9/11 Synchronicity Episode 2
Somebigguy Mon, 07/31/2006 - 4:29am
Check it out here:
http://renaissance.libsyn.com/index.php?post_id=114578
This episode features an interview with Dylan Avery and Jason Bermas.
To subscribe to this Podcast, use this URL:
http://renaissance.libsyn.com/rss
Rather than subscribing, you can simply download this specific episode here.
The home page for 9/11 Synchronicity can be found here:
http://www.911synchronicity.com/
As always, you can also access this podcast here:
http://www.911podcasts.com/display.php?vid=127
- Login to post comments
Click Here
Click Here
Understanding Oil By Serj,
Understanding Oil
By Serj, vocalist of System of a Down
9/13/2001
http://wrestlingcasa.tripod.com/systemofadown/id174.html
Great summary.
OT - Just came across this
OT - Just came across this in a previous thread:
Issue a public challenge to Nass something like this:
To Rep. Stephan Nass: We, the undersigned, will guarantee a $10,000 endowment to the University of Wisconsin-Madison if you engage in a two hour debate with Kevin Barrett, challenging him on his claims about the events on 9/11.
If enough people got behind this idea, raising the 10 grand (or more) shouldn't be difficult. If after hearing this new challenge Nass still refuses, our effort will still serve to demonstrate:
1. That Nass won't accept a debate challenge even if it benefits
the constituents and college he's trying to "protect".
2. that the truth movement is very serious and confident about our stance, and the information we have to share.
I'm thinking that the endowment would only be issued if Nass wins the debate, virtually guaranteeing that the $10,000 is never issued. However, I don't know what method would be used to determine the winner.
Any thoughts on the above?
Alex | 07.28.06 - 12:20 pm | #
I think something like this could be a good idea, giving Nass some sort of incentive to debate Barrett. I mean, we shouldn't have to; it is his duty as a public servant to give us some damn answers, but it appears he sees it differently. Anyway, we need to make this debate happen. Barrett vs. Nass: The Trouncin' in Wis-cown-sin!
Richard Andrew Grove is THEE
Richard Andrew Grove is THEE man in my book. For anyone whose heard his talks and interviews, I feel he has one of the most comprehensive and soul crushing takes on 9/11.
Insider Trading
Where the planes hit specifically
and why it matters
The Pakistani ISI proxy funding
The unusual operatives in place
around Manhattan that day
corporate involvement
very fascinating. check out a trailer for his upcoming documentary:
http://www.proteanmedia.com/grove/index2.htm
Interview was decent. One
Interview was decent. One problem I had was that Dylan or Jason said that the FBI admits that Osama has nothing to do with 9/11.
Not quite true. The FBI saying that they have no hard evidence linking Osama to 9/11 is not admitting that Osama had nothing to do with 9/11.
I listened to this- and I
I listened to this- and I was elated to hear that Dylan states he's decided Building 7 is the biggest smoking gun, rather than the Pentagon.
I can't tell you how happy I am to hear this, Dylan. If you give Building 7 the same attention and prominence that you gave the Pentagon, the film is going to demolish the official story... It'll collapse at freefall speeds, and we'll see pyroclastic clouds emerging from the arses of the guilty in a matter of months...
(Unless we're seeing mushroom clouds over Tehran first... If that happens, well I guess I'll see you guys in the FEMA camps. Along with Charlie Sheen... (It'll be like Red Dawn revisited, except this time, Charlie'll be on the business side of the barbed wire fence, yelling out to Emilio, "Avenge me!))