Hopkins Airport. The third edition states less information about Flight 93, but maintains that it is impossible that it crashed in Shanksville, Pennsylvania.
The first and second editions asserted that a missile hit the Pentagon, but Loose Change Final Cut presents two scenarios, saying that “opinions differ” about whether or not Flight 77 hit the Pentagon.
On May 26, 2006, a letter was sent to Dylan Avery regarding copyright and trademark infringement in Loose Change 2nd Edition resulting from the use of footage from French filmmakers the Naudet brothers. The letter states that Avery used copyrighted images from the film 9/11 and that those the images violate the Federal Lanham Trademark Act “by suggesting that the Naudet brothers or Mr. Hanlon have endorsed or sponsored the controversial views in your film.” The letter concludes: “Accordingly, we hereby demand that you confirm to us within three (3) business days of the receipt of this letter that you have removed all footage taken from our clients’ 9/11 film from your Loose Change film, including from the version of your film that can be downloaded on the Internet, the DVD version of your film and anywhere else you have used or are using our clients’ footage.”[13] Dylan Avery announced that the recut version of the 2nd edition would omit some of the infringing material.[14]
The statement that New York’s Empire State Building was hit by a B-52 bomber in 1945 was corrected; it was in fact a B-25 Mitchell, which is less than one-third the size of a B-52.
References to the rumors concerning the amount of gold stored beneath the World Trade Center (such as one claim of $167 billion in gold) were removed, leaving only confirmed statements, including that of the “$230 million in precious metals”.
The implication the film makes that Flight 77 had Pratt & Whitney engines made of steel and titanium alloy, was corrected; in fact the engines of Flight 77 were Rolls-Royce engines.
Multiple instances of Wikipedia articles being shown as source material were removed and replaced with news articles containing the reported information.
Throughout the film minor changes in talking points, images and language were made.
Impact
An August 2006 Vanity Fair article suggested that Loose Change “just might be the first Internet blockbuster” as it became the most watched video on Google Video in May 2006, being viewed at least 40 million times on that site, and with the official Loose Change website receiving over 100,000 hits a day. Millions more have viewed the film via unaffiliated websites. More than one million copies of the DVD have been sold, and many more have been given away.[15]
According to Broadcast magazine, the video was to have a special screening at the UK Houses of Parliament on June 14, 2006.[16][17][18] Michael Meacher, the British MP who had considered sponsoring the screening, decided against it. During that same month of June 2006, a former engineer from Microsoft developed a site, www.loose-change-911.com, to stream the movie in seven different languages.[citation needed]
On September 11, 2006 Dylan Avery and Jason Bermas appeared on Democracy Now! the War and Peace Report, to debate with James Meigs and David Dunbar,[19] two of the editors of Popular Mechanics and the book Debunking 9/11 Myths.[20]
Crew
Dylan Avery
Dylan Avery is the writer, director, and editor of the Loose Change films, is from Oneonta, New York, and currently lives in San Diego, California. After being denied admission twice by Purchase College’s film school,[21] Avery planned to make a movie about a group of friends who discover the September 11, 2001 attacks were an “inside job”. Along the way Avery himself stated that he had become convinced of this theory.[22][23]
Avery appeared on BBC’s 9/11 Conspiracy Files in February 2007.
Korey Rowe
Korey Rowe is a producer of Loose Change. Rowe was born in Oneonta, New York. He is a former US soldier who served six months in Kandahar, Afghanistan and one year in Kuwait and Iraq. Rowe enlisted in the 101st Airborne Division in August 2001 and left in June 2005, then joining the production of Loose Change. On July 23, 2007, he was arrested at his home in Oneonta, New York, based on a military warrant charging him with felony desertion.[24] Two days later he was returned to his unit at Fort Campbell, Kentucky,[25] although he states that he received an honorable discharge and returned to uniform of his own accord, and that he is attempting to expunge his name completely from the system.[26]
Rowe was at the end of his active-duty enlistment in the summer of 2005 when he was told his unit would be re-deployed to Iraq. Because of stop-loss policy, soldiers may be kept beyond their normal tour of duty.[27] Rowe’s unit, the 187th Infantry Regiment, was due to return to Iraq in August 2007, but was eventually granted release.
Jason Bermas
Jason Bermas is a graphic designer and producer of Loose Change who went to college in Oneonta, New York and currently lives in Austin, Texas. Jason Bermas also guest hosts The Alex Jones Show on the GCN network. Aside from film making he is also an activist who has demanded a new independent investigation into 9/11.
In 2008, Bermas directed a new film about the 9/11 attacks, entitled Fabled Enemies. The official website for the film states that “Instead of the focus being on physical anomolies surrounding the attacks, it focuses on a vast intelligence network and how they were able to succeed almost 7 years ago.”[28] A low-quality version of film has been released on Google Video.[29]
Content of 2nd Edition Recut
Flyer for a screening of the film.Loose Change 2nd Edition Recut (2006) opens with a brief description of past suspicious and questionable motives in the history of American government. This discussion includes mention of Operation Northwoods, a plan put forward, but never implemented, during the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962 to create and utilize bogus terrorist attacks against the United States, which were to be blamed on Cuba, as a pretext for invasion of the country. Focus is particularly directed at the previously proposed plans to substitute real commercial airliners with pilotless drone aircraft in order to investigate the plausibility of covertly using them as weapons, whilst maintaining the cover of an accident.[30]
Attention is also given to the Project for the New American Century, a neo-conservative think-tank, which released a report in 2000 titled “Rebuilding America’s Defenses”. In particular the film points out a line from that report which states “the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor” -Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. It also highlights the fact that during the same year the report was released, the Pentagon conducted the first of two training exercises which simulated a Boeing 757 crashing into the building. There is also mention that, from September 6 to September 10 an unusual amount of put options were placed on the stock of American Airlines, Boeing and United Airlines.[31]
This is followed by an examination of the attacks on the Pentagon. The film opposes the official story of Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon, alleging that the path of destruction does not match that which a 757 would leave. In particular, it points out the size of the hole in the Pentagon caused by the crash, examining a lack of debris and landscape damage seemingly inconsistent with prior airliner crashes. It is also alleged that too few parts were recovered from the crash site to reliably ascertain that they were of a Boeing 757, and a certain flywheel observed at the site seemed too small to have been part of the aircraft’s engine turbine. The wheel was officially declared to have been part of the APU but disputed by some experts as not to have come from the APU of a 757 but likely from an E-3 Sentry aircraft. It is also claimed that Hani Hanjour, the hijacker pilot, had difficulty performing basic controls on a small Cessna at a flight school where he rented, and that perhaps not even an experienced pilot could have maneuvered the reflex angle of turn at the airspeed and altitude at which the aircraft approached without going into a high speed stall. Mention is also given to three cameras on nearby buildings that allegedly caught the entire incident at the Pentagon on film, which the government confiscated and has refused to release in full.[32]
The next section focuses on the destruction of the World Trade Center itself. The film comes out in favor of the controlled demolition theory of the destruction of World Trade Centers 1, 2 and 7. Cited as evidence are eyewitness reports from a janitor, firemen, and other people near the buildings who heard bangs, many of them describing them as explosions, as well as videotapes showing windows far below the burning floors blow out during the collapse and seismograph results recorded during the collapse compared to the collapse of other similar buildings. The film claims that WTC 1, 2 and 7 were the first steel frame buildings in history to collapse due to fire. Another allegation centers on an audio recording in which it is claimed two distinct explosions can be heard at the time of the impact. Also, the film posits that the official story of the collapse violates the laws of physics.[33]
In particular, the video alleges that the fires inside the twin towers were not hot enough to bring the buildings down. An audio tape is presented in which the Captain of Ladder 7 claims that the fires can be brought under control by two lines, and it is mentioned that building 7 had taken only minor damage before its own collapse. These allegations follow a listing of buildings that burned longer than the Twin Towers and did not fall.[34]
For Flight 93, the video ignores the more mainstream theory of the plane being crashed by passengers to instead allege it was landed safely at Cleveland Hopkins Airport where it was evacuated by government personnel into an unused NASA research center. Evidence cited included photographs and eyewitness reports of the crash site as evidence, a corresponding evacuation at Cleveland Hopkins Airport and the corresponding reports, oddities in the transcripts of cell-phone calls supposedly placed from the plane during the hijacking, and the sighting of the tail number of Flight 93 on an aircraft in use at a later date.[35]
This is then followed by a more miscellaneous listing of allegations. It is claimed that cellular phone calls could not be made from American Airlines flights at the time of the crash, asking why American Airlines had to install a system in their own airplanes to allow the reception of cellular signals within the planes if they could do this regardless on September 11. It is suggested that the calls from passengers and crew were faked using sophisticated voice-morphing technology developed by the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico and that the December 13, 2001 video of Osama Bin Laden claiming responsibility for the attacks was also faked, featuring what appeared to be an overweight lookalike version of Bin Laden. Finally, it is alleged that, of the list of hijackers initially released by the government, many were not in the planes and were alive after September 11, 2001 and may even still be alive.[36]
In the end, the film gives out motives for people who would have benefited from launching the attacks themselves. Mention is first given to financial motives, including those of Larry Silverstein, who stood to receive a substantial insurance payout after the attacks due to a specific anti-terrorism clause as well as other allegations of insider trading and Halliburton’s benefiting from the subsequent launch of America’s “War on Terror”.[37][38]
Criticism
Loose Change has been subject to criticism from a variety of different sources. In March 2007, the United States Department of State published an article called “Loose Change Debunked” in which it says that the movie makes “sloppy mistakes”. The article is highly critical of the evidence cited to support the claim that Flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon, and it criticizes the controlled demolition hypothesis of the World Trade Center claiming that “Demolition professionals say controlled demolition of the Towers that day would have been impossible.” The article goes on to say:
“It treats statements made at this time as if they represent reasoned judgments, not impromptu, often poorly thought-through misimpressions and uninformed speculation… In sum, Loose Change is researched very shoddily, making numerous mistakes of fact and judgment. Nevertheless, this has not prevented it from becoming extraordinarily popular.”[39]
It goes on to note that Loose Change has also been criticized by other members of the 9/11 Truth Movement, referencing the critique entitled Sifting Through Loose Change.[40] Michael Green, a member of the 9/11 Truth Movement, has analyzed the film and is critical of many of its claims and methods.[41] Several independent researchers have also written critiques of the film. The Loose Change Guide,[42] created by Mark Roberts, features the whole transcript of the show, along with his comments and criticisms. Roberts also compiled a lengthy selection of interview quotes in which the Loose Change creators elaborate on the claims made in the film.[43]
In May 2006, the blog Screw Loose Change was created to criticize the claims in the film.[44] In collaboration with the creators of the blog and drawing upon the work of Mark Roberts, Mark Iradian prepared an edited version of Loose Change which he subtitled with criticisms.[45] Another analysis of the film has been created by the Internet Detectives.[46] Many of the critiques argue that Loose Change quote mines, uses unreliable or out-of-date sources, and cherry-picks evidence to claim that there are serious problems with official accounts of the events of September 11.[46][44][45][20][41] America.gov points out what it deems to be “very sloppy errors” Loose Change makes on the Pentagon attack.[47]
One of the many aspects focused on by these critiques is Loose Change’s analysis of the collapse of the World Trade Center. The comparison to other notable high-rise fires which did not lead to collapse ignores differences in building design, significant WTC structural damage and compromised fireproofing;[48][20] as most steel loses over half its strength at 600°C (1112°F).[49][50] The Madrid’s Windsor Tower comparison fails to note its steel-supported perimeter floors collapsed during the fire.[51] Kevin Ryan, described by Loose Change as working for Underwriters Laboratories (UL), was actually employed in a water-testing subsidiary.[20] Furthermore, UL does not certify structural steel,[20] and ASTM E119 certification is not meant to predict performance in real uncontrolled fires.[52] The NIST found no evidence of any firm having conducted tests on WTC materials in the past.[53] Another expert quoted, Van Romero, has clarified that he was misquoted by the Albuquerque Journal; he had actually said that it “looked like” explosives took down the WTC. When the misquote was printed, he felt his “scientific reputation was on the line.”[50]
On September 11, 2006, Democracy Now! broadcast a discussion between the Loose Change creators and editors from Popular Mechanics, where they debated various aspects of the documentary.[20] Matt Taibbi of Rolling Stone has written that the “9/11 truth movement”: “gives supporters of Bush an excuse to dismiss critics of this administration. I have no doubt that every time one of those Loose Change dickwads opens his mouth, a Republican somewhere picks up five votes.”[38]
Chris Farrell, the Director of Investigations & Research at Judicial Watch, warned in an interview that his organization “could be the water carriers for a honey pot operation, in which the government attracts overwhelming attention to the Pentagon issue, making it the cornerstone of the “9/11 truth movement”, and then blowing it out of the water by releasing clear footage of Flight 77.”[54] He stated, “Let’s just call it a baited trap, it draws somebody into a situation in which they’re compromised.”
According to George Monbiot, “The film’s greatest flaw is this: the men who made it are still alive. If the US government is running an all-knowing, all-encompassing conspiracy, why did it not snuff them out long ago? There is only one possible explanation. They are in fact agents of the Bush regime, employed to distract people from its real abuses of power. This, if you are inclined to believe such stories, is surely a more plausible theory than the one proposed in Loose Change.”[55]
Airings
September 10, 2006: BNN (Bart News Network) Nederland 3[56] and Portuguese public TV Station RTP aired Loose Change in prime time hours. RTP aired it again on 2: for September 17, 2006.[57]
September 11, 2006: Australian Pay TV Channel showed it during prime time hours.
September 10, 2006: Israeli Science Channel (Channel 8).
September 10, 2006: The Pakistani channel Geo TV, dubbed into Urdu; and Al-Arabiya TV, an affiliate of MBC, dubbed into Arabic.
January 1, 2008: It was aired on Swedish channel “TV4 Fakta” at 22:00 CET as part of a 9/11 themed programme schedule.
July 10, 2008 and August 31, 2008: Norwegian TV2 aired it at 23:50 CET under the Norwegian title “Fiksjon eller fakta?”, which translates into “Fiction or fact?”
September 11, 2008 and September 12, 2008: Finnish channel JIM aired the final cut in two parts.
In other media
George Monbiot, political activist and columnist for the Guardian, wrote an article on the improbability of the conspiracies cited in Loose Change, and then wrote a follow-up article in response to negative comments from some of his readers.[58]
Vanity Fair wrote an article about Loose Change and its creators.[59]
Democracy Now! hosted a debate between the authors of Loose Change and the editors of Popular Mechanics.[20]
Dutch Vara television channel’s program Zembla, investigated claims made in the documentary.[60]
FreeLooseChange.com is an initiative in Berlin, Germany. 100 shops, galleries, theatres and a daily newspaper office so far distributed 20,000 free DVDs featuring the documentaries Loose Change and Terrorstorm by Alex Jones in German language versions. A homeless newspaper promoted the DVD with free full page ads.
The History Channel aired a two-hour episode on August 20, 2007, entitled “The 9/11 Conspiracies: Fact or Fiction?” featuring interviews with the creators of Loose Change.[61]
On SModcast Kevin Smith discussed Loose Change and other conspiracy videos about aliens and various things. However, he maintains that he enjoys the film purely as entertainment, and does not believe or agree with the theories presented in the film.
See also
9/11: Press for Truth
Controlled demolition hypothesis for the collapse of the World Trade Center
Loose Change 2nd Edition Online Version (Google Video)
Loose Change 2nd Edition Polska wersja
Loose Change Online with Viewer Comments
Beyond The Ordinary – Interviews with Loose Change director and producer
View Loose Change online in many different languages
Loose Change: Final Cut (2007) (V) at the Internet Movie Database
Criticism
Loose Change: Loose with truth
Screw Loose Change – Not Freakin’ Again edition Subtitled critical version of Loose Change
9-11 Loose Change Second Edition Viewer Guide – Point-by-point criticism
The 9-11Research Companion to “Loose Change 2nd Edition – An interactive and detailed point-by-point critique of the film using an illustrated transcript
“Loose Change” An analysis – By Michael B. Green, Ph. D
Debunking Loose Change – By Internet Detectives
Media Coverage
Democracy Now! Exclusive 9/11 Debate: Loose Change Filmmakers vs. Popular Mechanics Editors of “Debunking 9/11 Myths” Broadcast on September 11 2006
9/11 conspiracy movie taken off the web – June 5 2006 – Naudet brothers allege infringement
This pioneering, groundbreaking expose of 9-11, now two years old, painted a stark and accurate picture of our world today and TOMMORROW. Mike’s new introduction “connects the dots.” Other search word: Conpiracy
1. Main titles – Opening montage – 0:00:00
2. Special 2004 Introduction by Mike Ruppert – 00:01:12
3. Rep. Barbara Lee, Floor Speech – Sept. 2001 00:08:11
4. Portland State – Overview, JFK, DCI Confrontation (‘96) – 00:10:23
5. Mike Ruppert Personal History – 00:23:28
6. CIA and Drugs (Economics and Oil) – 00:25:54
7. CIA & Wall Street, Drug Money and The “Pop” – 00:31:10
8. The Bush Family – 00:36:43
9. Money Laundering – Enron – 00:39:02
10. Catherine Austin Fitts – 00:43:32
11. Loopholes, the “Pop”, Citigroup – 00:47:15
12. Looting the Treasury – Professor John Metzger, Michigan State – 00:57:07
13. Peak Oil – 01:01:39
14. Advance Warnings, Bin Laden & Bush, The Carlyle Group – 01:02:18
15. Insider Trading – 01:07:48
16. PROMIS – 01:11:51
17. Taliban and Opium – Professor Peter Dale Scott – 01:13:00
18. Oil, Pipelines, Central Asia and China – 01:17:12
19. Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard, Looting Russia, Halliburton – 01:21:26
20. 9/11 Timeline – 01:36:28
21. Prisons & Social Security – 01:55:46
22. Civil Liberties – Congressman Ron Paul – 01:59:00
23. Cele Castillo (DEA), Dave Sabow (USMC) – 02:07:51
24. Biowar and Vaccinations – 02:09:56
25. Operation Northwoods – 02:11:07
26. What Can We Do? – Congressman Ron Paul – 02:12:20
27. Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney – Empire – Conclusion – 02:18:37
28. End Credits – 02:21:30
A US Citizen’s journey of discovery into the lies, oppression, and corruption that has invaded her country since 9/11. Through original footage, archived footage, and interviews with people such as Howard Zinn, Michael Parenti, and Michael Ruppert, Liberty Bound explores the state of the union and its ostensible move toward fascism. We talk with people who have been interrogated by the Secret Service and threatened with arrest for doing such benign things as sending an email, turning around during a Bush speech, and having a philosophical discussion on a train.
Panel 1 of a 3-part symposium on “The Current State of North Korea and the Future of the U.S.-Korea Alliance”, hosted by the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs (Princeton University) and Foreign Policy Magazine, Oct 13, 2006. Moderator: Aaron Friedberg, Professor of Politics and International Affairs, Woodrow Wilson School, Princeton University Panelists Discussants: Stephen Kim, North Korea Analyst, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory; Marcus Noland, Senior Fellow, Institute for International Economics; Betsy Henderson, Director of Research, Radio Free Asia; Christopher Chyba, Professor of Astrophysical Sciences and International Affairs, Woodrow Wilson School, Princeton University. Oct 13, 2006.
The largest group of miracle stories mentioned in the New Testament are those concerning disease and disability. The Gospels give varying amounts of detail for each episode, sometimes Jesus cures simply by saying a few words, or laying on of hands, and at other times employs elaborate rituals using material (e.g. spit or mud). Generally they are recorded in the Synoptic Gospels but not John.
Fever – The Synoptics describe Jesus as healing the mother-in-law of Simon Peter when he visited Simon’s house in Capernaum, around the time of Jesus recruiting Simon as an Apostle (Mark has it just after the calling of Simon, while Luke has it just before). The synoptics imply that this led other people seeking out Jesus, and him traveling over the whole of Galilee to preach to them.
Leprosy – The Synoptics state that, early in Jesus’ ministry, he healed a leper, whom he then instructed to offer the requisite ritual sacrifices as proscribed by the Deuteronomic Code and Priestly Code. Jesus instructed the ex-leper not to tell anyone who had healed him; but the man disobeyed, increasing Jesus’ fame, and thereafter Jesus withdrew to deserted places, but was followed there. Luke also states that later, while on his way to Jerusalem, Jesus sent ten lepers, who had sought his assistance, to the priests, and that they were healed as they went, but that the only one that came back to thank Jesus was a Samaritan.
Long term bleeding – The Synoptics state that while heading to Jairus’ house (see the section below on power over death), Jesus was approached by a woman who had been suffering from bleeding for 12 years, and that she touched Jesus’ cloak (fringes of his garment: Matt 9:20, 14:36), and was instantly healed. Jesus turned about and, when the woman came forward, said “Daughter, your faith has healed you, go in peace”. The bleeding is sometimes interpreted as menorrhagia, but most scholars consider that the duration, 12 years, makes it more plausible that the condition was something more akin to hemophilia.
Withered hands – The Synoptics state that Jesus entered a synagogue on the Sabbath, and found a man with a withered hand there, whom Jesus healed, having first challenged the people present to decide what was lawful for a Sabbath – to do good or to do evil, to save life or to kill . The Gospel of Mark adds that this angered the Pharisees so much that they started to contemplate killing Jesus.
Dropsy – Luke alone states that, during a Sabbath, Jesus ate in the house of a prominent Pharisee, opposite someone who suffered from dropsy, and Jesus asked the Pharisees that were present if it was lawful to heal on the Sabbath, but, after getting no reply, healed the man. Jesus then challenged the Pharisees to say that they would not immediately pull out an ox, or a son (or a donkey, according to some ancient manuscripts of Luke), if it fell into a well during a Sabbath.
Deafness – Mark alone states that Jesus went to the Decapolis and met a man there who was deaf and mute, and cured him. Specifically, Jesus first touched the man’s ears, and touched his tongue after spitting, and then said Ephphatha!, an Aramaic word meaning Be opened
Blindness – The Synoptics state that Jesus met a beggar (Mark gives the name: bar-Timai or son of Timai) who, though blind, still identified Jesus as the Jewish Messiah; Jesus said that the man’s faith has healed him, and he received his sight, and was allowed to follow Jesus. This happened when Jesus was leaving Jericho, and Matthew adds that there was another healed at the same time. John mentions as similar event that happened near the Pool of Siloam, with the following details:
The disciples first questioned Jesus whether the man’s curse was for his own sins, or those of his parents. Jesus said it was for neither reason, “but that the works of God should be made manifest in him”.
Jesus healed him by spitting on the ground, mixing his spit with mud, and putting the mixture into his eyes, then sent him to wash in the Pool of Siloam.
The event happened on a Sabbath; therefore the Pharisees said, “this man is not of God, because he does not keep the Sabbath”. They asked the formerly blind man concerning Jesus, who said, “he is a prophet”.
The Jews did not believe that the healed man was the same person as the man who had been blind from birth, and asked his parents if the healed man was their son. The parents responded that he was, and had been born blind.
Jesus identified himself as the Son of God, and the cured man worshiped him.
Additionally, Mark alone states that Jesus went to Bethsaida and met another man there who was blind, and then cured him. Specifically, Jesus is described as spitting in the man’s eyes, to which the man responded that his vision is now blurred; Jesus then touched the man’s eyes, and the man responded that he can see clearly now. John’s account of the healing of has been argued by some scholars to be a conflation of the account of bar-Timai in Mark, together with the healing method given by Mark’s account of the second healing of a blind man.
Paralysis – The Synoptics state that a paralytic was brought to Jesus on a mat; Jesus told him to get up and walk, and the man did so. Jesus also told the man that his sins were forgiven, which according to the Synoptics irritated the Pharisees, and according to John irritated the people in general. Jesus is described as responding to the anger by asking whether it is easier to say that someone’s sins are forgiven, or to tell the man to get up and walk. The Synoptics state that this happened in Capernaum, Mark and Luke adding that Jesus was in a house at the time, and that the man had to be lowered through the roof by his friends due to the crowds blocking the door. A similar account is given in John and occurs at the Pool of Bethesda; some have argued this is another version of the event described in the synoptics, rather than a separate cure.
Unspecified sickness – All four Canonical Gospels state that Jesus was asked by an official to heal a person important to him, and although Jesus is somewhat annoyed at being constantly asked to perform miracles, rather than being asked for teachings, he says that the person would be healed, and the official returned home to find that this has happened. The Synoptics state that official was a centurion, and that it was the centurion’s servant that was sick, while the Gospel of John states that the official was a royal official, originating from Canaan, and that it was his son who was sick.
Exorcisms
According to the Synoptic Gospels, Jesus performed many exorcisms of demoniacs. These incidents are not mentioned by the Gospel of John.
The accounts in the Synoptic Gospels are:
The boy possessed by a demon at Capernaum – Jesus exorcised an unclean spirit and forbidding the demon from informing people that he was the “Holy One of God”. (Mark 1:21-28, Luke 4:31-37)
Jesus drove out evil spirits with a word. (Matthew 8:8, 8:14-17, Mark 1:29-39; Luke 4:33-41)
The man possessed by demons at Gerasenes, whom the people had tried to chain up but had escaped, and lived in caves, and roamed the hills, screaming – Jesus inquired the man’s name, but is told by the man/demons that his name is Legion, “…for we are many”. The demons asked to be expelled into a group of swine, which Jesus did, and thereafter the pigs fell into a lake and drowned. The pig owners tell the townsfolk what had happened, and when the townsfolk see that the man is now sane, they besought Jesus to leave “for they were taken with great fear”. The man, on the other hand, informs the whole of the decapolis what had happened. (Matthew 8:28-34, Mark 5:1-20, Luke 8:26-39)
Jesus drove a demon out of a mute man who then spoke, the Pharisees said it was by the power of Beelzebub. (Matthew 9:32-34, Mark 3:20-22)
Jesus gave the Twelve Apostles the authority to drive out evil spirits. (Matthew 10:1-8, Mark 3:15, 6:7, 6:13, Luke 9:1, 10:17)
Jesus said if he drove out demons by the Spirit of God or Finger of God then the Kingdom of God has come. (Matthew 12:22-32, Luke 11:14-23, 12:10;, Mark 3:20-30)
The possessed daughter of the Canaanite or Phoenician woman in Tyre – the woman asks Jesus to heal her daughter, but Jesus says “I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel”. The woman replies, “Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters’ table”, whereupon Jesus tells her that her daughter is healed, and when the woman returns home she finds that this is true. (Matthew 15:21-28, Mark 7:24-30)
The boy possessed by a demon that is brought forward to Jesus straight after Jesus’ transfiguration, and who foams at the mouth, gnashes his teeth, becomes rigid, and involuntarily falls into both water and fire – Jesus’ followers cannot expel the demon, and Jesus condemns the people as unbelieving, but when the father of the boy questions if Jesus can heal the boy, Jesus says everything is possible for those that believe, so the father says he believes that the boy could be healed, and Jesus does so. (Matthew 17:14-21, Mark 9:14-29, Luke 9:37-49)
Jesus had driven seven demons out of Mary Magdalene. (Mark 16:9, Luke 8:2)
Jesus continued to cast out demons even though Herod Antipas wanted to kill him. (Luke 13:31-32)
Controlling nature
Jesus multiplying the loaves (altarpiece, 1870, Church of the Nativity of Mary, Ravensburg, Germany).The Gospels tell another group of stories concerning Jesus’ power over nature:
The Feeding of the 5000 and of the 4000 men – Jesus, praying to God and using only a few loaves of bread and several fish, feeds thousands of men, along with an unspecified number of women and children; there are even a number of baskets of leftovers afterward.
The Cursing of the Fig Tree – Jesus cursed a fig tree, and it withered.
Turning Water into Wine – at a wedding, when the host runs out of wine, the host’s servants fill vessels with water at Jesus’ command, then a sample is drawn out and taken to the master of the banquet who pronounces the content of the vessels as the best wine of the banquet.
Walking on water – Jesus walked on a lake to meet a boat.
Transfiguration of Jesus – Jesus climbed a mountain and was changed so that his face glowed.
The Catch of 153 fish – Jesus instructed the disciples to throw their net over the side of the water, resulting in them hauling in the huge catch (for hand fishing) of 153 fish.
Calming a storm – during a storm, the disciples woke Jesus, and he rebuked the storm causing it to become calm. Jesus then rebukes the disciples for lack of faith.
Transubstantiation during the last supper; disputed by some denominations. (see Christian Interpretations below)
Power over death
The Canonical Gospels report three cases where Jesus calls a dead person back to life:
Jairus’ daughter – Jairus, a major patron of a synagogue, asks Jesus to heal his daughter, but while Jesus is on his way, men tell Jairus that his daughter has died. Jesus says she was only sleeping and wakes her up with the word Talitha koum!.
The son of the widow at Nain – A young man, the son of a widow, is brought out for burial in Nain. Jesus sees her, and his pity causes him to tell her not to cry. Jesus approaches the coffin and tells the man inside to get up, and he does so.
The raising of Lazarus – a close friend of Jesus who has been dead for four days is brought back to life when Jesus commands him to get up.
Jesus’ own resurrection from the dead.
While the raising of the daughter of Jairus is in all the Synoptic Gospels (but not in the Gospel of John), the raising of the son of the widow of Nain appears only in the Gospel of Luke, and the raising of Lazarus appears only in the Gospel of John. It has been argued by several scholars and commentators[citation needed] that the story of the raising of Lazarus and that of the Nain widow’s son really refer to the same event, considered to derive from the raising of the youth in the original Mark.
Supernatural knowledge
The ability of Jesus to know things by supernatural means could also be classed as a miracle.
This may explain the reason why Nathaniel responded to Jesus saying, “Before that Philip called thee, when thou was under the fig tree, I saw thee”, by answering, “Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel.”[1] It could be perhaps that when he was under the fig tree, Nathaniel had been praying in secret which elicited this response, rather than that he did not know that he had merely been observed in the natural way.
The story of the Samaritan woman at the well is an example where Jesus supernaturally knew the history of the woman including the men in her life.
Loading ...
(5 votes, average: 4.40 out of 5)
Recent Comments