Rick Siegal Files Lawsuit Against 911 Mysteries Sofia Shafquat

[Bolo Boffin]

http://www.rfcexpress.com/lawsuit.asp?id=46083

The reckless lies of Sofia Shafquat, the maker of the 9/11 film 911 Mysteries, have started to catch up with her. Sofia uses Rick Siegal's footage of 9/11 as a primary source for the other 9/11 film 911 Eyewitness, and Rick has now filed a lawsuit against her.

The lies and deceit of 911 Mysteries, itself a primary source for Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, have long been documented:

http://www.911mysteriesguide.com/

Now a court will decide what damages, if any, are owed to Rick Siegal for the alleged illicit use of his footage.

[jakeXT]

1. Could someone help my memory ?

Was this the guy who filmed from Hoboken and tried to sell his DVD?

And then sometime later he went off the deep end with something crazy like nukes, space beams or no planes ? I can't remember which one it was or if it was him.

[Marksbrother]

2. Why do you say that the notion of no planes is crazy?

If you know of some credible evidence that actual planes crashed, you have an obligation to produce it. Otherwise, the only thing
that's crazy is the idea that CGI planes are the same as actual planes.

[Theobald]

3. Tens of thousands of eye witnesses and live feed video footage is not

credible? I have two relatives, one of whom worked in the WTC, who witnessed the second plane strike the tower and I've met dozens more who were there and saw the incident as it happened. You need to crawl out of the hole you live in and meet and talk to more people. If you spouted your crazy nonsense to some of the eyewitnesses you might not be able to type any more of your pathetically ignorant or laughably crazy messages.

I can't imagine how close minded, ignorant, or crazy one has to be to think that in a city of 7 million people one could fake planes flying into buildings and get away with it, with only a few web crackpots the only ones able to figure out the 'truth'.

[balantz]

4. Do you have testimony you can show of your relatives?

Like a video? Or are we just supposed to take your word without observing their testimony for ourselves?

[Theobald]

12. What difference would that make to you?

You don't believe the people who are already have videos of their eyewitness testimony online, so what difference would my relatives make? I got a better idea I'll meet you in a bar in New York City and you can judge their veracity for yourself in person. That way you could ask questions and get your answers straight from the source.

[balantz]

15. I thought you might not have anything. n/t

[Theobald]

18. I offer to meet you in person

so you can have a question and answer face to face with an eyewitness and you call that nothing? Pathetic.

[balantz]

19. I live no where near there nor have the resources to go.

I guess you will have to use the handy internet if you want to put up your relatives testimony.

[MrMickeysMom]

20. I know a pick up line when I read it!

Come on.... Maybe they want to know your "sign" first?

:rofl:

[Theobald]

21. Always willing to travel for a good laugh

I'm in Atlanta right now and have been in Boston, New York, Washington DC, Philly, Waterbury CT, Red Bank NJ, and Austin TX in the last month. Later this year I'll be in San Diego, Kansas City, Boston, New York, Philly, Pittsburgh, Milwaukee, San Francisco and Fort Worth.

[balantz]

22. I have no desire or need to meet you and help provide you with your laughs.

You said you have relatives who saw planes crash into the towers on 9/11/01.
I asked if you could provide proof of your claim via internet. If you can't or won't then never mind.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Ohio Joe]

26. Won't work. No planers have no interest in truth

I also have family and friends that witnessed the second impact and have gone round and round with the no planers here. They have nothing more then baseless accusations... oh wait, they are based on something... fantasy. They wish only to mock the dead, annoy and insult the living.

[Marksbrother]

29. Did any of them videotape the "crash" into WTC2?

Ace Baker will pay them $100K for an authentic video of an actual plane crashing into the WTC2 building. Oh, they don't have one?

Pity.

[Ohio Joe]

30. Ace Baker?

You mean, Ace Baker who refers to President Obama as "his holiness Lord Obama"?

You mean, Ace Baker who denies global warming?

You mean, Ace Baker who thinks Clinton, bush and Obama are all in on it together?

You mean, Ace Baker who thinks that socialized medicine is a step towards totalitarianism?

You mean, Ace Baker who wants people to hand over original video so he can manipulate it without oversight so he can then try to profit from it?

You mean, Ace Baker, who's ideas are so goofy even assholes like killtown and webfairy dismiss him?

Are we talking about the same Ace Baker?

Would you trust a person like this?

[Marksbrother]

31. You mean there's not one single unaltered video that shows a real

plane crashing into WTC2? Ohio Joe, you mean to tell me that you couldn't use an extra $100K? Like so many other True Believers,

didn't you say that you have family members who claim that they saw a plane crash there? And not a one of 'em videotaped it?


You mean to tell me that out of all those alleged thousands of eyewitnesses you say witnessed the event, not one single unaltered

and original videotape captured the Big Show?


You mean to tell me that not one single Network TV broadcaster has an original, unaltered video of a plane crashing into WTC2?


You mean to tell me that you are trying to make Ace Baker the issue here simply because that's the only thing you can think of

to do to avoid having to deal with the fact that there's not one single videotape of a a real plane crashing into WTC2?

That's the best you can do, Ohio Joe?

[Ohio Joe]

32. Typical

Avoid answering questions and drop a bunch of dishonest questions.

"You mean there's not one single unaltered video that shows a real plane crashing into WTC2?"

Certainly there are plenty of them.

"Ohio Joe, you mean to tell me that you couldn't use an extra $100K?"

Absolutely I could, I've been unemployed for almost a year. Unfortunately, I was in Ohio on 9/11 and have never claimed anything different. Though, even if I did have my own footage, I would not trust a science denying asshat like Ace.

"Like so many other True Believers,

didn't you say that you have family members who claim that they saw a plane crash there?"

Yes, one family member, a number of friends. Are you calling me a liar?

"And not a one of 'em videotaped it?"

I know two people that have footage they filmed.

"You mean to tell me that out of all those alleged thousands of eyewitnesses you say witnessed the event, not one single unaltered

and original videotape captured the Big Show?"

Again, there are plenty. Many that are readily available on the net, take a look.

"You mean to tell me that not one single Network TV broadcaster has an original, unaltered video of a plane crashing into WTC2?"

As far as I know they do.

"You mean to tell me that you are trying to make Ace Baker the issue here simply because that's the only thing you can think of

to do to avoid having to deal with the fact that there's not one single videotape of a a real plane crashing into WTC2?"

No. I'm saying that no one in their right mind would trust Ace Baker.

"That's the best you can do, Ohio Joe?"

Yes. In addition, I would say it is a whole hell of a lot better then putting forth ideas that have zero science, zero evidence and zero witnesses.

Now, even though you declined to answer my questions and I have answered yours, lets see if you deal with any of the realities of no planes.

1 - Why, after all these years, is there not one single video expert saying the videos are fake?
2 - With all the money no planers have spent, why have they not hired one single video expert? Would not 100k hire an expert?
3 - Why, after all these years, is there not one single witness that has come forth to say, "I was there, I saw the explosion and there was definitely no plane"?


Now, lets see the best you can do.

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Ohio Joe]

34. So... no answers?

Thats your best? Lame.

Of course, since I'm a stand up kind of guy that does not run from questions, I will for now continue to answer yours.

"Ohio Joe, forgive me, but it is very, very difficult to believe that you personally know two people who personally videotaped

a plane crashing into WTC2 but they aren't interested in collecting $100K? "

Nonsense, I said no such thing. What they are not interested in doing is giving their tape to an asshat so that he can smear them by using his junk science and make a profit doing so. Only a fool would fall for such an obvious play.

"You sure you aren't weaseling by saying "I know two people that have footage they filmed"? Did you intentionally omit to say

that their footage actually showed a plane crashing into WTC2?"

No weaseling. I don't hide or do word play when people have questions for me, I answer them... unlike other people.

"Ohio Joe, I'm not saying you lied, but without corroboration of your claims, why should we believe it? Why isn't it

fair to say that it's, in the words of SDuderstadt, a "goofy" fantasy?"

Don't believe it, coming from a some one that would rather take the word of an asshat that does not support Dems, does not believe in science and is against us all getting some health care... you know, its not bothering me very much.


Now... about those questions I asked you, does your best get any better or is that all you have?

[Marksbrother]

35. Ohio Joe: couldn't you use a share of that $100K?

All you have to do is provide a video that can be authenticated. Why can't you do that, if one actually exists?

[Ohio Joe]

36. That is simply not true

First, how many times do I have to say that "I" do not have any tapes. Are you having a problem understanding that? Which part, I'll clarify. Next part that is not true:

"All you have to do is provide a video that can be authenticated."

Untrue. The actual tape has to be given to him and he is not qualified to authenticate it. You also have to sign over all rights to the tape. After seeing his completely stupid analysis of video readily available... Not to mention his very un-liberal views... Well to be frank, I would not trust him with a burnt out match. I don't know a liberal that would.

"Why can't you do that, if one actually exists?"

oh, I could, I won't. I do not support asshats. Now... if the asshat wanted to pay to have it analyzed by a pro and not make people give up both their tape and their rights to it, I might be able to make that fly. I'm not holding my breath though.

Now, I have been patient and answered your questions, some more then once. I have also addressed your complete mis-characterization of the asshats offer. Now, I will wait to see if you answer my questions or continue to avoid them as happens so often with no planers.

[Marksbrother]

37. You could provide a videotape, but you refuse to?

You really expect anyone to believe that? You say that you have access to one of the most critical missing pieces of evidence in the

9/11 conspiracy, but you won't make it available? Despite the fact that if it's proven to be genuine, it would be worth $100K?

I'm sorry, but that doesn't make any sense whatsoever and maybe some other people here will believe your story, but I don't.

[Ohio Joe]

39. First you mis-characterize the offer... now you mis-characterize what I said

Do you have reading comprehension issues? I have already corrected your mis-characterization of the offer, do you expect to be believed when you keep trying to peddle the same shit over and over? Are you ever going to answer my questions or just keep shilling for this douchebag? Keep going though, you do a better job then anyone else ever could of destroying your credibility.

[Marksbrother]

40. What did you think I mis-characterized?

You said you know of authentic videos showing a plane crash into WTC2.

You said you know who owns them.



I asked you why you wouldn't provide them.

Your response was essentially that you don't trust Ace Baker.


Why then won't you provide them to someone of your OWN choosing?

[Ohio Joe]

41. Well... lets see

You mis-characterize the offer by stating "All you have to do is provide a video that can be authenticated." in post 35

You do it a second time in post 37 by stating "Despite the fact that if it's proven to be genuine, it would be worth $100K?". This is not even part of the offer.

You mis-characterized what I said by stating "You say that you have access to one of the most critical missing pieces of evidence in the 9/11 conspiracy, but you won't make it available?". I never called it any such thing. I find the very idea laughable.



"You said you know of authentic videos showing a plane crash into WTC2." True

"You said you know who owns them." Also true

"I asked you why you wouldn't provide them." Not true. You have (until this post) only asked me to sell them to your buddy Ace.

"Your response was essentially that you don't trust Ace Baker." Close enough.

"Why then won't you provide them to someone of your OWN choosing?" Several reasons:
1 - How many times do I have to say, they are not mine to do anything with.
2 - Pay me 100k and I'll talk to them, I think I could arrange it.
3 - Why? You see, If there was one shred of evidence of no planes, I would. To make it worse, there is not one person... Not you... Not Ace... No one that will even attempt to fill in the massive gaping holes in the "theory" with anything that even resembles reason (sorry, mind control of all of lower NYC does not fit the criteria). Perhaps if someone did, I would. You up to the challenge? Your buddy Ace? Why won't you guys take my challenge?

[Marksbrother]

42. There's no authentic video showing a plane crash, Ohio Joe.

You can dance all you want to but the bottom line is: you haven't given any reason to believe that you know of the impossible.

[Ohio Joe]

43. Then please, take my challenge

Why do you not take my challenge?

[defendandprotect]

46. YOU just happen to have "family and friends" who post here and who

witnessed the second impact?

As we have seen there are "actors" in play in the offering of info on TV --
As we have also seen, investigation by researchers shows that events at the
Pentagon are unlikely to have happened as set up and reported!

Indeed, it looks like a plane merely flew over the Pentagon as the explosions
were set off. And, that the fallen lightpoles and taxi driver bear false witness
as to what actually happened there on 9/11.

Again -- you also have the reporter who was at the Pentagon and reported that
'NO PLANE HIT THE PENTAGON' . . .

later, he seemed quite under pressure to retract that info -- but it is on record.
And much more likely true that untrue.

The lack of debris at the Pentagon also points to the reality that there was NO PLANE.

[Ohio Joe]

48. I apologize, I was not clear

No, I have no friends or family that post on DU, my meaning was that I have gone round and round regarding no planes. I am sorry I was not clear. Also, I have no interest in the pentagon right now, should that change I will give you my thoughts on the topic.

[defendandprotect]

50. Okay . . . progress . . .

however, note that the concept is 'NO PLANES' .... not 'NO PLANE' . . .

Therefore, ALL THE PLANES are in question -

including the Pentagon.

Fraud in the case of 9/11 is rampant from beginning to end -- from the beginning
with the PNAC and Bush's desire stated a year before he became president to attack Iraq.
In fact, after the '93 attack which is also highly suspicious, the PNAC/neo-cons were
pressuring Clinton to attack Iraq - which he refused to do. So, we know what part of the
goal was and it was achieved thru lies about Iraqi connections to 9/11 and WMD - ah, those
"mushroom clouds."

Additionally, the WTC towers moved like "musicial chairs" in ownership, insurance --
including specificially for terrorism - and building security in the short time before 9/11.
The Bush family were highly involved in security of WTC and at least one of the airports,
if I recall correctly.

There are also strong rumors that the WTC towers were going to have to be dismantled at huge
costs -- demolition was not to be permitted. There were problems with asbestos and other
problems.

There there were at least two glaring motives for using the WTC towers as a "false flag"
operation.

As I've said elsewhere on the 9/11 threads, had we been told that the Russians had succeeded
in invading America and hijacking four commercial jet liners simultaneously -- riding them
around the skies for an hour and more while NORAD didn't respond, we'd be laughing our heads
off.

These "planes" flew over dozens of military bases which were quite capable of defense.
Supposedly one of the planes flew over the nuclear reactor in New York --
Additionally one of the planes supposedly flew near the White House which has anti-ballistic
missiles. And, certainly, the Pentagon had anti-ballistic missile batteries which were
obviously turned off -- or there was no "incoming."

[Subdivisions]

6. Please post links to your best amateur impact videos. Thanks. n/t

[Theobald]

11. Here is a link to a bunch of videos

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DoE8Uz2ia3M&feature=related

Amateur and Professional.

[defendandprotect]

47. Obviously, we need someone to inspect and vouch for these videos . . .

and when they came out -- and what connections any of these people might
have to the usual suspects.

[Marksbrother]

49. Not exactly realistic, are they?

Has anyone EVER seen a video of any kind whatsoever about any topic whatsoever, where the NYC skyline looks as weird as it does

in these videos? Planes? "planes" - as in cartoons.

[defendandprotect]

51. Though I haven't rechecked other

9/11 websites recently, there were at least one or two dealing with videos like these.
The supposed filmers were known and comparisons were made and the results were that they
were highly questionable.

Also, the French film maker who took the film of the 2nd plane seems to have also produced
a rather questionable video. Just happened to be in the one exact spot where he could zoom
up and catch the plane. Btw, I've recently seen a camera imagine zooming in that way from
foreground focus to far off background and there was a period of blurring.

Also, as you're pointing out re changes in color of the sky -- those who have been looking at
these videos point that out as happening as they seem to shift into the cartoon plane.

That's my definition -- don't blame them!

:)

[Marksbrother]

52. Faked 9/11 videos and "eyewitness" accounts

Consider this. Whenever you see purported eyewitness accounts of the WTC2 attack, very few of them report having seen a

plane crash into the building. Leaving aside the credibility of those few, isn't it only reasonable that if 100's or 1,000's

of people saw a plane crash into a tall building that ALL of them or nearly all of them would have said that's what they saw?


Do you know anyone who has seen a video of the WTC2 attack on TV who DIDN'T see a plane crash (melt) into the building?

[defendandprotect]

53. Agree . . . .

[hack89]

38. Now it's your turn

you have seen all the footage of the impact.

Care to show us all your footage of the explosion that is missing a plane? Surely they didn't fake every piece of footage?

[defendandprotect]

54. Explosions . . . no plane ... as posted by another poster --

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=253851&mesg_id=254259

[defendandprotect]

45. How about explaining the NOSE OUT video . . . ????

That was obviously video fakery . . .

So you're left in a position of believing that they FAKED one shot???

Nor do I think we've heard from 7 million people in NYC --

In fact, we've heard from a lot of "actors" obviously who were interviewed on
the streets near WTC -- in obvious set up interviews -- witnesses reading from
scripts --

while, other witnesses who made clear there was "NO PLANE" were simply walked away from!

It's a losing argument --

If you suggested to Americans that 19 Russians had hijacked four airplanes from our
airports simultaneously -- after the White House having ignored months and months of
warnings -- including warnings from the UN Security Council in August which visited the
White House and our intelligence agencies because they were so concerned about Bush's
"Operation Ignore" re the warnings -- everyone would be laughing as they should be!

The question is "How Could They Not Have Known?" -- only by ignoring the information,
including from our own CIA . . . you might recall that one: "Bin Laden Determined To
Strike Within US" -- ????


And, interesting thing is when you review the JFK assassination you see the same kind
of leading of public's mind to "long gun nuts" and assassins named "Leon" -- and
JFK's supposed lack of interest in having Secret Service properly protect him!
All lies, of course. We also have the example of the Zapruder film being doctored to
lie about the assassination.

Same patterns -- same right-wing conspiracy.

[Subdivisions]

5. Deleted Message. Wrong thread. n/t

[CJCRANE]

7. Does anyone have a link to the "divebomber"

second impact compared to the horizontal second impact?

I found that quite interesting.

Would also be interested in a link to a debunking of that (if it exists).

[balantz]

8. Here is a link to a comparison of two of the fake plane videos.

The "divebomber" and the "al Qaeda" videos:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnUlsQQfO6A

[balantz]

9. This more complete "divebomber" shows the "plane" coming in even steeper than in the other clip. n/t

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iF1zlguWMRY&feature=related

[CJCRANE]

10. Thanks.

It does seem to be flying fairly level in all of the other footage.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CJCRANE]

14. That was somewhat uncalled for.

I'm not a no-planer but I find their analysis of the media interesting, it seems to show up anomalies that are interesting. If you recall, for instance, that 85% of the troops in Iraq believed Saddam was connected to 9/11 (according to a poll in 2004) then it's pretty important to look into political manipulation of the media.

[balantz]

16. No problem. Glad to help. You can compare most if not all the forgeries in the following link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DoE8Uz2ia3M&feature=related

Even the very first news clip is so painfully fake with the cartoon plane skipping across the CGI sky.

Why would they do all of that unless there were no Boeings melting into buildings without a single tail or wing disturbed?

Maybe the perpetrators used smaller, plane shaped guided missiles? Like this one:

[CJCRANE]

17. I watched some of the live footage

from the different networks and news channels...and it was interesting that a few of them didn't show the plane in the second impact, just the explosion (due to the camera angle). IIRC the live plane shots were from Fox and CNN feeds/footage.

[aldo]

23. Go here, to buy the DVD and support Sophia

http://www.911weknow.com/911-mysteries-dvd

Send donations for her legal fight if you can. She created 911 Mysteries all on her own, with her own money. Now she needs our help.

[wildbilln864]

24. will do, thanks for the link! nt

:hi:

[Bolo Boffin]

27. Those who give Sofia money are supporting her lies.

http://www.911mysteriesguide.com/

[KDLarsen]

28. She needs help alright...

*clunkity-clunk* :eyes:

[Laurier]

44. Shafquat bastardized live footage to deceive people for profit

That is not behavior that I can support, and it is certainly not behavior that I would encourage anyone else to throw money at.

I'm no fan of either Siegel or Shafquat, but as between the two of them in this particular matter, Siegel has the high ground here and Shafquat is in the wrong.