-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Fwd: [catapult] "Planes" were real.
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 16:01:06 -0500 (EST)
From: rcu@duke.edu
Dear John Austin,
You write:
> Perhaps you are just unaware that the Naudet brothers had been filming
> just about daily with the fire department since the previous June ?
They weren't just in the right place at the right time. They were at
the PERFECT place at the PERFECT time, IN THE PERFECT WAY. That is what
Les Raphael's article lays out, point by point.
http://911foreknowledge.com/staged.htm
> And, they had the permission of the Fire Department to follow the first
> few months of a new recruit's on the job training.
That new recruit Tony is not a real firefighter. He is never shown doing
one lick of actual firefighter work anywhere in the movie. He does not
appear anywhere in the footage from the boot camp where they
allegedly discovered him. An elaborate plot device is constructed to get
him off camera for most of the big day, so they only have to SAY, and
not SHOW, that he did 7+ hours of heroic search/rescue attempts at
Ground Zero. He tells a really tall tale about being there:
http://911foreknowledge.com/badbleed.htm
He even gets a dang SINGING credit at the end. And in particular, he is
not even present at the Alleged Odor of Alleged Gas scene, so why were
the Naudets filming that scene if their alleged subject wasn't there?
Note also that James Hanlon, the firefighter/narrator/interviewer/co-
director, just HAPPENS to be a PROFESSIONAL TV ACTOR WITH A RESUME GOING
BACK TO 1995. Naturally they avoid mentioning this in the movie. But you
can see him for yourself on a Third Watch episode rerun next Thursday at
4am EST on AETV, original air date 2/28/2000.
> They had permission to be in the firehouse and on the scene, as long
> as they didn't get underfoot. That new recruit died that day.
NO ONE from that firehouse died that day, because they're all agents who
were told how to stay away from the lethal areas at the lethal times.
The alleged new recruit Tony in particular was specifically scripted to be
the very last survivor to return to that firehouse, around 6pm. They make
a big suspenseful buildup about that. You might try actually watching
this movie sometime before dismissing out of hand my research that comes
from hundreds of hours of studying and discussing it with people so far.
> Also note that the firefighters are the first to respond to the loud
> sound of a jet. Naudet follows their gaze.
No, he pans straight onto the WTC (which he made an establishing shot
of, earlier in the scene) and catches the impact in the exact middle of
his view.
He claims he could read the word "American" on the thing -- but look at
the video frames of it, it's way too small to be a 767, and too
randomly shaped to even be a plane at all.
http://missilegate.com
> That takes care of all 63 "points" of yours.
For instance?
And how about the SECOND camera, the one that the OTHER Naudet was
operating at that same instant (8:46 a.m.)?
http://team8plus.org/forum_viewtopic.php?6.98
How come they never mention how that happened, and in fact lied about it,
by saying that cameraman was still back at the firehouse at that moment?
How about the TWO cameras they had inside the WTC-1 lobby when they said
they only had one there? Note the two different angles shot of
"Mr. Backofhead" when he kills Father Judge with some syringe or
cattleprod type thing.
http://911foreknowledge.com/judge.htm
> Take a tranquilizer - or get into screenwriting.
Study the movie yourself before you dismiss the conclusions of those who
have.
Ray Ubinger
http://911foreknowledge.com
On Wed, 22 Mar 2006, J. Austin wrote:
> Ray,
>
> Perhaps you are just unaware that the Naudet brothers had been
> filming just about daily with the fire department since the
> previous June ?
>
> And, they had the permission of the Fire Department to follow
> the first few months of a new recruit's on the job training. They
> had permission to be in the firehouse and on the scene, as long
> as they didn't get underfoot. That new recruit died that day.
>
> I'm not absolutely sure about New York, but here in Los Angeles,
> when responding to the smell of gas, firefighters clear the area as
> the first step. The "smell of gas" may often precede a large
> explosion.
>
> Also note that the firefighters are the first to respond to the loud
> sound of a jet. Naudet follows their gaze.
>
> That takes care of all 63 "points" of yours. Take a tranquilizer -
> or get into screenwriting.
>
> -John
>
>
>
>
> rcu@duke.edu wrote:
>
> >Dear John Austin,
> >
> >You say there is no evidence the Naudets were in on the plot??
> >We have a whole website full to such evidence:
> >http://911foreknowledege.com
> >
> >Note for starters Les Raphael's article
> >http://911foreknowledge.com/staged.htm
> >in which he documents 63 coincidences that enabled just ONE scene, the
> >famous Alleged Odor of Alleged Gas which was a plot device to enable them
> >to film the 1st Hit under the false pretense of making a
> >firefighter documentary.
> >
> >Mr. Austin, if SIXTY-THREE SIMULTANEOUS COINCIDENCES aren't enough to make
> >you suspicious, how many WOULD be? 64? 65? 165? 1,000,065?
> >
> >
> >Ray Ubinger
> >http://911foreknowledge.com
> >exposing the Naudet-FDNY Snuff Film since 2004
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
Search the archives for political-research at http://www.terazen.com/
Subscribe to the RSS feed for political-research at http://rss.groups.yahoo.com/group/political-research/rss
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/political-research/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
political-research-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
No comments:
Post a Comment