Cotillard Has Regret About 9/11 Remarks

French Oscar Winner Questioned U.S. Account Of WTC Attacks, Doubted Men Walked On The Moon

(CBS)  She just won a best actress Oscar for playing Edith Piaf in "La Vie En Rose," but unlike the famous singer's signature tune, "Non, Je Regrette Rien," Marion Cotillard is singing a song of the opposite sentiment.

Cotillard found herself in hot water recently over comments she made in an interview last year accusing the U.S. of a 9/11 cover-up.

"Marion never intended to contest nor question the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and regrets the way old remarks have been taken out of context," her Paris-based lawyer Vincent Tolesano told the Agence France Presse.

The actress made her comments on a French television program in February 2007, saying "I think we're lied to about a number of things," including who brought down the World Trade Center.

Cotillard argued that it was an inside job, prompted by the towers becoming obsolete.

"It was a money-sucker because they were finished, it seems to me, by 1973, and to recable all that, to bring up-to-date all the technology and everything, it was a lot more expensive, that work, than destroying them," she said.

---

Photos: Marion Cotillard

---

She also added that she's not convinced the U.S. really landed a man on the moon in 1969. "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."

The interview surfaced on a French magazine Web site and has made the rounds over the Internet.

Cotillard is due in Chicago next week to begin filming "Public Enemies" opposite Johnny Depp.

[guesswhoiam3]

"thegdriver,
The United States Department of Commerce - National Institute of Standards and Technology changed their explanation of what happened to all 3 buildings in September 2007."

No. It did not.

"They never tested for explosives residue.WHY?"

Because it did.

"They can not prove the fire melted the steel columns, they can not really explain why the towers collapsed!"

Because the steel did not melt. No one who actually investigated has ever made that claim. It softend as does all metal when heat is applied. And they explained in detail why they collapsed.

"They admit to not using computer simulations and other methods of investigation..."

Uh, they did use simulations, as well as actual experiments on mock-ups using the same type of material as that in the towers.

"They were not very thorough for such a catastrophic and world consuming event."

They were extremely thorough.

"You need to do some research."

You need to do any research. Other than unsupported rants by ignorant people that is.

//Try looking at different sources and Government documents. Do not rely on a TV show. //

Taking your own advice would be tremendously helpful.

//scabee
P.S. Why did the Air Force stand down? Ha, Ha!//

Because it didn''t. It responded just as the protocols of that time required.

[scabee]

thegdriver,
The United States Department of Commerce - National Institute of Standards and Technology changed their explanation of what happened to all 3 buildings in September 2007.
They never tested for explosives residue.WHY?
They can not prove the fire melted the steel columns, they can not really explain why the towers collapsed!
They admit to not using computer simulations and other methods of investigation...
They were not very thorough for such a catastrophic and world consuming event.
You need to do some research.
Try looking at different sources and Government documents. Do not rely on a TV show.
scabee
P.S. Why did the Air Force stand down? Ha, Ha!

[guesswhoiam3]

"I can''''t believe how naive we, the Americans, can be...."

Well certainly some of us are. Want to guess who?

"don''''t you know that before 9/11, Bush''''s popularity was going down, and after the WTC his popularity went up enormously??"

Don''t you know he had been in office 9 months? I doubt that his popularity had gone down very far in the few months before such a huge conspiracy would have been started.

"Yeah, we say "oh, it''''s because she''''s french" or "It''''s because she''''s stupid"... We''''re so blind and proud that we don''''t even take into account the fact that the investigation was delayed,"

The 9/11 Commission doesn''t seem to have been all that concerned. They think they got what they wanted and when they wanted it.

"that the full report of the CIA was censored"

Really? So you know the content of what was censored and can tell us the "truth"? Excellent. Please do so.

"and that we invaded Irak for nothing"

Which has just what to do with 9/11? The administration rejected claims that Iraq had anything to do with it.

"(oh yeah, I forgot, we invaded it for oil)..."
Posted by lakergirl241 at 08:51 AM : Mar 05, 2008

Let''s see now. Invade at very high expense to get what we were buying on the open market. Sure.

[guesswhoiam3]

"they didn''''t stand down? really?"

Yes, really.

"I could''''ve sworn some planes were hi-jacked that day"

Which has nothing to do with any fabricated ''stand down'' claim.

"-we''''ll if you and the government says so."

Neither of "us" has to prove a thing. You are making the claim. Prove that there was a stand down.

"I must''''ve been mistaken about pnac''''s reference to a "new pearl harbor" silly me, you regressives are sooooo smart."

Smart enough to actually read the document in question. Why not actually try it for a change?

//Your swipe about me believing every conspiracy is untrue, but a great way to water down and distract form this one.//

Excellent. Please list the ones you don''t believe in.

//and finally, my apologies I assumed you were intelligent enough to understand metaphors, but since you''''re not, I may have a democracy in china you may be interested in....//

I understand well enough. You know nothing of what you speak, and have nothing to back it up.

See how simple that is?

[lakergirl241]

I can''t believe how naive we, the Americans, can be.... don''t you know that before 9/11, Bush''s popularity was going down, and after the WTC his popularity went up enormously?? Yeah, we say "oh, it''s because she''s french" or "It''s because she''s stupid"... We''re so blind and proud that we don''t even take into account the fact that the investigation was delayed, that the full report of the CIA was censored and that we invaded Irak for nothing (oh yeah, I forgot, we invaded it for oil)...

[lakergirl241]

Please, why don''t we stop (and I mean the Americans) seeing the French as enemies!!! Can''t you understand that not everything the media tells us is true?
We don''t know if that theory that Cotillard has is true, but what we know (from the CIA) is that Bush was told about a terrorist threat over the US and he did NOTHING about it. So, I think Cotillard''s version is not so wrong after all.

[keithle1]

Another pretty but stupid woman...sigh.

[rational_1]

i don''''t buy or take haldol or anything else mega-pharma sells.
Posted by FightFascism at 08:53 PM : Mar 04, 2008

That proves it - the crazies are always the last to realize they need medication. I know, I know, big pharma is putting something in the drugs to make it easier for the government to control us and make us believe in fantasies like moon landings and planes flying into buildings in NYC. LOL

By the way, good luck with surgery without anesthetics if you happen to go under the knife.

[fightfascism]

wow, you foolios get really upset when someone questions your view of reality, sounds like you''re the flat-earthers. typical regressives. and irrational1, i don''t buy or take haldol or anything else mega-pharma sells. for you though i''d suggest you ask them to research a cure for your oral diarhea, or better yet a pill to alleviate the pressure caused by the mass media excrement caught in that void between your ears.

[rational_1]

they didn''''t stand down? really? I could''''ve sworn some planes were hi-jacked that day -we''''ll if you and the government says so. I must''''ve been mistaken about pnac''''s reference to a "new pearl harbor" silly me, you regressives are sooooo smart. Your swipe about me believing every conspiracy is untrue, but a great way to water down and distract form this one. and finally, my apologies I assumed you were intelligent enough to understand metaphors, but since you''''re not, I may have a democracy in china you may be interested in....
Posted by FightFascism at 03:04 PM : Mar 04, 2008

Time to boost your Haldol dose methinks...

[fightfascism]

they didn''t stand down? really? I could''ve sworn some planes were hi-jacked that day -we''ll if you and the government says so. I must''ve been mistaken about pnac''s reference to a "new pearl harbor" silly me, you regressives are sooooo smart. Your swipe about me believing every conspiracy is untrue, but a great way to water down and distract form this one. and finally, my apologies I assumed you were intelligent enough to understand metaphors, but since you''re not, I may have a democracy in china you may be interested in....

[guesswhoiam3]

"So why did the Air Force stand down?"

Because it did not do so.

"Why did pnac cite the strategy for whipping jingo brainswashed media zombies into a war-frenzy years before?"

Because it did not do so. Try actually reading the document.

"Do you regressives believe everything your govenrment tells you?"

Do you believe every bone-headed conspiracy you hear? Obviously the answer must be ''Yes".

//If so, I''''ve got a ski resort in Iraq you may be interested in......//

Really? Why did you buy it in the first place? Talk about gullible.

[fightfascism]

So why did the Air Force stand down? Why did pnac cite the strategy for whipping jingo brainswashed media zombies into a war-frenzy years before? Do you regressives believe everything your govenrment tells you? If so, I''ve got a ski resort in Iraq you may be interested in......

[thgdriver]

She is French, right. Well, that enplanes every thing. The French have not faced the real world for years. If you ask them, they will tell you they won the 2nd world war. Having the Germans as occupiers was all part of a bigger plan. LMFAO!!

[thgdriver]

scabee

It''s fine to be a skeptic when skepticism is warranted.

Every one of your contentions was explained and made very clear by people who started out thinking just like you. Engineers, scientists and architects were all involved.

You need to do more research before posting this or that was never cleared up or explained. You are either a lier or need to look at the facts.

[rational_1]

I guess she never heard the phrase "It is better to be thought a fool than to open one''s mouth and prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt.". WTC was an inside job? No moon landing? What''s next? She planning an expedition to search for Bigfoot? Maybe Atlantis? When will these line-readers (ahem actors) learn not to make idiots of themselves? Stick to acting, mumble your thanks when you get the award, and then slink quietly away.

[thgdriver]

They had a documentary on the History channel recently that takes the conspiracy theory morons on and enplanes every one of their nut case ideas one at a time. It was a two hour show that took the conspiracy theory, explained the conspiracy idea, then blew their stupid analogy out of the water by showing exactly what really happened.

They also explained the damage to other buildings in the area, how they were built, and why they came down. WTC building 7 was explained in detail.

The conspiracy theorists say the dammdest, moronic, things but never come forward with one piece of evidence----NOT ONE!!!!

[guesswhoiam3]

"To this day, no one has fully explained why WTC7 was demolished on 9/11."

Yes, we do.

"We don''''t know why the government delayed any investigation of 9/11 for 444 days."

The 9/11 Commission might disagree.

//We don''''t know why Iraq was invaded, when they had nothing to do with 9/11.//

And no claim was ever made that it did.

[guesswhoiam3]

"What makes the twin towers and building 7 so special that they are the only buildings EVER known to implode the way they did?
The Government has already investigated and said they have no idea what caused building 7 to fall.
Jet fuel does not burn hot enough to have melted the steel in the towers.
The buildings fell like they were imploded.
Impossible. Never happened to any tall building on fire in the world, ever!
Try to find an engineer, explosives or jet fuel expert that believes the fire from jet fuel made three buildings burn and fall down.
You wont.
Wake up and investigate your beliefs.
If it is scientifically sound go with it, if not,
try to go beyond the idiocy and find the truth.
PATRIOT "

Absolutely none of which is true.

[scabee]

What makes the twin towers and building 7 so special that they are the only buildings EVER known to implode the way they did?
The Government has already investigated and said they have no idea what caused building 7 to fall.
Jet fuel does not burn hot enough to have melted the steel in the towers.
The buildings fell like they were imploded.
Impossible. Never happened to any tall building on fire in the world, ever!
Try to find an engineer, explosives or jet fuel expert that believes the fire from jet fuel made three buildings burn and fall down.
You wont.
Wake up and investigate your beliefs.
If it is scientifically sound go with it, if not,
try to go beyond the idiocy and find the truth.
PATRIOT