The Naudet film is a fraud

[les raphael]

We've all seen the shot - the camera speeding leftwards to catch the plane flying off towards One World Trade Center looming in the distant sunshine : the first attack of 9/11, as captured by French film-maker Jules Naudet, the only person in New York to film the actual plane impact from behind, and one of only two to film the plane from any angle at all. But all those - including most 9/11 sceptics - who for four years have accepted this piece of film as nothing more than a documentary record of the event, captured by chance, should have a closer look at it. If they do, they will discover, as I did, that the film is no innocent piece of reportage. Not only is it too convenient to be genuine, it is, in fact, evidence of complicity in the crime it records. If we lived in a rational world, this view would be the common consensus by now : but if rationality had anything to do with it, why would sixty million sane American adults vote for somebody like George W. Bush, or swallow his insulting version of what happened on 9/11 ?
If you have access to a recording of this scene, on the internet or on video or DVD, have it available when you read my analysis at www.serendipity.li/wot/naudet/raphael.htm and prepare to see the film in a new light. If you think it was a simple case of 1. right place, 2. right time, and that's why no-one else achieved what Naudet did, try explaining my list of - to date - not two, but 64 conveniences. No photographer in history has produced anything remotely similar - without the film having been prearranged. I say the last two seconds of American Airlines Flight 11 were captured by a propaganda photographer who knew what was going to happen that day, and was a party to the conspiracy and the 3,000 murders. Outrageous ? What are the alternatives ? The film exists : explain it. We either have to redefine the meaning of the word "luck" or accept that luck had nothing to do with this.
We have had a major clue to the 9/11 enigma staring us in the face all this time, thanks to a combination of our own shortsightedness and the audacity and arrogance of those behind the film, daring us to accuse them, if or when the truth dawned on us. I started doing that the day it dawned on me, in letters to the Naudet brothers themselves, Jules and Gédéon, and many others. How can I accuse famous film-makers of involvement in mass murder ? But what do we know about them ? Very little, in fact : we have alleged dates of birth ; we're told they emigrated to the USA in 1989 and graduated together from New York University Film School in 1995 ; they made just one film before "9/11," available on DVD ; their father Jean-Jacques, a photojournalist, also lives and works in the USA, and has co-authored several books, but we know even less about him than about his sons. Interviews with the brothers are, or were, few and far between, and to my knowledge their last public appearance was at a Fire Department benefit on Long Island on 23 June 2003. If they're innocent, and object to my claim, why am I still here, while they are the ones who have disappeared ? Until such time as I hear from their lawyers, my accusation stands, and I invite everyone persuaded by my arguments to join the campaign for the truth about this film. The Naudets may not have organised 9/11, but I think they must be close enough to know who did, and who recruited them as photographers. Why don't I offer my information to the FBI ? I have done : for whatever reason - quite possibly their own complicity - they appear to have done nothing with it, and until they do, we need alternatives to that avenue. The case for a genuine 9/11 inquiry is now overwhelming : its witnesses should include the Naudets, being asked the kind of questions the Kean Commission predictably failed to put to them.