The movie "In The Line of Fire" (1993) has a warning about the date 11-09-2001

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 09:15 AM
link   
The movie "In the Line of Fire" from 1993, with Clint Eastwood, has a hidden "warning" about the date of 11-09-2001.

As we know, in the date format used in most of the world, September 11, 2001 is written 11-09-2001.



In the movie, a Secret Service agent (Eastwood) tries to stop an ex-CIA asset who turned into a psychopatht that wants to kill the President of the United States.

The "warning" is hidden in a scene in the end of the movie.

The man who wants to kill the President disguises himself as a donor to the re-election campaign of the President.

In the scene, Clint Eastwood is comparing a list of bank accounts opened in the last six months in a Los Angeles bank where an employee was murdered, with a list of donors to the Los Angeles comitee.


This is what Eastwood finds in the list of donors:

i48.tinypic.com...

Look at this picture...



The false name of the "donor" (the psychopath) is James Carney. And Eastwood finds the name in the list.

What imediatelly caught my attention was the fact that there are NUMBERS at the side of the name of each donor.

Guess which was the number at the side of the name of James Carney?

Yes, it was 2001.


This is odd enough to make someone stop the movie, go back to the scene, and pause it, to see it with more attention.

Now, see the numbers above 2001... Yes, that's 1109.

Weird?




posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 09:20 AM
link   
Let's talk seriously.

There are millions of possible number combinations!

Why exactly 1109 and 2001?


This scene is the climax of the movie, where the Secret Service agent finally discovers how the psycopath is disguised.

The number 2001 is a not at the side of "any" name. It's at the side of the "target" name, the name of James Carney.

And the number 1109 is exactly above the number 2001.

It's so clear...
edit on 30-4-2012 by Atento because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 09:23 AM
link   
And also remember the fact that, according to the offcial history, Osama Bin Laden was an CIA asset who fought against the Soviets in Afghanistan, and later turned against the USA. That's a similarity with the murderer of the movie.



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 09:32 AM
link   
No. I'm not buying it. I'm just not. There are probably 1000's of other movies that we could one way or another link to 9/11 in some sort of fashion. If this picture is all there is to your theory then I have to disagree with it.



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 09:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by HawkeyeNation
No. I'm not buying it. I'm just not. There are probably 1000's of other movies that we could one way or another link to 9/11 in some sort of fashion. If this picture is all there is to your theory then I have to disagree with it.



Besides the so called passport of Neo in "The Matrix", can you please point another movie that has a reference to the exact numbers 11 09 2001 ?

And in the "climax" scene of the movie? Can you point one?

And in a movie that shows a Secret Service agent fighting against an ex-CIA asset that turned against the US government (sounds like Bin Laden)?



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 09:37 AM
link   
Oh, I almost forgot it:

This movie was released in 1993, that was the same year of the first bombing of the World Trade Center by Al-Qaeda and Bin Laden...



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 09:38 AM
link   
That's a bit of a stretch, dontcha think?

It's very easy to see omens and portents after the fact. That doesn't mean they have real significance.



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 09:39 AM
link   
In legal terms, names are often written back to front, listing the last name first and the first name last, as in John Smith being listed in bank or official documents as Smith, John.

Now then, realizing this, if we look at the account holders of the two accounts in question in the still from the aforementioned movie, you'll see the real mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks. That's right ladies and gentlemen, the real brain behind that day was none other than James Kirk, Captain of the Starship Enterprise.



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 09:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by smyleegrl
That's a bit of a stretch, dontcha think?

It's very easy to see omens and portents after the fact. That doesn't mean they have real significance.



Oh, okay, that's "just a coincidence"...

The number at the side of the name "James Carney" has four digits. Could be any number between 0001 and 9999.

Ten thousand options...

Now, add the fact that the number ABOVE also has four digits. More ten thousand options.

Ten thousand squared... Wow!!



Now add this:

- Secret Service agent fighting ex-CIA asset who turned against the US government (Bin Laden was a CIA asset in Afghanistan, against the Soviets)

- Movie released in 1993, the same year of the first World Trade Center bombing by Bin Laden and Al Qaeda.


"Coincidence", of course!



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 09:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by BBobb
In legal terms, names are often written back to front, listing the last name first and the first name last, as in John Smith being listed in bank or official documents as Smith, John.

Now then, realizing this, if we look at the account holders of the two accounts in question in the still from the aforementioned movie, you'll see the real mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks. That's right ladies and gentlemen, the real brain behind that day was none other than James Kirk, Captain of the Starship Enterprise.



Nice try to discredit this thread...

Nice try...



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 09:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Atento
 


I'm sorry, but I have to agree. This is really reaching. I understand that you may think you're on to something, but this is quite a stretch. I would believe the illuminati cards theory before this.

I don't know about the Matrix thing, but I think the movie Knowing would be a better fit for things in the past than a movie that didn't have anything to do with Osama. Or take the Manchurian Candidate, even that would be more plausible of a plot to believe that there's a small possibility of that happening. I just can't connect these dots. In the states, we more often, at least in the schools I went to wrote Month-Day-Year or year month day. I hardly ever, even now in Japan, read it day month year. If it is written, it is say 14 Apr 2012 or 20120414. I never see say 11/09/01, it would be 9/11/01. Look at all the press releases or headlines in the states, 9/11/01. I believe in the UK, maybe in Europe and/or Canada they may write it that way, but I don't think that is the norm in the States.

I saw some of the posts above mine. Instead of seeing someone else's side, you automatically jump on people for not seeing your way. The site says deny ignorance. We aren't being ignorant, you're being arrogant. No everything doesn't mean something. And 0001-9999, is not 10000. It is 9998 different combinations of numbers.
Sorry, I know that was childish.
edit on 30-4-2012 by stinger94 because: Guy is being kind of a jerk to others that don't agree with him.



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 10:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Atento
 


Well, if this was a genuine "warning" of september 11, why did they use the European method of dating? day/month/year? The attacks were on American soil, the film was an American film....why not use 9/11/01, the way we write the date?



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Atento

Originally posted by BBobb
In legal terms, names are often written back to front, listing the last name first and the first name last, as in John Smith being listed in bank or official documents as Smith, John.

Now then, realizing this, if we look at the account holders of the two accounts in question in the still from the aforementioned movie, you'll see the real mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks. That's right ladies and gentlemen, the real brain behind that day was none other than James Kirk, Captain of the Starship Enterprise.



Nice try to discredit this thread...

Nice try...





In fairness, I wasn't trying to discredit the thread, I actually think it's a pretty nice find. I was simply making a joke. I saw the account holders and it made me laugh. I DO NOT believe in the official story of 9/11, and I can't imagine the level of complicity that pervades the highest aspects of our world's society, to include Hollywood. Please forgive me for jesting...really, just trying to raise a smile. Peace...
edit on 30-4-2012 by BBobb because: Whoops.



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 11:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Atento
 


Umm, no, Osama was not a CIA asset in Afghanistan. You had native Afganis (who the CIA worked with) and you had Arab Muslims (who Osama worked with). Even back then, Americans were warned to stay clear of Osama due to his hatred of infidels.



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 11:17 AM
link   
Ho, ho, ho!!!

Guess what, boys?

THERE IS A REAL JAMES CARNEY!

He is the Press Secretary of the Obama administration.

And guess where he was on September 11, 2001?

He was a reporter aboard Air Force One with President George W. Bush...

Check Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org...

Now what???



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 11:23 AM
link   
9-11 is often depicted in movies to make the viewer subliminally think of an emergency since it is our number for emergency services. I feel it is a stretch for this case but to give credit to the OP, most people who make movies design every bit of each frame and often encode things into backgrounds. OP do some research on the director of this movie and see if you can get some more supporting evidence. Otherwise this is just an appearance of 911 appearing to make us feel anxious.



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 11:26 AM
link   
Is there a Secret Service agent on the board??

I was watching CNN last night, they were doing their entertainment segment. Anyway, they mentioned the latest Muppet movie. After the commercials, the 11th word was assassinate, 30 words after that was Cheney, 900 words after that was 2012.

The Muppets are going to assassinate Dick Cheney at 9AM, November 30,2012.



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 11:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Atento
 


Also just saying, Wikipedia is not a credible source. Not saying you are wrong, but no school or business would say wiki anything is credible. Not when anyone can make changes to it. You are probably correct with this. I don't think Hollywood is involved with any cover up, but I've been wrong before!



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 11:32 AM
link   
reply to post by vipertech0596
 


This made me laugh. What if we combine the movie Air Force One with the scene from Transformers with the deception on Air Force One?



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 12:14 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 





new topics
top topics
 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join