Naudet Documentary On Google Video

Willie Rodriguez must have been somewhere there when Naudet entered the lobby of WTC1. I wonder how his account matches with Naudet's ?
 
bill smith said:
To anyone watching this thread you are winning the debate by a mile Kreel. Do you have a link for that movie ? I'll crack a few cans and watch it tonight if you do ?
Click to expand...

SNERK! Bill, you won the award yesterday for the single finest example of argument from personal incredulity in history, and it appears that you have found a soul brother in Dedicated No Planer/Blame the FDNYer Kreel.

"I don't believe how a documentary film maker could get documentary film to use in a documentary, so it is an inside jobby job!"

I agree that Kreel is wining this debate by a mile, of course I also believe that Kreel is a debunker posting here to make truthers look bad.

Keep it up Kreel!!
 
bill smith said:
Willie Rodriguez must have been somewhere there when Naudet entered the lobby of WTC1. I wonder how his account matches with Naudet's ?
Click to expand...

Here it is. He saw a gasoline fireball.

Transcript of NIST Public Meeting in New York City . February 12, 2004

Rodriquez: The fire, the ball of fire, for example, I was in the basement when the first plane hit the building. And at that moment, I thought it was an electrical generator that blew up at that moment. A person comes running into the office saying explosion, explosion, explosion. When I look at this guy; has all his skin pulled off of his body. Hanging from the top of his fingertips like it was a glove. And I said, what happened? He said the elevators. What happened was the ball of fire went down with such a force down the elevator shaft on the 58th . freight elevator, the biggest freight elevator that we have in the North Tower, it went out with such a force that it broke the cables. It went down, I think seven flights. The person survived because he was pulled from the B3 level. But this person, being in front of the doors waiting for the elevator, practically got his skin vaporized.

William Rodriquez
http://wtc.nist.gov/mediaPublic Transcript 021204 Final1_withlinks.pdf
Click to expand...
 
KreeL said:
Wow! Some guy named Ray Ubinger totally ownd some guy named gravy in that thread.

Good find, orphia. It's hard to believe none of you learned from an older thread. You obviously didn't rewatch the movie.
Click to expand...
apparently you didnt get very far into that thread

Gravy said:
Maybe this will hold him over for another month or two.

How about E.M.T. Alexander Loutsky, who saw flight 11 hit, Ray? Lying? http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110151.PDF

How about PAPD P.O. David LeClaire, who saw flight 11 hit, Ray? Lying? http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/pa-transcripts/pa-police-reports01.pdf (pg. 85)

How about E.M.T. Oscar Martinez, who treated a woman with horrible injuries from flight 11's landing gear, Ray? Lying? gear:http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110183.PDF

How about PAPD P.O. Pat McInerney, who saw flight 11 hit, Ray? Lying? http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/pa-transcripts/pa-police-reports02.pdf (pg. 32)

How about Rob Marchesano, Ray? Lying?

"... as the jetliner buzzed toward Lower Manhattan. Rob Marchesano, a construction foreman, was working at a site at La Guardia Street and West Third. He heard a roar overhead, and saw a plane flying by, low and fast and at an angle that at first made him fear that it would hit his crane. He and his co-workers watched in astonishment and then horror as the plane approached the North Tower of the World Trade Center. He noticed that the plane seemed to tilt at the last second, as though someone wanted the wings to take out as many floors as possible." http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A38407-2001Sep15

How about Ezra Aviles, Ray? Lying?

"Ezra Aviles was in the north tower and saw flight 11 approach:
From a window on the 61st floor in the north tower, Ezra Aviles had seen everything. He knew it was no bomb. His window faced north, and he saw the plane tearing through the skies, heading straight for the tower. It had crashed into the building over his head-how far, he was not sure. In fact, its lower wing cut the ceiling of the 93rd floor, and its right wing had ripped across the 98th floor, at the very moment that Patricia Massari was speaking to her husband about her home pregnancy test.

Aviles worked for the Port Authority. He dialed five numbers, leaving identical messages, describing what he saw, and telling everyone up the chain of command to begin the evacuation. He called one colleague, John Paczkowski, but reached his voice mail. "It seems to be an American Airlines jetliner came in from the northern direction, toward-from the Empire State Building, toward us," Aviles said. He ticked through a list of notifications-he had called the police and the public affairs office, and had beeped the chief operating officer for the agency. "Smoke is beginning to come, so I think I'm gonna start bailing outta here, man.... Don't come near the building if you're outside. Pieces are coming down, man. Bye." http://tinyurl.com/f4efr

How about Michael Scott, Ray? Lying?

"In the Port Authority Office of Public Safety, Assistant Director Michael Scott received one of Aviles’ calls:

I received a telephone call from my good friend Ezra Aviles of the Office of Policy & Planning who said an aircraft had just struck the North Tower at a location above his office which was located on the north side of the 61st floor. In our discussion he was very calm and stated he saw the logo on the aircraft (American Airlines) as it approached the building. In further dialog it became clear that this was not a small commercial aircraft but a full size passenger aircraft. He stated he was contacting me to notify Public Safety officially and would make a few other calls, depart the tower and come over to the PATC “to help us out.” http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/pa-transcripts/pa-police-reports01.pdf Page 2

Take your sick act elsewhere, creep.
Click to expand...

And Ray was never able to prove that the street was blocked off pre-first impact.

Like yours Kreel. His was an argument from ignorance. And you have shown to have plenty of ignorance in reserve to fall back on.
 
Last edited:
Reading thru KreeL's posts over the last day one is forced to draw the conclusion that he is not of sound mind, or that he is mimicking that state. I'll give examples; but either way it is obviously a complete waste of time trying to reason with him. That's just not how he rolls.

KreeL seems unable or unwilling to grasp the simple and obvious idea that, in a very large city such as NY, there will ALWAYS be various film crews, news cameras and the like present. Every day, year in and year out. Nobody of sound mind would argue the opposite.
The mere fact that the South Tower impact was recorded by so many news organizations and amateurs on 9/11 provides ample documentation of the event, and is entirely expected because the impact of the North Tower was a huge and shocking crisis, which focused the whole city's attention on the WTC towers.

The odds of someone having a rolling or operative video camera within Manhattan, and with a reasonable view of the tallest buildings there at 8:46am on 9/11 are fairly good. Of all those crews roaming the city, it could have been a CBS or FOX news team, but just as random events do unfold, it happened to be an inexperienced duo of French documentary makers who caught, just barely, most of the first plane impact. (note: only one of the team was there at the first impact)
I'll get back to the actual shot in a moment, but back to the topic of randomness and coincidence.

Coincidence is by definition a 'noteworthy alignment of two or more events or circumstances without obvious causal connection'.

As outlined earlier, most sane and rational persons (this excludes truthers, sadly) will agree that there most certainly would have been several TV crews and private video cameras available at that time on that day in NYC.

There is no evidence at all - that is zero evidence - to suggest that there is a causal relationship between ANY of those video cameras being there with FOREKNOWLEDGE of the events which would unfold. In particular, the Naudet bros had already been working on their documentary prior to 9/11. The accusation that they created the doc as part of an elaborate ruse to capture footage of the attack is, while within the realm of possibility, without any real merit.
It just doesn't fly.
Even if one does entertain this notion, it is quickly and readily apparent that neither brother nor the firefighters had a clue what was about to unfold.
Here are a few points, but others may add as they see fit:

1) only one brother was filming the gas leak test, the other stayed back at the 'house'. This would not make sense if their purpose was to capture footage of the actual plane crash. They would both have been out there filming.
2) When the first plane is heard approaching, the camera does not react, but stays focused on the firefighter. This is direct evidence that the operator does not comprehend the importance of the approaching jet. It refutes directly the foreknowledge accusation.
3) The fireman is shown reacting to the sound of the jet. It is several seconds before the camera is turned away, just barely capturing the impact already unfolding.
4) The camera zooms in and out several times, creating a chaotic and poor quality image of the ensuing fireball. This is 100% consistent with a surprised and hurried reaction by the operator. It takes no imagination to realize that, had Jules known in advance, he would have seen fit to focus carefully (with some pretext) on the tower.
5) The video of the first impact, while remarkable and unique, is not necessary to establish the fact that AA Flt 11 hit the North Tower. In other words the video is somewhat irrelevant to the discussion whether the event really happened or not. It is merely another piece of documentary evidence which corroborates, beyond any reasonable doubt, what occurred on 9/11.

Conspiracy theorists have not been able to establish either a plausible motive for the Naudet's being some kind of fraud, nor any facts to back up the claim.

Such is the poor level of reasoning of resident truthers such as Bill Smith and KreeL (in particular) that corroboration becomes conspiracy! In this paranoid fantasy world, where there ARE NO COINCIDENCES, and EVERYTHING IS CAUSAL, there is no corroboration, only collusion.

Let me give a perfect example of KreeL's dysfunctional mentation:

a) numerous eyewitnesses testify that there were explosions and burned victims in the llobby of the N. Tower. They appear to have emanated from the elevators.
b) Jules Naudet reports seeing burned victims and hearing screams as they enter the first part of the lobby, but reports that he chooses not to video those people.

While his testimony (video and statement) both corroborate the other eyewitness testimony without fault, KreeL attempts to use this as 'proof' that the Naudets are 'shills'. This is simply irrational, illogical and ridiculous.

KreeL's complaints and accusations are not only off-the-mark; they venture into the purely paranoid and delusional. They are unconnected with reality - inconsistent with the known facts of the events of 9/11 as they pertain to this video.

They are worthless, IMHO. KreeL has failed completely to prove anything but that he is not of sound mind. My sympathies go out to him, and I will not respond further to his delusions.

Over and out. AE
 
Last edited:
HAs the cowards in this thread (KREEL and Bill) contacted the Naudet bros yet? Two pages since last night, over 10 posts each from the cowards and they haven't taken the time to contact the brothers they are slandering?


Nice that the cowards can hide behind their computers slinging lies around and aren't even man enough to confront those they accuse.


When are the cowards going to be man enough to contact the Naudets?
 
Arus808 said:
HAs the cowards in this thread (KREEL and Bill) contacted the Naudet bros yet? Two pages since last night, over 10 posts each from the cowards and they haven't taken the time to contact the brothers they are slandering?


Nice that the cowards can hide behind their computers slinging lies around and aren't even man enough to confront those they accuse.


When are the cowards going to be man enough to contact the Naudets?
Click to expand...

What about Jeff Hill ? He strikes me as the very man for a call like this ? Jeez...or you could even call them yourself and get them to confirm thst they were telling the truth. lol
 
Last edited:
Jeff hill isn't on this forum making libelous statements against the Naudet bros.

Instead of replying why aren't you on the phone or emailing them?


Coward much?
 
A further issue worth noting is the damage done by the constant slander and libel of truthers.
There were many victims on 9/11, as noted. Absent among them are the little (garden variety) truthers like KreeL, Bill Smith, etc, and also the notable 'leaders' of the movement like Dylan Avery, Jim Fetzer, Steven Jones, Judy Wood etc...

Those people and their little minions have created a cottage industry, and even celebrity status, based on misrepresenting one of the worst crimes against American citizens on record. The word 'vampire' comes to mind to describe the behavior of this clique.

And the movement has real, sharp, nasty teeth to go with it's totally immoral slander - for example, the Naudet Bros threatened to sue the makers of 'Loose Change' for copyright violations, after it became an internet phenomenon. Apparently Mr. Avery and his cohorts did not get permission to use the footage - I believe this is a form of theft.
This is not speculation, it is fact.

In a 2006 interview, Korey Rowe, a 'Looser' associate of Mr. Avery, bragged about the subsequent harassment of the naudet brothers.

'Essentially what is going on, although I can’t comment a lot, it is in a legal process right now but, uh essentially what happened is the Naudet brothers about 2 weeks ago saw Loose Change, didn’t like the representation of the material, got in contact with Paramount who owns the rights to their footage, and Paramount got in touch with a lawfirm that represents them, and sent us a very threatening letter, and which is actually enough to disbar a lawyer for doing that kind of thing. Just threatening us left and right, calling us all kinds of names, telling us we are doing things for the wrong reasons, making money off the deaths of people, and telling us that we had to take down the website, take the movie back from anyone we sold it to, make sure the copy is destroyed, remove every copy from the Internet, which is completely impossible.'

Notice he doesn't dispute the copyright violation. That would be difficult..

Here's the admission:

'So what we did, we decided that we would make these people think we are going to comply, make these people think that we are going to go ahead and shut down. We took our website down, put up the lawsuit. We didn’t even put up their contact information, people went out and found it, put up their pictures, and their phone numbers, and had people call them. They called us and begged us to take this off of our site because they couldn’t handle the amounts of threats they were getting. And I said if you can’t handle it, take down the suit. (laughter) They actually haven’t come across and sued us yet, they did send us the first initially threatening letter.'

Nice. So you rip someone off (they become a victim of theft) then your buddies go after them when they use the legal system.

http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006_06_01_archive.html


Elsewhere, firefighters are alleging that Dan Wallace, son of firefighter Robert F Wallace, who died on 9/11, was sucked into the truth movement and eventually became depressed and overdosed.
The kicker is that the 'truth' movement exploited his death as being an 'assassination' by the government.

So he was victimized several times, by the terrorists who killed his father, then by the 9/11 turht movement and it's sick and parasitic nature.


http://forums.firehouse.com/showpost.php?p=1063690&postcount=18

http://forums.firehouse.com/showpost.php?p=1063689&postcount=17

http://forums.firehouse.com/showpost.php?p=1062984&postcount=2



The more I learn about the 9/11 'truth' movement, the more disgusted I become. It seems like the gathering place for paranoics, charlatans and attention-seekers, all hoping to gain something from the misery and tragedy of 9/11.
 
Hey! Go easy on bill and KreeL, they have to work extra hard for troll kibble now that ultima is back. It isn't any wonder to me that this is one stupid thread.
 
alienentity said:
A further issue worth noting is the damage done by the constant slander and libel of truthers.
There were many victims on 9/11, as noted. Absent among them are the little (garden variety) truthers like KreeL, Bill Smith, etc, and also the notable 'leaders' of the movement like Dylan Avery, Jim Fetzer, Steven Jones, Judy Wood etc...

Those people and their little minions have created a cottage industry, and even celebrity status, based on misrepresenting one of the worst crimes against American citizens on record. The word 'vampire' comes to mind to describe the behavior of this clique.

And the movement has real, sharp, nasty teeth to go with it's totally immoral slander - for example, the Naudet Bros threatened to sue the makers of 'Loose Change' for copyright violations, after it became an internet phenomenon. Apparently Mr. Avery and his cohorts did not get permission to use the footage - I believe this is a form of theft.
This is not speculation, it is fact.

In a 2006 interview, Korey Rowe, a 'Looser' associate of Mr. Avery, bragged about the subsequent harassment of the naudet brothers.

'Essentially what is going on, although I can’t comment a lot, it is in a legal process right now but, uh essentially what happened is the Naudet brothers about 2 weeks ago saw Loose Change, didn’t like the representation of the material, got in contact with Paramount who owns the rights to their footage, and Paramount got in touch with a lawfirm that represents them, and sent us a very threatening letter, and which is actually enough to disbar a lawyer for doing that kind of thing. Just threatening us left and right, calling us all kinds of names, telling us we are doing things for the wrong reasons, making money off the deaths of people, and telling us that we had to take down the website, take the movie back from anyone we sold it to, make sure the copy is destroyed, remove every copy from the Internet, which is completely impossible.'

Notice he doesn't dispute the copyright violation. That would be difficult..

Here's the admission:

'So what we did, we decided that we would make these people think we are going to comply, make these people think that we are going to go ahead and shut down. We took our website down, put up the lawsuit. We didn’t even put up their contact information, people went out and found it, put up their pictures, and their phone numbers, and had people call them. They called us and begged us to take this off of our site because they couldn’t handle the amounts of threats they were getting. And I said if you can’t handle it, take down the suit. (laughter) They actually haven’t come across and sued us yet, they did send us the first initially threatening letter.'

Nice. So you rip someone off (they become a victim of theft) then your buddies go after them when they use the legal system.

http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006_06_01_archive.html


Elsewhere, firefighters are alleging that Dan Wallace, son of firefighter Robert F Wallace, who died on 9/11, was sucked into the truth movement and eventually became depressed and overdosed.
The kicker is that the 'truth' movement exploited his death as being an 'assassination' by the government.

So he was victimized several times, by the terrorists who killed his father, then by the 9/11 turht movement and it's sick and parasitic nature.


http://forums.firehouse.com/showpost.php?p=1063690&postcount=18

http://forums.firehouse.com/showpost.php?p=1063689&postcount=17

http://forums.firehouse.com/showpost.php?p=1062984&postcount=2



The more I learn about the 9/11 'truth' movement, the more disgusted I become. It seems like the gathering place for paranoics, charlatans and attention-seekers, all hoping to gain something from the misery and tragedy of 9/11.
Click to expand...

Paramount and the Naudets could have still drggged 'Loose Change' into court. Ask yourself why they didn't and still don't. We feel that we are representing people like the 400 family members who sued Bush and Co. for murder in 2004. And of course the 3,000 victims themselves.
 
bill smith said:
Paramount and the Naudets could have still drggged 'Loose Change' into court. Ask yourself why they didn't and still don't. We feel that we are representing people like the 400 family members who sued Bush and Co. for murder in 2004. And of course the 3,000 victims themselves.
Click to expand...

Why give Loose Change the free publicity? It's not like there is any money there for any financial penalty.
 
bill smith said:
Paramount and the Naudets could have still drggged 'Loose Change' into court.
Click to expand...

Because for all Dylan's bluster, he did end up complying. Missing from alienentity's account is how Dylan had to make a complete turnaround from his 'harass 'em into silence' mode when he was looking down the barrel of some raketeering charges, just to name a few.

Dylan bragged about it as alienentity showed after he stopped crapping his pants from the charges he was potentially facing.

Paramount and Naudet didn't have to go through with court lawsuit because Dylan folded for the most part. He played tough guy afterward, but why should Paramount care about an internet tough guy?
 
The Naudet footage was removed from subsequent loose change productions wasn't it? Point made. What are they going to accomplish by proceeding with a lawsuit? Avery's garnishment of his wages at Friendly's? Why do you think MPAA dropped file sharing lawsuits?
 
A W Smith said:
The Naudet footage was removed from subsequent loose change productions wasn't it? Point made.
Click to expand...

Yup. I think rev 2 was made to remove all the footage.

IIRC it was Memorial Day when Dylan got notice. Almost 3 years to the date.
 
Why didn't the morning news camera guy pick up his camera and film the impact? Oh, of course, it was running, but he wasn't holding it. Stranger still, he couldn't see the face of WTC1 that was impacted. He also didn't film any crowd reaction, but got some audio. There were cameras in NYC. Only ONE being held in the middle of a street, turned on, and all ready and waiting to capture MoneyShot I.

Nice non-existant link there concerning Rodriguez, bigAl. Try again.

The film "911" could be considered the most blatant use of staged propaganda in the history of the world. MoneyShots I-VII -- all there.
 
Let's apply KreeLogic TM to this thread:

1. This is, in fact, the most moronic thread I've ever read here.

2. No sane human can possibly think the Naudets were "plants", given the evidence.

3. KreeL and bill smith do believe they were plants.

4. Therefore KreeL and bill smith are nuts or they don't exist.

There. I've just debunked the both of you using your own logic.

Any further posts from either of you can now be considered disinfo.

Hey, this is fun!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom