It looks like people are becoming increasingly interested in comments Marion Cotillard made about 9/11 a year ago on a French television channel. We get news of this story thanks to our friends at Variety:
Only a week after picking up her best actress Oscar, Marion Cotillard’s unconventional views on the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks have come to light. In a year-old interview revived Saturday on French website Marianne2 the Gallic thesp questions the U.S. government’s accounts of the attacks on the World Trade Center. “I think we’re lied to about a number of things,” Cotillard said. “We see other towers of the same kind being hit by planes. Are they burned? There was a tower, I believe it was in Spain, which burned for 24 hours. It never collapsed. None of these towers collapsed. And there (in New York), in a few minutes, the whole thing collapsed.”
The interview with Cotillard was first broadcast on the program “Paris Premiere — Paris Derniere” a year ago, but it attracted little attention then. Because of Cotillard’s heightened profile following her Oscar win for playing Edith Piaf in “La Vie en rose,” a transcript of the interview was posted on Marianne 2.
Variety goes on to wonder if this info would have hurt her oscar chances if news came out beforehand. I would guess no. I really don’ t think this is a big deal at all to be honest. If people have questions I never think it is wise to shut them up or look poorly upon them for asking them. In fact, I get concerned when people attack individuals that ask questions that may not be popular. Only cowards and those with things to hide attack people who ask a question.
There are a large number of American citizens that believe that 9/11 was an inside job. If someone from France is merely questioning the truthfulness of the Bush administration’s account of the incident – you will have to pardon me for saying “no shit”. The current administration is looked upon with disdain and hatred the world over and has proven itself to be full of shit time and time again. If you are surprised an actress from France questions their honesty – I have swampland to sell you.
She is an actress and should be hired for her abilities and not her beliefs. If this news does effect her career; I will certainly be startled and dismayed.
Agreed, I have already started doing so. Damn you Movie Blog!!! I will check out that video tonight. Take it easy
It’s been excellent discussing with you, sir. The randomness of our off course rambling may have pulled you out of your shell, but that just means you’re going to have to start posting more on topic responses in the future! LOL
BTW. I just watched this, and although there’s still some rhetoric about it being an inside job, there are some valid questions and observations. Check it out if you like: http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=4026073566596731782
Rabble! Ok here I go, allow me to do my best. The basis of it was that the plane crashed into the building causing the initial damage and then the burned. Steel retains heat and the longer something burns and is surrounded by combustible materials the fire is fueled more and grows hotter. Over the hour or so that this happens this causes the steel to soften and lose integrity. Though the impact was more on the side of the building the fire itself that burned for over an hour was spread over several floors all along rather than be concentrated in the impact zone alone. Since the fire spread this caused the steel all around the structure of the floor to weaken allowing the weight to be too much for it to handle and that is why it fell in a more uniform fashion rather than fall over or push out. I think the reason that my case is not completely convincing is because I am beneath an amateur in these matters and I can only discuss it in generalities.
In regards to whether I made formulas, no. The principles I was taught and dealt with were basic formulas and laws. We practiced things like cannon shots, bows and arrows, if you start at one part of a bank on a river and the stream current is traveling at such and such a rate, if you traveled straight at a certain speed how far down the bank would you end up. Basic stuff like that. Things I found out that surprised me was that if you jump off a cliff you will cease to curve outward because the velocity would become so great it would prevent it, it would only change if there were external forces like wind or a cliff-face. I had fun with those simulations on the computers. Good stuff.
The last question was how does a building get obliterated into nothing but rubble? Well there were some sections were entire sections of the side were still intact while some areas were pounded into dust. I simply chalk that up to weight and inertia. That was the collapse not the fire.
Glad to be civil, as to the other Brian (that’s my first name too) what in the world are you talking about. There were I think two people who said it was an inside job but Doug only said that the Bush Administration was not entirely truthful. That should be taken as a point of fact. Of course they would, there are parts of every government investigation where parts are hidden from the public, this happens in almost every one. The reasons can vary, even if you are not cynical of the Bush administration. If you don’t want someone to repeat that act then of course you are going to keep somethings from the public. To me that is just common sense, especially if you had intelligence and don’t want to reveal your methods. There were lots of signs there and I am sure that the government did not want us to know all of them because we think they are incompetent enough as it is, why make it even worse?
Wow for a post about an actresses comments this really went off on a tangent. I typically keep to myself, I have come here for months and posted once or twice. But I have done so more today than in the entire time I have been coming here. It’s fucking crazy how you can get sucked into this.
It’s a shame that people get so offended when others simply ask questions. For shame.
BrDanzig
I appreciate your rebuttal, and I will look into the fire side of things more diligently. However, a quick question: since the buildings were strong enough to hold the top 30 or so floors before the fire, how could the structural damage that occurred during the fire capsize straight down? I still fail to see how that could happen. Given that you took physics, I would expect that you took and practised different formula’s to draw specific conclusions. How can you formulate that when something is weak on its side, it falls in the middle? Also, if you could, please answer how a building gets obliterated to nothing but rubble from a fire. Thanks for being civil, btw. It nice to know there are still rational people to have discussions with.
Godfather, from my understanding the firefighters did not know the extent of the damage and therefore did not evacuate themselves or others. This decision cost them their lives. While the majority of the fuel was burned in the initial explosion there were remnants that were leaking out. People who were evacuating stated that they could smell it.
Like I said before I am not an engineering expert and my attempts are admittedly half-assed summaries. Even though they were not hit on center they still would have collapsed as they did. Had they been hit low or underneath as Ramzi Yousef had intended in 1993 that would very likely have been the effect. But they were hit high enough that when the top started to come down it was of such weight and mass that the idea of it toppling without a greater external force to push it or sufficient resistance from the remaining tower itself to spill outward just wasn’t there and so it collapsed as it did.
Also the idea that if there was enough concrete, steel and other material to absorb the impact of the blast is not far fetched from my understanding. Also if people are outside of a window where heat is escaping and not being insulated or centered in certain locations then, yes they can survive in on the outside windows while a fire rages on inside. They very well might have gone to the windows to escape from the higher temperatures.
I will let that rest my case for now. Most of what I know is from what I read and a couple of physics classes I took 6 years ago where we actually talked about it in a couple of classes. I appreciate that you think my arguments are well thought out but I am not the best person to answer your questions. There are much smarter men out there than I.
BrDanzig
Your thoughts are well written and put forth, however, there are a couple mistakes with your reasoning. In regards to the planes hitting the buildings, it is a known fact that the majority of the jet fuel was burned outside the buildings on impact, not inside. Sure there were fires inside, however, when the firefighters inside are claiming they can put the fires out, it makes one wonder how these fires were so intense that these men and women didn’t say “fuck it…we can’t stop it…everyone out”?
As for the physics side of the equation, the buildings came straight down and didn’t topple towards one side as they should have. I’m not saying the whole building, but at the very least the portion above where the planes hit. They did not hit the buildings centred, which would have caused them to come down in the manner they did. Now, having said that, there’s a panel of respected engineers and professors out there that rebuke the way these 3 buildings came down. Oddly, the Twins are a freak of nature (or physics) to the way they came down, but the even larger “unknown” has to be building 7. Just something to keep in mind.
The people I referred to were not 10 stories above where the planes hit. If the argument is to be made that these fires were raging and so intense that they caused the structural failure of these massive and well designed buildings, then the case cannot be argued on why the humans standing in the same window as the plane crashes wouldn’t have been burned, regardless of how it’s spun. To say that they were hiding behind a wall (“people who were in rooms who were behind enough material to survive the plane hit. Kinda like how people duck behind walls to shield themselves from explosions”) and believe that the materials were on fire doesn’t sit right in my mind. How can they be the cause of these steel structures failing yet stop the imploding fire ball and steel coming in?
Jagmir
Trying to insult me by calling me “dogfather”, really? I figure you could’ve at least been a little more original than that. To answer your questions, look into it deeper. By the admission of even the 911 Committee put together to “investigate” the WTC and plane crashes, they themselves admitted that the majority of the fuel from the planes was burned on impact, not inside the buildings. So, to answer your “super-heated” and “steel-mill” argument, I will say to you that in a controlled environment where temperatures are maintained to help shape steel, do you really believe that the combustible materials they are using to create those fires are paper, computer parts, drywall, and glass? Are you arguing that the heat generated by the fires in the attacks on the WTC buildings can be the same degree of heat that a blacksmith uses to bend and shape steel/iron 1/4-1/2″ thick? Now that’s a new one! Wow! All these steel factories using exponential (that means “A LOT”) amounts of energy to create heat sufficient enough to mold and shape steel (over 3″ thick) into structural buildings that can withstand hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of pounds can be done by burning a few computers and carpets? Interesting… I think I’m gonna start a steel mill here! There’s a lot of old computers people are throwing out!
Don’t call me a conspiracy nut. I never stated the government was in on anything. I just like to ask questions that somehow seem to escape having a rational or logical answer.
Jack Burton
It’s pretty easy to assume that I am like an uneducated person, taking the words of some college kids over an engineer, basing opinion on “word of mouth” instead of truth and logic and experience. Calling me sheep is easy, but you having a simpleton mindset allows me to call you on your immaturity and reluctance to look into facts staring you in the face. A simple google search produces lovely videos by some well respected, knowledgeable, experienced, and quite informative group of people, that raise some very interesting questions. Please, boy, if you want to call me sheep, have the decency to look into where I gathered my information before coming off like as ass and ASSuming something that has little to do with what I stated.
I’m not saying the government attacked or destroyed the WTC and has a secret agenda to rule the world, or blah blah blah… However, there are WAY too many unresolved questions and irrational hypothesis’ to just take what “they tell you” as truth.
It seems my opening remark in my previous comment above was accurate in that the actress (and her lawyers) have come fourth and said that her words were ‘taken out of context’ and that she does not really feel there was a conspiracy by the US Government.
No Doug, there is not a “large number of American citizens that believe 9/11 was an inside job”. There are a rare few.
Whether or not they are too dim or just missinformed is another matter, but there are only a small number.
As to the actress, I think her views on the moonlanding pretty much closes the deal on her sanity.
Of course the Oscars is always a great avenue for some good old fashioned Bush Bashing. Never fails to surround the event like flies on, how did you say, “shit.”
Actually Godfather, from my understanding of physics you would be incorrect. The laws of physics would dictate that they collapse straight down. The sheer weight, mass and inertia of the top collapsing would cause it to continue to fall down and not curve out or topple over. It would fall over if it had been given the force to topple over. You would have to, in a sense, push it over. The heat caused the steel to lose structural integrity, which is how blacksmithing is done. When you are talking about several hundred tons, it simply will not work that way you imagine it to be. It was a large mass that was caused by gravity to fall down. This is my retard version of it as I am not a structural engineer and there are much smarter people out there who can explain it in much better ways. In regards to people making phone calls. Most of them were from people in floors above the crash site and there were a remote few that did call from the floors struck but were cut off early as the fires grew out of control. People being alive in those areas is not too surprising. There were people who were in rooms who were behind enough material to survive the plane hit. Kinda like how people duck behind walls to shield themselves from explosions. Even though they survived the plane hit itself, from my understanding few of them survived the event as everyone on those levels and above were doomed the moment the plane hit. The only ones that survived were from Tower 2 were a stairwell had actually survived the impact intact and a few were able to make it down before it got engulfed by the fire and jet fuel. I have seen some of the video which claim to “debunk” the structural collapse theory but they all seem to be part of the conspiracy mongers who want to say that thermite was the material used to bring down the towers.They are used more to propagate the theory that it was a controlled demolition (which is just silly no matter how you look at it) I am glad you are asking the questions, I am trying to be helpful in answering them and not be insulting. Like I said, this is my amateur answers and I am not a scientist but when 90% of engineers and scientists tell me the same thing, I tend to believe them.
You can do what you like. I am saying that it is unwise to look down anyone for asking a question.
I am unsure why you would look down on Charlie Sheen for his sexual habits. That is his business, why would you care?
I keep it real every day.
Hey Omar,
Thanks for the line “dancing monkeys for my entertaiment…etc” you know, I couldn’t have come up with a better one. And by the way, its not ALL beautiful women…just THIS ONE…(wink wink, shrug, shrug).
Hey, perhaps you fellas can explain to me how metal is processed in a steel mill….gee, I don’t know… MAYBE WITH FIRE!
Dogfather, I don’t even know where to start. Look, plane crashes into buildings…jet fuel flame burns interior infrastructure, super-heated pockets of fire melts steel, architechtural integrity fails, building collapses. Last I checked, gravity is a downward force.
Dogfather,
I don’t think that there has ever been any good quality control/quality assurance experiments involving plane full of jet fuel crashing into skyscrapers have you?
GODFATHER, you, sir, are SHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP. Stop watching YouTube videos made by college kids with too much time on their hands. A gaggle of scientists in Popular Mechanics already told you what really happened; now if you want to go through life taking the word of a bunch of pimple-face kids on YouTube over a VERY CREDIBLE magazine like Popular Mechanics, then by all means, keep the foil hat on. Otherwise, you, sir, are one conspiracy away from the white jacket.
P.S. Doug, my man, seriously? I can’t look down on an ACTRESS trying to tell me the science of structural engineering? What’s next, you gonna tell me I can’t look down on Charlie Sheen for screwing everything that walks or squawks? Get real, brotha.
P.S.S. Seriously, John, how can you allow that idiot with the name “Satan” to still be on your site? The fact that he’s posting under a vulgar name already took away most of the credibility from this “debate”.
She also said this about the moon landing:
“Did a man really walk on the Moon? I saw plenty of documentaries on it, and I really wondered. And in any case I don’t believe all they tell me, that’s for sure.”
Since there’s been talk of how “the evidence shows the buildings came down by fire” and yada yada yada, I’ll make one point that I hope ANYONE arguing the point of fire can convince me of:
IF the fires were so hot to melt 47 interior steel columns, burn through all the carpeting, computers, dividers, curtains, etc, where the fire-fighters inside the building said they can knock the fires out with two lines (it’s documented), why oh why, if the fires were SO hot to burn the metal and collapse these buildings purposely designed to take such a collision, not burn the humans still inside, making phone calls, or standing on the edge of the gaping holes left by the airplanes? Interesting little tidbit that these so called professionals of engineering claiming it was brought down by fire, can’t seem to answer that people were still alive in the areas these fires were supposedly raging in…
Oh, and if you want to argue how these engineers and the government claim that it was structural failure, I have a nice little video of some very respected engineers rebuking your argument…
One more thought for you: IF the WTC buildings were brought down by structural failure, isn’t it a might bit convenient that they fell straight down and didn’t topple sideways as physics would dictate they should have? It’s amazing how these three buildings are the only steel buildings in history to come down due to fire, and conveniently defy the laws of physics along the way…
You know I cannot say for sure that it would hurt her career, but I will say if she questioned the validity of the Holocaust people would be much less kind to her. I certainly stand up for people who think that questions should be asked of all things and every event. I think that the more unpopular the question tends to be, the more it should be protected and examined. However, it does seem a little bizarre that she is asking questions, that as Darren pointed out, have been researched and answered numerous times. It is considered by many to be the most researched building collapse in history. There is a wealth of research and information that she could have read at multiple times. I was wondering how a building built to withstand a plane crashing into it collapsed and read up about it and so I understand. But to defend her again, if she was not asking the questions like that no one would spend the time to give us answers.
Wow Jagmir… Tell us how you really feel about actors. To believe that actors are not capable of serious thoughts, analysis, and discussion is a losing battle. Maybe your definitions/thoughts of what “actors” are like can be summed up by saying you watch too much E-News and think that everyone is a Lindsay Lohan, Britney Spears, or Jessica Simpson.
cib3K… I’m willing to wager that this woman is smarter than the President of the US. Don’t be too committed that people in specific roles are smart. Some are there by money (or their parent’s money – LOL). Calling her an “ordinary” woman can seem foolish, especially stating “Actors are good at slipping into characters and portraying emotions – not masters of analysis and deep thought”. I garner a lot of “actors” will tell you slipping into those roles takes a lot of analysis and deep thought.
@ cib3k
Yes, she’s pretty much stating she believes the Towers collapsing was an inside job by saying none of the towers fell. Otherwise she wouldn’t bring up that we’re supposedly being lied to and mention the other towers.
First, I’m amazed how people only now are noticing Marion Cotillard. She was in Taxi and two of its sequels, for god’s sake. I thought any movie lover would have seen at least one of those. I’m not from France and I know her from years ago.
Second, she’s just an actress. She’s not Einstein, she’s not the president, she’s an ordinary woman. Actors are good at slipping into characters and portraying emotions – not masters of analysis and deep thought. I find her opinions about conspiracies quite normal – a lot of people are thinking the same things, mostly due to lack of information. And she’s better than others – there are a lot of uninformed people out there who aren’t even doubting what the government and media feeds them; they’re like sheep. She’s also not stating that the conspiracy is the TRUTH – she’s just wondering about things and she’s suspecting we’re being lied about some of them. And I believe we are indeed lied to sometimes, and things are hidden from us, so it’s a normal reaction from a human being to suspect something is wrong.
Also, I’m not sure now, but the 9/11 conspiracy theories were quite popular outside US a few years ago – at least in my country.
Jagmir.
That last sentence show how little you respect women and automatically think beautiful women are morons and actors as well.
Why the FUCK are actors and entertainers not allowed to voice their opinion about the way things are going in the world today? Are they only dancing monkeys in your eyes? Is that really how you view people of that profession? Dancing monkeys for your entertainment who are meant to jerk you off and then go sit quietly in a corner?
Fucking pisses me off when people spout ignorant shit like this.
I’ll tell you what gets under my skin….stupid people….everywhere.
Look at Darren’s references. He’s right. It is more likely that pigs grow wings at night and soar through the night sky than the US govt being involved in such a hideous act. C’mon people. get your heads out let it have some sun.
a good-looking broad with a killer body is the last person I’d ask to think. just show us your TnA sweetie, leave the thinking for multi-cellular organisms.
Even with out 9/11 Bush STILL STOLE THE ELECTION in 2000! So screw him. AND even if you throw out the controlled Demo of the WTC, there are still TONS of unanswered questions about what really happened on 9/11! And in no fucking way does 9/11 give Bush the authority to do what he has done to our country, not to mention Iraq and Afghanistan. Bush and his whole crew should be on trial fro crimes against humanity! TO HELL WITH HIM. And who cares if she asks questions about 9/11? Are we all supposed to shut up and just follow orders? Good thing Washington and Jefferson didn’t do that back in the day or we would all be singing God Save the Queen right now.
I’ll always believe that in a democrat society, with free speech as a core value, that any member of the public, regardless of their public notoriety or anonymity should be able to say (within the strictures of libel and slander) pretty much anything they want to. It’s up to us as individuals to investigate the veracity of anyone’s claims and draw our own conclusions.
Darren Darren Darren…
As Doug said, there’s some swamp land for you… But let’s leave the topic of the towers out of this argument, shall we…
Doug
To answer your question, I do believe that had this information been put forth prior to the Oscars, it would have most certainly changed the vote, but whether positively or negatively is unknown. The reason I state this is because in just about every situation, politics does play a significant part of ones decisions, and the Oscars’ would’ve been no exception… I personally believe that it would’ve hurt her chances of winning, but again, we’ll never know for sure, unless someone claims her a terrorist (because she’s questioning the authority) and they throw her in the slammer for this belief (it has happened to many people in the US). I guess the future will show whether these remarks will hurt her in the American film industry.
Screw Stormy70, and to hell with Bush and all his ilk. And yes, I live in god forsaken Amerikkka, but I just like the majority of Americans DID not vote that shurb into office.
It’s what she said two years ago. Does she still feel the same way…? Also if this came to light sooner, I don’t think it would have hurt her Oscar chances. They honored her acting, not her conspiracy theories.
I for one do get sick and tired of the conspiracy theories. I don’t care if you love the soon be gone President and his administration or have an inner inferno rage over him. Terrorists brung down the Towers. Nobody else. That is not an opinion. That is fact.
Well, Bush lied. Okay.
So did: National Institute of Standards and Technology;
Popular Mechanics, Scientific American and Time Magazine; CBC; the BBC; Le Monde; FEMA; National Fire Protection Association; National Institute of Standards and Technology …The Republican Party AND The Democratic Party as both stand behind the 9/11 commision report.
Right? Wrong. In both Government backed and independent studies (such as Popular Mechanics and Scientific American, and Purdue University, among others) they have debunked the conspiracy claims left and right. Conspiracy theorists have speculation and/or mild circumstances twisted to fit thier own truths. The people who discover hard facts, eyewitness accounts, all liars. That, in the words of the Cartman, is simply ‘retarted’.
Let’s talk about some buildings, shall we? Cotilliard saus a tower in Spain was on fire for 24 hours. Fair enough. But was it as tall as one of the Trade Center Towers? It is a different building (even SHE wasn’t sure) and the planes went into the buildings.
Fact:
*The NIST investigation revealed that plane debris sliced through the utility shafts at the North Tower’s core, creating a conduit for burning jet fuel — and fiery destruction throughout the building. :
*While the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F.
Different circumstance for the WTC. And while we are here,,,I have to ask the recent Oscar winner: What other hijacked planes went into other buildings before or after 9/11 and of that magnitude?
Nothing against Marion, but she isn’t a big enough star for anyone to care about what she says. Who cares? This’ll be old news in a week when Britney ODs again.
Her ilk being idiotic actors with the wind whistling through their empty heads. Stick to taking your clothes off, sweetheart, leave the conspiracy theorizing to late night radio.
The moon landings were fake?! Come on. That is high quality crazy, right there.
Most of her like? You mean French people or actresses?
She is an idiot. But that’s OK, most of her ilk are idiots.
I find it offensive that you think no one is allowed to think poorly of her for it. By that token, you are not allowed to think poorly of anyone asking “questions” about other people’s patriotism.
See what I did there?
She questioned the moon landings, too. Did Bush cause her disbelief on that particular issue. She is a moron of the highest order. Now she is just doing le damage control.
I’m Swedish by the way.
Very well written, Doug! I totally agree!
No her comments simply suggested that the administration was not being entirely truthful.
Hell I’m positive the public was lied to a lot about 9/11. That does NOT mean it was an inside job and that’s not necessarily what she is saying.
What I’m more worried about is shortly after 9/11 when the French did not support the US there was a wave of anti-French sentiments…(freedom fries anyone?) I’m concerned that this can bring all that crap back again (even if it is one sole actress). These things have a way of getting out of hand.