While watching the 1998 film, “Enemy of the State,” I noticed a curious reference to 9/11. A few others online have noticed this as well. As we showed recently, pre-9/11 film references are common, and show more than mere coincidence, especially in the cases of the references in the Simpsons, The Lone Gunmen and the Iron Man cartoon. This one is peculiar, in that it picks out John Voight’s character, “Reynolds” in the film, who is the head of the NSA and is involved in numerous illegal activities such as wiretapping, spying and tracking. The film has Will Smith and Gene Hackman on the run from big brother, and is replete with references to the control grid, 1984 and Brave New World. It also thows in a little hint at 9/11 for good measure.
This is not necessarily of any significance beyond mere chance. Richard Feynman once explained how confirmation bias often causes us to see patterns that are not there, because we assign significance to some outcomes and pay no attention to others. However, these 9/11 references also cannot be automatically dismissed as confirmation bias, especially since we know that the CIA and other government agencies have long been directly involved with using Hollywood for propaganda purposes.
It is not difficult, merely tedious, to determine whether confirmation bias is at work here or not. An examination of every film release from 1992 through 2001 and a compilation of every date graphically displayed in the films will soon show which dates are statistical outliers. If the 11th of September happens to be one of the dates that is disproportionately displayed, that would be a strong indication, albeit not absolute proof, that there was beforehand knowledge of its future significance.
I have no interest in watching a decade’s worth of movies, nor do I think it is necessary to do so in order to doubt the Official Story of 9/11 (regulars know that I am cynical enough to assert the mere fact that a particular version of events has been deemed Official by the government is sufficient reason to be dubious about it) but if those who are conspiracy-minded are interested in providing evidence that goes beyond mere happenstance, that would be one way to go about it.