Chico, CA: Chock up another MSM 9/11 Truth win
doughnut Sat, 05/05/2007 - 1:09am
Our local weekly newspaper, Chico News & Review, has a front page story about 9/11 Truth (and Justice!).
It's a pretty good article. I don't like the article title, "Truth Believers", but I suppose it's okay.
They tried to make it "balanced" by including a CSUC professor's comments (the same prof who did the "pancake theory" presentation at our 9/11 Truth-ish conference last week).
But it is more 9/11 Truth and Justice than anything. Mostly it profiles our group, Chico 9/11 Truth, and some of its "core group" members, showing that "normal, intelligent, professional people" can be pro-9/11 Truth.
Chock up another mainstream media win for our side.
Slowly but surely, step by step.....
Here's the online version:
- doughnut's blog
- Login to post comments
Not a bad headline...
It could have been "TRUTHINESS Believers".
Go Chico! It's ya birthday!
_______________________
"Cogito ergo sum"
A Redfinition of MSM
I had to think back over a dozen years ago to the media and journalism classes I took as an undergrad, and I was wondering if we should use such a broad brush to paint coverage like this as MSM.
It's true that a lot of these "local" papers and "local" news stations are subsidized and owned by bigger corporations. Many of the national and international stories they receive come from the monolithic sources like AP, Reuters, UPI, NY Times, and so on. But what these sources don't provide are the in-depth local stories that are popping up here and there as is the case with this Chico article.
While this grass-roots article seems to create a fair & balanced perspective of the 9/11 Truth movement as it is evolving in the Chico-Reno area - I think what we're seeing here is similar to what went on in Vermont several months ago. The local papers and media in VT covered the stroy and people began to talk. I am sure they were talking about 911 Truth at the gas stations, the diners, the water cooler at work, and so on.
I believe it's that suburban, small-town way of thinking that will read and digest the MSM as it appears in the NY Times, the Wash Post, CNN, CBS, NBC, ABC, FOX - however - some of these people are less inclined to take to heart a national news story and its source. They favor the local. It's closer to home.
The lesson here? Write to your local papers or your local news stations for more coverage like this. When it is covered, like we see with this Chico article, the coverage is more in-depth. The journalists at this level tend to have a little more range in how they cover a story. The local media seems less inclined to do hit-pieces. A neighborhood-style set of values is what we have going for us with coverage like this.
These local journalists and editors are not beholden to a the 30 second commercial split like the way they are when covering Rosie's "bizarre" comments on the view. If the MSM, particularly the televised media, were to cover 911 Truth the way it was done in the Chico paper, they risk losing the audience which as we know has the same attention span as your average lemur.
Write to the local papers.
Write to the local news stations.
Get these addresses, numbers, and emails and send them out.
Peace.
Opinion of "structural engineer"...
When asked about the collapse of WTC 7, which wasn't hit by a plane, Mills shrugged, shook his head and asserted simply, "Not controlled demolition." He offered no detailed explanation; the FEMA report Mills endorses attributes WTC 7's collapse "primarily to fire" and the likelihood of "debris impact damage" from the Twin Towers "in a number of locations."
His comments are not worth the ink that was used to print them. They should have been left out of this otherwise fair and balanced article.
Russell Mills goes on to state, "I haven't seen anything to do with 9/11 Truth coming from structural engineers," adding: "Granted, I haven't read everything."
Mills should take a look at the following:
_______________________
"Cogito ergo sum"
Yes
I missed his conference presentation, but I heard second-hand that someone asked him about WTC 7 and his reply was something like, "I haven't studied it so I can't comment", and he then proceeded to makes comments about WTC 7 that basically followed the official story.
Someone tried to mention or ask a question about the fact that even the NIST website says that the "pancake collapse" theory is now dead for the Twin Towers, but the prof wouldn't really answer any "conspiracy theory questions" without basically dismissing them as worthless and a waste of his valuable time. (I'm trying to not be too snippy, but I like to get the occasional dig in now and then)
I doubt if he's even followed what's happened since he did his original presentation however many years ago it was, which isn't very scientific at all. (his lack of keeping up to date and his presentation, both)
So he is typical in the sense that he is an "official story-er".
----
Senior 9/11 Bureau Chief, Analyst, Correspondent
http://www.chico911truth.org/ --- 9/11 Truth -- The Path to Peace
"Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force;
like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master.
Never for
Hmm I wonder what Mills
Says to this. No structural engineers ? Give me a break, a quick look at patriotsquestion911.com/ and you can find professors in that field saying WTC 7 is a CD:
A very good example would be:
Hugo Bachmann, PhD – Professor Emeritus and former Chairman of the Department of Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology
Even more intrestingly check out his specific publications:
* Vibration problems in structures
caused by rhythmical human body motions, machines, wind etc., experimental and theoretical work
* Earthquake problems in structures and plants
Conceptual seismic design, analysis, member design and detailing of new buildings, bridges and industrial facilities, assessment and if necessary seismic upgrading of existing structures, capacity design and deformation-oriented procedures in the case of reinforced concrete and masonry structures etc., experimental and theoretical work
*>>>>> Impact problems in structures<<<<<<<<<
>>>>>>>> Impacts by explosions, blasting, vehicles, stones, avalanches etc., experimental and theoretical work<<<<<<<<<
And check what he says about WTC7:
"In my opinion the building WTC 7 [610 feet tall, 47 stories, and not hit by an airplane] was, with great probability, professionally demolished," says Hugo Bachmann, Emeritus ETH [Swiss Federal Institute of Technology] - Professor of Structural Analysis and Construction. And also Jörg Schneider, likewise emeritus ETH - Professor of Structural Analysis and Construction, interprets the few available video recordings as evidence that "the building WTC 7 was with great probability demolished." "
http://www.danieleganser.ch/zeitungsartikel/pdf/agora_eng.pdf
----------------------------------------------------------------
http://patriotsquestion911.com/
Help me shout 9/11 articles on:
www.shoutwire.com
Deleted
Deleted
Deleted
Deleted
Deleted
Deleted
I do not find Mills' statemenet credible
But would appreciate it if someone could provide a link that answers his statements.
He says: ""The most important concern of structural engineers is to control 'buckling,' " Mills explained, reaching for a giant yellow Styrofoam "noodle" (the kind that children play with in the pool) to demonstrate his point. Pushing down on the top of the noodle, Mills illustrated how a column of a very tall skyscraper, like one of the Twin Towers, would buckle from pressure above, such as floors pancaking onto one another."
I have read this elsewhere. I believe the speed of the buildings' collapses, their similarity, uniformity, and the dust produced more than answers his vague statement. But if there is a more detailed analysis of precisely these claims, a link would be most appreciated.
Thanks, Alvin
Mills' statement is INcredible...
I appreciate your informed skepticism. However, Mills' statements not only lack credibility with you and I, but they are at odds with the laws of physics as well. Therefore, it is incumbent upon HIM to 'provide a link' that will explain his incredibly UNSCIENTIFIC conclusions. My guess is, the only link he has comes directly from his proverbial arse! Sorry Mills but the "Styrofoam noodle"... "experiment" [making finger air quotes] ain't gonna cut it!
To his credit, he readily admits, "I haven't read everything". My follow-up question would have been, "well, have you read anything?"
_______________________
"Cogito ergo sum"
I don't believe Mills at
I don't believe Mills at all.
I would just like to have a Kevin Ryan sort of paper dealing with what he, or some other, structural engineer is saying.
If someone knows of a link to a detailed analysis and rebuttal of what he is saying, please post it.
Next time I hear something like what Mills is saying (I hope he has more detail than the noodle), I simply want to have good clean facts to demolish their argument.
Remember...
Every time one of these quacks tries to come up with some silly theory, they're compounding the chance that their stories will be self-contradictory. Any explanations outside of real science will tend to be self contradictory, or mutually exclusive. Catalog all these idiotic explanations and quote the person proffering them. This can later be used to discredit the "official" explanation(s).
------------------
"Peace comes from within. Do not seek it without." - Buddha
"What you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that you do it." - Gandhi
"The Sun never shined on a cause of greater worth." - Thomas Paine
This is a good point and one
This is a good point and one that I do keep in mind.
It is also a main reason to get these people to make real statements about what they believe, or at least assert.
Mills sounds typical--vague explanation with no calculations or specificity, though that may be partly the fault of the reporter.
The more that people try to defend the officil story, the more opportunities we have to show them why they are wrong.
Structural Vs. Electrical... Physicists...
This guy is trying to assert that ONLY structural engineers can explain this event. BS. I'm pretty sure that someone like Steve Jones, after working on "muon catalyzed fusion" can easily grasp thermite reactions and structural failures.
Anyway, why the hell can't the Movement seem to snag some structural engineers? You would think all the other reputable scientists and professionals in the movement would have some friends in that field...
------------------
"Peace comes from within. Do not seek it without." - Buddha
"What you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that you do it." - Gandhi
"The Sun never shined on a cause of greater worth." - Thomas Paine
hmmm
makes one wonder...where are they?
_________________________________
Morgantown 9/11 Truth
The Eleventh Day of Every Month
Here is one
http://www.vermontguardian.com/commentary/032007/TwinTowers.shtml
Can anyone give the email address of the author of the good article, or that of Mills?
That's a good one, thanks. I
That's a good one, thanks.
I read that one when it came out but had forgotten about it.
If there are any other links of this type, please post them. Minor point, Rice is technically a civil engineer who worked with structural steel. I do not buy the idea that only experts can assess the evidence or understand the physical laws underlying the event, but it is always good to have as much ammo as we can get.
Mills should definitely be sent a copy of Rice's essay.
email:
Here, structural engineers say hello:
Prof. Mills: rmills@csuchico.edu
lol
When you're bad, you're very good.
:0)
----
Senior 9/11 Bureau Chief, Analyst, Correspondent
http://www.chico911truth.org/
ae911truth.org
That's why Richard Gage is creating Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. The website should be up and fully operational in a few weeks, at which time he hopes to get architects and engineers to "sign up" and add their name to a list of people who are 9/11 Truth oriented. (similar to http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/ )
http://www.ae911truth.org/
----
Senior 9/11 Bureau Chief, Analyst, Correspondent
http://www.chico911truth.org/ --- 9/11 Truth -- The Path to Peace
"Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force;
like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master.
Never for
So,this guy goes to the
So,this guy goes to the doctor because his head hurt.The doctor examined him ,ran some tests & looked at his chart/medical history and ask all sorts of questions (diet,sex drive etc,etc.).Then the doctor gave his diagnosis.
Well,the man didn't like the doctors diagnosis & wanted a second opinion.So,when he got home he called a different doctor on the phone and told him he was seeking a second opinon.The doctor said "ok,come to my office & I'll examine you" and the man said "no,you can't examine me" the doctor then said "ok,have your doctor send me your chart with your medical history ect" & the man said "no,you can't see my chart" .. Do you think the doctor will give this man a second opinon?Of course Not!
So,when you ask "where are all the engineers" just remember engineering like medicine is a science and the questions you should be asking is where are the blueprints (which by law are a matter of public ) but are unavailable?Where the visualizations for the NIST's computer animations?Where the construction records?Where are the certifications etc etc.
Finally: WTC Blueprints
They were finally released (or found, something like that) and I think there is a link to them at ae911truth.org.
----
Senior 9/11 Bureau Chief, Analyst, Correspondent
http://www.chico911truth.org/
Actually,
Actually, “an individual interested in a more complete analysis” released the WTC blueprints to STJ911. This person apparently remains anonymous.
http://stj911.org/press_releases/blueprints.html
“We're an empire now, and when we act we create our own reality."
Show me all the blueprints.
Show me all the blueprints. Show me all the blueprints. Show me all the blueprints.....
Show me all the blueprints.Show me all the blueprints.Show me all the blueprints.Show me all the blueprints.Show me all the blueprints.Show me all the blueprints.Show me all the blueprints.Show me all the blueprints.Show me all the blueprints.Show me all the blueprints!
Heh heh. The Aviator.
------------------
"Peace comes from within. Do not seek it without." - Buddha
"What you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that you do it." - Gandhi
"The Sun never shined on a cause of greater worth." - Thomas Paine
cant trust experts
Experts said the world was flat, saddam had wmd's and that smoking was good for you. most experts are going to agree w the states propaganda. HOw many german scientists agreed w hitlers propaganda? most of them. Nevertheless most structural engineers have remained silent on 9/11, either they buy the story or they will lose to much if they speak out. Experts can not be trusted, its like the oj trial, ordinary citizens not experts who will say anything like oj's defense team, need to decide these matters.