Loose Change Flash is FAKE

Originally posted by Ivar_Karlsen

Originally posted by munkey66
What does it matter if there was a flash or not.

It probably dont mean a whole lot to you, but for the rest of us it means that if there were no flash on 911 somebody must have faked it for some reason.

Yea, that's what I am also saying, for what reason did Loosechange fake the Naudet first hit shot.

Here is a link to the Sept. 12th 2001 Naudet shot from the archives and it has no flash: www.archive.org...

Best
D.Duck

From the research I have done and can remember: Isn't the Naudet Brothers Video Highly suspect, and both brothers have disappeared from the main-stream since the video had been possibly 'Stagged'?


Ahh what do I know, maybe the Loose Change is the right video, or maybe there both wrong.


Unless you have unwavering video that is known to be "authentic" no one person can even say which is the correct verson of the first plane strike.

Originally posted by theability
From the research I have done and can remember: Isn't the Naudet Brothers Video Highly suspect, and both brothers have disappeared from the main-stream since the video had been possibly 'Stagged'?


Ahh what do I know, maybe the Loose Change is the right video, or maybe there both wrong.


Unless you have unwavering video that is known to be "authentic" no one person can even say which is the correct verson of the first plane strike.

theability,

Very good points and its in line with my reasoning too.

I think both videos are fake from the beginning but if you are going to say one of the fakes is the original fake I have to say it has to be the Naudet because it was aired 9/12-2001.

The interesting thing is why would Loosechange fake it again?

D.Duck

reply to post by D.Duck


Agree'd completely, it is so hard to know what is real and unreal with the first strike, I just seem to hold all of that footage in the, "Very Suspect" (!) catagory.


You know what I mean??

Originally posted by theability
reply to post by D.Duck

 

Agree'd completely, it is so hard to know what is real and unreal with the first strike, I just seem to hold all of that footage in the, "Very Suspect" (!) catagory.


You know what I mean??

Yea, I know what you mean and that "Very suspect category" file, is getting larger the closer you look at the 9/11 footage.

Best
D.Duck

Originally posted by D.Duck
The interesting thing is why would Loosechange fake it again?

Loose Change didn't fake anything. The only thing that's fake is you. You're unresearched, and as usual, haven't got a clue as to what you're talking about.

The Naudet bros. put out 2 editions of their video. The first one had the flash, the second one is less visible.

Someone already stated this in this thread, but I'll post it again so you don't peddle any more disinfo:

The BBC (and other networks) ran the Naudet footage either later that day or on 9/12, way before Loose Change was even a thought. Here's the BBC broadcast and the flash is bright and visible:

www.youtube.com...

Now, you can make an apology to the Loose Change guys and a correction to your blatant disinfo. Then you can make another thread and find out why the Naudet brothers edited the flash or why it's not very visible in their second edition.

You are, once again, debunked.

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by D.Duck
The interesting thing is why would Loosechange fake it again?

Loose Change didn't fake anything. The only thing that's fake is you. You're unresearched, and as usual, haven't got a clue as to what you're talking about.

The Naudet bros. put out 2 editions of their video. The first one had the flash, the second one is less visible.

Someone already stated this in this thread, but I'll post it again so you don't peddle any more disinfo:

The BBC (and other networks) ran the Naudet footage either later that day or on 9/12, way before Loose Change was even a thought. Here's the BBC broadcast and the flash is bright and visible:

www.youtube.com...

Now, you can make an apology to the Loose Change guys and a correction to your blatant disinfo. Then you can make another thread and find out why the Naudet brothers edited the flash or why it's not very visible in their second edition.

You are, once again, debunked.

So BoneZ, you are saying that Naudet faked their video?

D.Duck

Originally posted by D.Duck

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by D.Duck
The interesting thing is why would Loosechange fake it again?

Loose Change didn't fake anything. The only thing that's fake is you. You're unresearched, and as usual, haven't got a clue as to what you're talking about.

The Naudet bros. put out 2 editions of their video. The first one had the flash, the second one is less visible.

Someone already stated this in this thread, but I'll post it again so you don't peddle any more disinfo:

The BBC (and other networks) ran the Naudet footage either later that day or on 9/12, way before Loose Change was even a thought. Here's the BBC broadcast and the flash is bright and visible:

www.youtube.com...

Now, you can make an apology to the Loose Change guys and a correction to your blatant disinfo. Then you can make another thread and find out why the Naudet brothers edited the flash or why it's not very visible in their second edition.

You are, once again, debunked.

So BoneZ, you are saying that Naudet faked their video?

D.Duck

Faked or edited out? It appears they edited out of the second release. The question is why would they edit out a flash in the second edition unless they were trying to hide something or reveal something. Perhaps a secret "whistleblower" edit job to get people to view the original again to see the flash in its original state.

There is no flash in NBC TV archive from Sept. 12th. There is no flash in Naudet 911 DVD. Yet, there is a very bright flash in Loose Change. That makes as little sense as the fact that the second plane had three different distinct flightpaths on 3 different networks when their cameras shared the same vantage point.

[edit on 22-5-2009 by MartinL1]

Originally posted by MartinL1
That makes as little sense as the fact that the second plane had three different distinct flightpaths on 3 different networks when their cameras shared the same vantage point.

Oh it's not fact. If you peddle it as fact when it's not, that means you're peddling disinfo. There was only one flight path with 3 different angles from 3 different networks. Just because you don't understand camera angles doesn't mean there was 3 different flight paths for the same plane.

But you're off topic with this, so let's please stay on topic.

[edit on 22-5-2009 by _BoneZ_]

To close this thread, Dylan Avery of Loose Change had this to say:

"The flash "disappears" in certain copies because of field issues ... it technically only exists for half a frame in most copies, including the DVD ( it only showed up when I selected certain de-interlacing options ), so you need to make sure you're interpreting the footage properly.

Also, in Final Cut, I was going off of the Associated Press' copy, since we paid to license that shot amongst others. It arrived on a DVCAM tape, copied straight to my hard drive, and bam, flash is there."

Link

So, someone should contact the Associated Press and see how the flash got in their copy. Either way, I think the Loose Change guys deserve an apology for an unfounded and unresearched accusation.

Who wants to step up like a man and admit their mistake and apologize?

Even stranger with the BBc released Naudet footage that evening is the duplicate explosion sounds

Listen close






I mean whats with that????