He got slammed in that interview, and it really wasn't that hard. I say lets use Mcain's endorsement of their idiotic positions and arguments to bring this further into Main Stream political discussion!!!!!
If John Mcain thinks answering questions about what really happened on 911 is IMPORTANT FOR THE WELL BEING OF THE NATION ....well lets start demanding those answers!!
When opportunity knocks , and it is the 1# 08 Republican Presidential candidate...well for God sakes lets let him in.....he'll be sorry he knocked......for he has underestimated the overwhelming volume and strength of evidence that points directly to our Government's complicity in 911!!!!!Radical Pragmatist

This guy totally had his ass handed to him, can there be any doubt that these guys are shilling for the administration? He should be grateful they only touched on three topics.

That image directly contridicts the images of the 5-6 burning windows from Barclay Street.

The debris of the missing floors would be in those photos and are not. (The ones with the two postal trucks, one damaged on the left and the other intact closest to WTC7)

"If you rely on the corporate media for your information, you don't know what's going on. Period."

Agreed.

Outfoxed

this charles goyette guy is awesome
salute

think i'll have to email him to say thank you

On the exact same documentary where Silverstien said "pull it" later in the video they show them demolishing other WTC buildings. The clip rolls and shows the crew blowing up the building right after one of them says "Hey we're getting ready to pull building 6"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNEoiOP76QQ&mode=related&search=

From the same documentary it is proven that "pull it" means demolish it.

There were no firefighters in WTC7, so try again.

I'm trying to do my part, as I post many threads on Netscape referencing the threads here.....

I hope that makes an impact?

Could you imagine if it was one of the ones who were on those destroyed tapes?

saw that....wondering what they plan on reporting.

THANKS JON

Extremely well stated!

great post Ronnied

Interesting find, Jon...

I assume this is fairly new, since it is based on the forthcoming movie...

A number of questions arise:

Was there an official FAA gag order? If so, when and how was it lifted? Are other ATC's now free to speak to the media?

"In the beginning, they were talking about a small airplane off of Poughkeepsie that hit the WTC". Hmmm... Where is that air force base that Grove talks about?

"Duff" said he was "supersonic"... "which is kind of non-standard for us".

Were there any calls to anyone in NYC or anywhere else from the ATC's who indicated that they feared the second plane was also headed toward WTC?

Unofficial approximate transcript

Listen to this MP3 file of Popular Mechanics on the Charles Goyette show in Phoenix. Charles has him backpedaling big time.

2006 Aug 23

http://www.911podcasts.com/files/audio/A003I060823-am-c3.MP3

PM – Popular Mechanics - Davin Coburn “researcher editor, reporter on the original article on 9/11, and fact-checker of the book”
CG – Charles Goyette, Radio Show Host

Topic: 9/11 Facts and Myths

CG: Is there information that has not been given to the public?
PM: Very little…there is very little that has been held back as far as the basic facts of what happened that morning in terms of the material we looked into.
CG: I was under the impression that there were a lot of facts that were withheld. I mean, the surveillance videos, for example, around the Pentagon we were told about: a hotel video, a convenience store video, we haven’t seen those. Apparently they were swooped up very quickly or so the report goes.
PM: That is the case, those have been taken for larger criminal investigations those are now being disclosed to the public, you know with the Judicial Watch material…
CG: I’ve talked with the guys at Judicial Watch, and they’re not very happy about it, they released like four frames that don’t really show much of anything.
PM: They don’t show very much considering that the frame rate was one frame per second and the plane Flight 77 was moving about 780 feet per second, from that distance it’s not surprising that there was not a whole lot caught on that video.
CG: Are you telling me that’s the only video?
PM: No, I suspect there are other videos, I suspect they’re still being used for various investigations.
CG: What the hell is there to investigate? They told us who the guys were, they held onto some of that stuff for the Moussaoui trial for the love of God, like it was really relevant to his trial (sarcastic), it’s five years later, when are the American people entitled to the evidence?
PM: I think there’s plenty of evidence out there…
CG: It’s not the evidence we’ve seen that we’re concerned about, it’s the evidence we haven’t seen. Does that make any sense?
PM: Oh sure it makes sense…. The evidence is abundant…
CG: It’s the dog that didn’t bark... We know the evidence we’ve seen, that doesn’t cause any suspicion so much as the evidence that we don’t see. It’s not helpful in this country with a very secretive government when a big, powerful magazine like you guys, who owns Popular Mechanics?
PM: “Hearst.”
CG: Ok, with Hearst Corporation, with all of your might, instead of joining the people in their natural curiosity to see all the evidence, you try to say, “Oh shut up, you peons don’t know what you’re talking about, everything’s fine, keep on moving, there’s nothing to see here.” Hearst should be using their influence to get all the evidence released and that will end all the conspiracy talk! Wouldn’t it?
PM: (does answer this question)
CG: …I want to come back to the unseen evidence – the dog that didn’t bark. Hearst has a lot of muscle – where are you in lobbying for the release of all the evidence to put an end to all this madness, speculation and distrust?..
PM: It’s not up to us…
CG: I said use your influence.. Look, is there something we don’t know about this that they have to hide from us? No, or so I presume. We’re told who did it, we’ve invaded two countries in response to it, we’ve spent billions of dollars, I mean, what could be possibly secretive right now?
PM: How can I answer the question?
CG: Because you don’t know, we just want to see the evidence. If the plane flew into the building, show us the damn pictures. What could that possibly hurt?
PM: (Cannot answer question)
CG: …Building 7 is the first piece of evidence that I turn to. Popular Mechanics…say that a third of the face, approximately 25% of the depth of the building that was scooped out beforehand.
PM: When the North Tower collapsed… there was damage to Building 7…. What we found out was…about 25% of the building’s south face had been carved away from it… Each column that you remove that was destroyed by the wreckage from the North Tower…
CG: That would be very persuasive to me if it were true. And it may or may not be true… I go, oh that’s interesting…if that’s true that would go a long way towards explaining what happened to Building 7. So I turn to the pictures in your book about Building 7 you’ve got a picture of Building 7, but it doesn’t show that. So I’m going, OK, instead of just somebody asserting that a third of the building was scooped away, show me the picture. But you don’t show me the picture.
PM: …We have seen pictures that are property of the NY Police Department and various other governmental agencies that we were not given permission to disseminate….
CG: Popular Mechanics got to see them, but the average American citizen can’t see them.
PM: Correct.
CG: Well, that’s a fine kettle of fish, isn’t it? ….What did you see there that I can’t see?
PM: Just what was described.
CG: Well it must be something that’s dangerous for me as an American citizen or a voter to see. You’re publishers, if anybody is concerned about evidence in a criminal case or something, they’ve done the worst possible thing, they’ve shown it to a damn magazine publisher!
PM: That was done for the purposes of our background research.
CG: What about my background research? Do you see the source of my frustration here? I didn’t know we had different classes of citizens. You can’t tell me it’s because it’s a criminal case because they’ve shown it to a damn magazine publisher.
PM: ….I can’t answer that question.
CG: I know you can’t.
PM: (is speechless)….
…Caller (Mike): What about the 7 to 9 hijackers that were reported in the British press who came forward and said, “We’re alive, what are we doing on the FBI list of so-called hijackers? We’re alive and well.” How do you explain that one?
PM: It was one BBC report – I am saying that is false.
Caller: How did you verify that the British story was false?
PM: The remains of the hijackers who have been widely understood to have been on those planes…
Caller: What remains?
PM: There was DNA evidence collected all over the place.
Caller: The building was incinerated; the concrete was turned into powder, there were molten pools of steel in the bottom of the building that were still hot weeks after, and they were able do autopsies on bodies? Are you insane? Where are the autopsy reports you were referring to, on the hijackers, where are those reports? I haven’t heard anything about autopsy reports.
CG: I want to know, even if we presume you’re correct that they recovered the DNA of the 19 hijackers from the rubble, where did they get their original DNA with which to match it? Where did they get the original DNA of a bunch of middle-eastern Islamic madmen? Where did they get the DNA? Had they submitted DNA before they, uh…I mean, where the hell did they get it? You’re not even talking sensibly with me.
PM: Off the top of my head, I don’t know the answer to that.
CG: Of course you don’t.
PM: I’ll get back to you with it.
CG: Is that a promise?
PM: I will do my best.
CG: People all across the state of Arizona now are hearing Davin Coburn say on the show that he’s gonna find out how they got that DNA checked against those Islamic terrorists who had…hijacked those planes. Good, I’d like to hear it. Now do you understand why people scratch their head when these kinds of representations are made?
PM: No, actually I don’t…
CG: You don’t understand why when you tell us that they found the hijackers’ DNA remains amongst the molten steel, and I ask you where did they get the original DNA from the hijackers to match it against – Do you think that’s bizarre to ask a question like that, do you think it’s conspiratorial just to want to know?...You told me that they have DNA evidence that matches the hijackers…
PM: I think the entire question is baseless. I think that it is not even a question that’s worth answering….
CG: …You’ve told me that they checked their DNA, where did they get their original DNA to check it against? You’re the one with the answers, I’m not. I just ask questions.
PM: …A seven year old can ask why, over and over and over….
CG: No, this is the worst attack on America in the history of this country, we’ve invaded two countries, maybe a third because of it, we’re gonna spend trillions of dollars. It’s not a seven year old asking why, I want to know where they got the evidence that they matched it against. What’s so hard about that?
PM: The way that you’re framing it is intentionally…
CG: Of course it is, ‘cause it’s five years later and we haven’t heard the answer. And you haven’t given it to us in Popular Mechanics. I swear to God, that’s it. You see, it’s the way I’m framing it makes it an illegitimate question? Well tell me how to reframe it, tell me how to ask it differently.
PM: I would start entirely over with the question that that gentleman asked.
CG: I want the question I asked. All right, that’s it. Hey Daven, thanks…the Charles Goyette Show.

Which leads me to question, what the hell was he thinking? Was Silverstein in on it from the beginning? Why the hell would he have make that statement on camera. It doesn't add up.

At the very least, he's jeapordizing his ability to collect on the insurance, at the very worst, he's admitting culpability of an inside job.

FBI: Bin Laden Not Wanted for 9-11?
The 'FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11'

by Enver Masud

http://www.twf.org/News/Y2006/0608-BinLaden.html

The FBI's "Most Wanted Terrorists" web page does not state that Bin Laden is wanted for the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

The FBI page states: "Usama Bin Laden is wanted in connection with the August 7, 1998, bombings of the United States Embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya. These attacks killed over 200 people. In addition, Bin Laden is a suspect in other terrorist attacks throughout the world."

When asked why there is no mention of 9/11 on the FBI's web page, Rex Tomb, the FBI's Chief of Investigative Publicity, is reported to have said, "The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden's Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11."

In the months leading up to the Septmber 11, 2001 attack, it is reported, the Taliban "outlined various ways bin Laden could be dealt with. He could be turned over to the EU, killed by the Taliban, or made available as a target for Cruise missiles." The Bush administration did not accept the Taliban's offer.

"On September 20, 2001," according to the Guardian, "the Taliban offered to hand Osama bin Laden to a neutral Islamic country for trial if the US presented them with evidence that he was responsible for the attacks on New York and Washington. The US rejected the offer."

On September 23, 2001 the BBC reported that four of the hijack "suspects" - Waleed Al Shehri, Abdulaziz Al Omari, Saeed Alghamdi, and possibly Khalid Al Midhar - were alive, and that FBI Director Robert Mueller acknowledged "the identity of several of the suicide hijackers is in doubt."

Bin Laden, in a September 28, 2001 interview with the Pakistani newspaper Ummat, is reported to have said: "I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States."

Skeptics dismiss the video tape "found in a house in Jalalabad", Afghanistan, which allegedly shows Bin Laden confessing to the September 11 attacks. In a December 20, 2001, broadcast by German TV channel Das Erste "two independent translators and an expert on oriental studies found the White House's translation not only to be inaccurate, but manipulative."

FBI Director Robert Mueller, in a speech at the Commonwealth Club on April 19, 2002, said: "In our investigation, we have not uncovered a single piece of paper - either here in the United States, or in the treasure trove of information that has turned up in Afghanistan and elsewhere - that mentioned any aspect of the September 11 plot."

The evidence against Bin Laden, promised by Secretary of State Colin Powell on September 23, 2001, has yet to be made available to the public.

Bin Laden is the "prime suspect" in the September 11 attacks, said President Bush on September 17, 2001, and he pledged to capture him "dead or alive."

---
Enver Masud, "Deadly Deception, Pretexts for War," The Wisdom Fund, July 30, 2001

George Friedman, "America's Secret War," The Wisdom Fund, October 11, 2005

Enver Masud, "What Really Happened to 7 World Trade Center?," The Wisdom Fund, April 17, 2006

It takes psychopaths to back up fairy tales from habitual and pathological liars. This PM guy is clearly nuts.

that's unlikely... where'd you hear that?
_

"Among the 'spider-man' skeptics are those who claim that no human can shoot web and stick to walls... They conveniently ignore the fact that he was bitten by a radioactive spider."

Daily Bugle editorial debunking the claims of spider-man deniers

love this site but this new comments section SUCKS.

Emm, NOoooooo!!, thats the BEST that PM can give us!!
They are complete idiots like the Administration!

Stand for SOMETHING...
...or you'll fall for ANYTHING!!

Does anybody have a better copy of the Goyette and Pop Mechanics MP3?
The compressed distortion is killing me.

"red hot, molten, running in streams" Maybe the buildings were built on top of a volcano, hey, lets ask that kid from Popular Mechanics, be sure to frame the question right.
http://www.pbs.org/americarebuilds/engineering/engineering_debris_06.html

Google - America Rebuilds Larry Silverstein and you can easily go to to other websites that have the entire interview and have nothing to do with Alex Jones. AJ did not alter anything and quit making baseless assumptions based on your opinion.

I just listened to the you tube link you listed at the top of your post and guess what? That was damn sure Demo Dave Griffin sayin pull buildin six. I'd stake my life on it.

Alex Jones is a 50 caliber machine gun of truth.

That's your boy, ain't it?

I saw the original PBS doco and Silverstein admitted to it. If you look at Alex Jones as sensationalistic, review thoroughly his links. He actually comes up with some very interesting stuff that is out there in the main stream media.

So, yes, I can attest to the fact it is true. Silverstein did make that exact comment on PBS. Jones has not altered it in any way. Hope that helps.