Interview with Jarek Kupsc, Director, Writer and Star of "The Reflecting Pool" – Part III

Kupsc: Right, about WTC Building 7, she was canned from her show just because she doesn’t have that kind of clout.  She’s not a money maker for her network anymore.  She used to be, but she’s not.

It depends on who you are, what you do and what your status is. 

If you had someone like…let’s just drop this celebrity…it’s just not going anywhere.

Bonanno: All right.

Kupsc: I fully understand.  I did send Charlie Sheen and Martin Sheen a copy of the movie.  I tried to get a hold of Sean Penn, not in terms of performing in the film.  We need the support of these people with credibility or credentials, if you will, to speak out on 9/11.

I was hoping I would hear back from Charlie or I could get through to Sean to see what they think about it or see if they could support our movie and I never heard anything back.

What we really need, not just for the movie, but for the 9/11 Truth Movement, is for one respected journalist such as Seymour Hirsch of The New Yorker to do an investigative piece connecting all the dots, all the loose ends, wrapping it up in a story.

They did a great job in The New Yorker with the Abu Ghraib prison scandal.  They broke the story in The New Yorker.  Why couldn’t they do something similar with 9/11?

Mother Jones or Harper’s…it’s a moot point, really, to say this because the answer is obvious.  They can not put their ass on the line.

All it would take for people’s opinion to turn on a dime is for one journalist such as Si Hirsch to write about it.

Bonanno: There’s a scene in the movie in which Prokop is on a beach or near a dock – there’s water.  There’s a guy that Prokop meets there.  Prokop says, “You’re the only one who’s written about Building 7.”

According to what McGuire, Prokop’s editor, says in the beginning of the movie, the movie takes place 5 years after the events of 9/11.

We all know that people like Thierry Meyssan and David Ray Griffin had written about 9/11 before 2006. 

Yet, the story line seems to indicate that the possibility of an alternative explanation for what happened on 9/11 was coming to light in 2006.

Was this intentional?  Did you mean to imply that 9/11 hadn’t been researched prior to the time frame in the movie?

Kupsc: What you’re leading to is why didn’t I bring out any of the 9/11 research?

 1  |  2  |  3