Thom Hartmann to Host 9/11 Truth Debate on Air America
Live links at:
http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20071102154606957
On Thursday, November 8th, from 1 to 2 PM Eastern, popular progressive Air America host and author, Thom Hartmann, will host a debate between Kevin Ryan, 9/11 UL whistleblower and co-editor of the online Journal of 911 Studies, and Michael Shermer, publisher of "Skeptic Magazine" and Executive Director of the Skeptics Society. Click here to Listen Live at the time of the show.
For some background on these participants, see:
Kevin Ryan:
Kevin Ryan is former Site Manager for Environomental Health Laboratories, a division of Underwriters Laboratories (UL). Mr. Ryan, a Chemist and laboratory manager, was fired by UL in 2004 for publicly questioning the report being drafted by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) on their World Trade Center investigation. In the intervening period, Ryan has completed additional research while his original questions, which have become increasingly important over time, remain unanswered by UL or NIST.
Through interviews, presentations, and his work as co-editor at the online Journal of 911 Studies, Mr. Ryan works to bring out the truth behind the events of 9/11/01 for the benefit of all people.
Scholars and Family Members Submit Request for Correction to 9/11 NIST Report
9/11: Looking for Truth in Credentials: The Peculiar WTC “Experts”
Michael Shermer:
Dr. Michael Shermer is the Founding Publisher of Skeptic magazine and the Executive Director of the Skeptics Society. He is an author, speaker, and producer.
Dr. Shermer is a contributing editor and monthly columnist for Scientific American, and is the host of the Skeptics Distinguished Lecture Series at Caltech. He is also the co-host and producer of the Fox Family television series, Exploring the Unknown, and serves as the science correspondent for KPCC radio, an NPR affiliate for Southern California.
Fahrenheit 2777: 9/11 has generated the mother of all conspiracy theories
Shermer on CNN’s Glenn Beck show on 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
Also in "Skeptic Magazine," 9/11 Conspiracy Theories: The 9/11 Truth Movement in Perspective, by Phil Molé
A couple of other good articles on this: Scientific American's Smear Against 9/11 Truth--A Critique of "Fahrenheit 2777: 9/11 has generated the mother of all conspiracy theories
or Scientific American's Smear Against 9/11 Truth: A Critique of "Fahrenheit 2777: 9/11 has generated the mother of all conspiracy theories
Thom Hartmann: The Thom Hartmann Radio Program
From ThomHartmann.com--Thom Hartmann is live daily from noon-3 PM ET in New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Detroit, Seattle, Denver, Portland, Phoenix, Santa Fe, San Diego, Pittsburgh, Memphis, Grand Rapids, and on over fifty other stations nationwide including Chicago, Washington DC, Santa Barbara, Minneapolis, and on XM and Sirius Satellite radio. He is also a four-time Project Censored-award-winning, New York Times best-selling author. His national daily progressive radio talk show, now in its fifth year on the air, replaced Al Franken on the Air America Radio Network and now has more live daily listeners than any other progressive talk radio show.
Click here for Thom Hartmann's blog and here for the show archives.
- aayers's blog
- Login to post comments
Great news
Michael Shermer is a real tool. He's going to talk about area 51 and dropping manequins from airplanes.
Kevin Ryan on the other hand happens to be brilliant. No contest.
Here's Paul Craig Roberts on Tom Hartman show a couple months ago:
http://www.alexjonesfan58.com/mp3/20070718_tomhartman_paulcraigroberts.mp3
The links to T Hartman's
The links to T Hartman's Blog and Archive did not come through on the original post.
Thom Hartman's Blog:
http://www.airamerica.com/thomhartmannpage/node
Thom Hartman Archive:
http://thomhartmann.com/archives.htm
LISTEN LIVE LINK:
http://www.airamerica.com/aarplayer/gateway
Shermer
wouldn't do this if he didn't think he could win. I wonder what his game plan would be and how best to counter it?
Obviously, I have ultra high regard for Kevin Ryan.
Perhaps a discussion of the potential problems is warranted.
==================================================================
"There are none so hoplessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free." (Goethe)
Preparation material...
Start with his critics:
http://enigmanwoliaison.googlepages.com/home
http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showuser=2894
http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?act=Search&CODE...
"The important thing is to not stop questioning" - Einstein
"Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance" - Einstein
Many hands make light work!
RRREMA=realize, recognize, reconcile, educate, motivate, activate
I loved that last one.....
CP, I underestimated you. Nice support from J911ob and Buddy.
TxGuy has always been an obvious shill (forgive me for using that unfortunately accurate appellation) everytime I have read his posts.
==================================================================
"There are none so hoplessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free." (Goethe)
My bet is that Shermer is
My bet is that Shermer is going to hit low. He'll talk about Holocaust deniers and question Ryan's credentials. The best response would be to hit back. Don't let the smears stand, point out that the family members who lost people are behind the press for truth, and tell him that to associate those who disbelieve the official story with Holocaust deniers is not merely an insult to the victims of 911, but depraved. Tell him he is simultaneously spitting on the victims in America and Nazi Germany when he makes that association. Then demand that Shermer address something other than CD. Talk about foreknowlege, NORAD's Standard Operating Procedures in response to hijackings, the Kean admission that NORAD lied to the commission, the PNAC, and generally try to force Shermer to admit that the official story is obviously false. Then, after establishing the official story as false, mention WTC 7 and the pools of molten metal and so on.
Shermer Will Try to Obfuscate Issues
and get Kevin to discuss the "weaker periferal areas" and defend them. But it won't work! Kevin Ryan is far too bright and knowledgable for that.
From a C-SPAN interview I saw of him last year trying to debunk 9/11 skeptics, Shermer tried to concentrate on fake cellphone calls and "what happened to flight 77 and the passengers if it didn't hit the Pentagon, etc. And how the media would be all over this if there was a conspiracy. "
Kevin would do well to focus on the hard evidence for C.D., including thermite and molten metal, and the science that refutes "pancaking." He will bury Shermer on this.
Kevin could also do well by invoking Norman Mineta's testimony. After all, this is official testimony-- not "conspiracy theory." And possibly eyewitness accounts. 500 Eyewitnesses in the "9/11 Oral Histories" that contradict the official version. I would go into War Games as well. But bottom line: There's no need to speculate on things or go out on a limb for Shermer. Simply hammer him on smoking guns that prove 9/11 was a fraud.
So in a sense, Kevin Ryan is the skeptic who is debating a "True Believer." This is an important point since Shermer is editor of "Skeptic" magazine and wants to debunk anything that isn't based in science. Well, guess what? The official story is a MYTH! And Kevin is a man of science.
I've been watching Michael Shermer closely . . .
. . . and the hit points he makes about 9/11 truth are always weak. His acceptance to debate Kevin Ryan is based, IMHO, on nothing more than arrogance and the thought that truth is an agreed upon fable. Even so, Kevin Ryan, in whom I have complete confidence to represent us, will surely win the day (and the debate, no less).
I guess Shermer thinks that if enough people voted that the earth is flat, it would somehow be true.
My Favorite Piece of Physical Proof for Contr. Demolition of WTC
I hope Kevin Ryan brings up the below ironclad demonstration of controlled demolition of the World Trade Center:
A truly vital piece of evidence that provides definitive proof that the World Trade Center towers were brought down by controlled demolition are the videos of yellow-hot molten metal seen cascading off the South Tower (World Trade Center Tower 2).
That piece of evidence isn't merely a smoking gun: it's a smoking nuclear cannon. Those videos, alone and by themselves, are irrefragable *proof* that the South Tower (at the very least) had thermite-like ("like" in the sense of producing comparable temperatures) incendiary demolition charges with the ability to easily slice through structural steel going off within it. There is no innocent explanation for what those videos record.
That is to say, the only way to get around that it is thermite which is causing that yellow-hot metal to cascade off the South Tower before its collapse would be to posit that we are seeing a different form of extremely powerful incendiary with thermite-like temperatures at work in the videos. Of which, even if true, would be every bit as much damning, since no such powerful incendiaries can be accounted for without involving a sinister intent to plant them there.
Below are videos which contain some of this footage:
"Shot from street level of South Tower collapsing," CameraPlanet http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2991254740145858863
http://www.supportthetruth.com/vids/thermite.wmv
http://www.plunder.com/Video-of-Thermite-on-9-11-at-the-W-T-C-and-Physic...
http://www.checktheevidence.com/911/Molten%20Metal%20from%20WTC.mpg
"Wtc 1, impact site close up, tower collapse close up, long shot, people shouting," CameraPlanet http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8564772103237441151
From the color of the yellow-hot molten metal seen cascading off the South Tower, it had to be at least over 1000 °C, yet jet fuel burns in open air at 260-315 °C; nor do burning office, building, or plane materials impart temperatures anywhere near that hot to structural members (indeed, it would present quite a hazard if such articles were constructed with such powerful incendiaries, and so designers of such objects go out of their way to make sure that they are not). Thus, if it wasn't molten iron from thermite that we are seeing come off the South Tower, then by necessity a reaction source with a heat intensity very much like thermite had to be present. Yet there is nothing in the U.S. government's account that can explain such a heat source; indeed, there's nothing innocent that could explain it, since it requires some sort of extremely powerful incendiary.
For more on this, see Steven E. Jones's (Ph.D.; physicist and archaeometrist; former professor in the Department of Physics and Astronomy, Brigham Young University) below paper:
"Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Completely Collapse?," Dr. Steven E. Jones, Journal of 911 Studies, Vol. 3 (September 2006) http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200609/Why_Indeed_Did_the_WTC_...
http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/Papers/J6p2%20.doc (Older version.)
See also:
"Experiments to test NIST 'orange glow' hypothesis," Steven E. Jones, Ph.D., August 31, 2006 http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/Experiments-to-test-NIST-orange-glowh...
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/Liquid_Aluminum_011.mpg
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/Liquid_Aluminum_012.mpg
"Experiments with Molten Aluminum," Steven E. Jones with Wesley Lifferth, Jared Dodson, Jacob Stevenson and Shannon Walch, circa June 2006 http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/ExptAlMelt.doc
"A description of molten aluminum poured onto rusty steel," Wes Lifferth, Physics Shop, Brigham Young University, Journal of 9/11 Studies, Vol. 9 (March 2007) http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200703/Molten_Aluminum_Poured_...
Moreover, even the official FEMA scientists Jonathan Barnett, Ronald R. Biederman, and R. D. Sisson, Jr. bolster the evidence that thermate (i.e., thermite with sulfur added, which causes it to slice through steel even faster by forming a eutectic alloy with it) was used to bring down the WTC towers (see "Appendix C: Limited Metallurgical Examination" in World Trade Center Building Performance Study: Data Collection, Preliminary Observations, and Recommendations, Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA 403, May 2002 http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apc.pdf ):
""
Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent inter granular melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure. ... No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified. The rate of corrosion is also unknown.
""
And in the below paper it is conclusively proved via chemical analysis using wavelength dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (WDS), scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and X-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy (X-EDS) that large quantities of thermite analogs (such as thermate) were used in the destruction of the World Trade Center towers:
"Revisiting 9/11/2001--Applying the Scientific Method," Dr. Steven E. Jones, Journal of 911 Studies, Vol. 11 (May 2007) http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200704/JonesWTC911SciMethod.pdf
____________
"Terrorism is the health of the State."--James Redford, author of "Jesus Is an Anarchist," June 1, 2006 http://praxeology.net/anarchist-jesus.pdf
Awesome
...post! Great sourcing and case for deliberate destruction.
Unfortunately "videos" don't translate
very well on radio but I do hope there is some way Mr. Ryan has planned to work them into the studio and then force Shermer to acknowledge it instead of what we all know he has to do which is obfuscate, then dance around the issue and finish the response with a good Ol Reich wing character attack. Ryan simply can not allow Shermer to get away with steering the debate into the valley of straw men he has to slap him around a bit and be forceful.
Stress the critical importance of a REAL, HONEST investigation. Slam home the idea that IF the Reich wing deniers are so damn confident that they are correct then why are they so damn scared to do an HONEST investigation?
I Have Already Conducted Said Investigation. Verdict: Inside Job
This idea being pushed by some in the 9/11 Truth movement to have more official hearings or "investigations" into the the 9/11 attacks is a bad idea. It promulgates the notion that people need authority figures to tell them what to do and what to believe. In other words, that people can't come to the conclusion that the 9/11 attacks were an inside job unless they're told that it's "official."
At best, the most good that could likely come out of such hearings or "investigations" is that the U.S. government perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks get caught in more lies and contradictions. But it's bad because it fosters the notion that people have to be told by people from on high what to think, which isn't conducive to the cause of truth.
Those who genuinely investigate the 9/11 attacks in-depth already know the U.S. government staged the attacks from beginning to end. The amount of publicly available hardcore evidence demonstrating this is truly staggering. People don't need to be told by some panel or commission what the claimed "truth" is. This worship of "authority figures" to tell us what is and isn't okay to believe is one of the main things that the 9/11 Truth movement is fighting against.
Our task is to educate our countrymen, neighbors, friends, and family as to what the truth is. Genuine change isn't going to come about by voting, or "working within the system," as it is a rigged system designed from the start to keep the ruling elite in power.
Genuine change will come about when enough people know the truth and simply fail to support the system anymore. Then voting will be irrelevant because there will be nothing to vote for, or to vote against.
What if the government held a war and no one showed up? That's the stage we need to reach, where the ruling elite simply lose their chain of command and are abandoned because the masses fail to follow them. The stage where their own soldiers and police no longer follow their orders.
The way to reach that stage is to simply speak the truth to people. When others learn the truth, they will be in a position to speak the truth to others. With more people speaking the truth, even more will join in because they see that they're not alone and isolated in holding this position. And so on, until just about everyone and their grandmother is talking about the fact that the U.S. government staged the 9/11 attacks.
As it is now, we're not all that very far from that stage. Although things will likely get much worse before they get better.
For more on this process, see Étienne de La Boétie, Discours sur la servitude volontaire; ou Contr'un, likely written in 1552 or 1553, first published in full in 1576. An English translation by Harry Kurz with an introduction by Murray N. Rothbard, The Politics of Obedience: The Discourse of Voluntary Servitude (New York: Free Life Editions, 1975), is available at http://www.mises.org/rothbard/boetie.pdf .
____________
"Terrorism is the health of the State."--James Redford, author of "Jesus Is an Anarchist," June 1, 2006 http://praxeology.net/anarchist-jesus.pdf
An Investigation Tells the World the "Official" Story is Bogus.
It can put us on the path to the Solution you speak of.
We have a long long way to go before we as a nation will break from the status quo.
I understand what you are saying
however the "authority figures" I'm talking about are 9/11 family members, NYFD & first responders and citizens NOT a bunch of Bush insiders & democrat enablers.
Maybe you need to redefine whom you consider authority figures, those whom you view as that I consider the scum of the Earth.
Kevin, please see my article:
"Skeptics" or Dupes? Skeptic Magazine Not So Skeptical of 9/11 Lies
http://crimesofthestate.blogspot.com/2007/06/skeptics-or-dupes-skeptic-m...
This will brief you on what to expect.
Be prepared to talk about things OTHER than demolition.
Why isn't "Skeptic" magazine skeptical of the numerous lies that were exposed, all the conflicts of interest, all the warnings received before 9/11?
Make handy lists to rattle off the evidence quickly on the air.
Call them on their missing skepticism when it comes to the Bush junta.
Are they skeptical of official lies about Iraq? Where are those WMDs?
A regime that would lie its way into the war crime of aggressive war would pretty much stoop to anything.
why are covered up half investigations not cause for deep skepticism?
yes, please don't make this
yes, please don't make this a debate onlly about Controlled Demolition. Get some other info out there for the listeners to latch onto.
/////////////////////
911dvds@gmail.com - $1 DVDs shipped - email for info
This Debate that Amy Goodman hosted might give a preview
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stVmEmJ666M
This was interesting because Amy Goodman chose the topics, and most of them, save for WTC7, were the weakest points. Though I know the Popular Mechanics guy was all BS, he did very well against the LC guys, unfortunately.
I hope Kevin can steer the conversation toward the strongest evidence, steer completely clear of any "theories", and focus only on the unanswered question, the conflicting testimony, the needs of the families, and so forth. And to follow up on another comment, *Kevin* needs to explicitly say that he is the skeptic here, not the publisher of Skeptic Mag.
Hartmann is very close to screaming 9/11 Truth
As a good info warrior, I monitor the Air America programs and although Tom in the past has not engaged listeners in 9/11 truth dialog, he has always listened and been respectful. Lately his answer to callers has been, "we're going to have a show on this subject soon" and true to his word there is.
As we approach the political/economic abyss, many cautious people are going to take their foots off the brakes and start promoting the obvious truth.
Shermer = Shill
Shermer is an obvious shill. MSM trot him out whenever he's needed. He's weak and will offer only dismissive remarks without much passion, which is what happens when you're not truly committed and paid to do it
...no way, can't believe him!
I'm kind of partial to these...
David S Chandler
http://911speakout.org/
4-Ton Girders: Blowing in the Wind?
4-ton girders were found as much as 600 feet from the base of the North Tower of the World Trade Center after its collapse. This raises obvious questions. How fast must they have been ejected from the collapsing building to land that far away? What forces were at work to give such massive structures high horizontal velocities? If anything besides gravity was at work, pandora's box is opened up.
South Tower Coming Down
This is a movie of the collapse of the South Tower of the World Trade Center taken with a hand-held camera. In the original video, the camera is moving wildly, so the details of the collapsing building are hard to see.
To make it easier to study the details of the collapse, I separated the movie frame-by-frame and wrote a program to transform the images in such a way that the image of the building remains fixed, even though the camera is moving. I then reassembled the sequence of still frames into a slow-motion version of the movie.
For more, see 911SpeakOut.org.
--
"But truthfully, I don't really know. We've had trouble getting a handle on Building No. 7."
~~ Dr. Shyam Sunder - Acting Director Building and Fire Research Laboratory (NIST)
"We are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse."(NIS)
I will be tuning in for this.
Can't wait to hear this one. Looking forward to Kevin Ryan sitting down with the hangout/straw man specialist Shermer.
And BTW, medicis, you addressed a "CP" in your post. Would that be me? I didn't make any previous post so that stuck out as odd. Is there another CP here?
It would.
Citizen Pawn. My comment was sort of wry. It was to you. It was in response to the link (in ChuckSheen's post above) to your debate with TxGuy on the loose change forum. Why Wry? (Dryly humorous, often with a touch of irony.)Because all of your posts are intelligent. Not that I am any judge, but I thought you did a nice job on that thread. Kudos to you.
Re: debate. I have some hope that Thom Hartmann will be a much better moderator than any Amy Goodman brand of gatekeeping. I'm sure he will certainly try knowing that all will be watching. On his forum there is a strong 9/11 truth presence - which has had its own battles with shills. But Hartmann has stayed above or ourside of that fray. But he has permitted it to evolve.
p.s. there is also the 'other' CP (Cindy P**) that is my ex-wife (clinical neuropsychologist) but I only communicate with her under duress -I'm joking- actually we get along ok...... ;)
==================================================================
"There are none so hoplessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free." (Goethe)
Oh I see now!
Yeah I didn't see Chucksheens post. I can't access the Loose Change archives since my I.P. got Uber banned there months ago, so I didn't know what you meant. I guess I said some things about "TXGUY"? A.K.A. the Blueprint Caddy ?A.K.A. "Enigma" at the uncritical thinking watering gossip hole called JREF?
And about my posts being intelligent, thanks. Does this mean we should date casually?
(That was a joke, you may laugh)
After listening to his rants
After listening to his rants on 9/11, I think he should rename the magazine "Strawmen."
The position of a skeptic is to analyze the official claim, which is that Ali Baba and his 19 flunky thieves defeated the most sophisticated defense system in the world, defeated the laws of physics, and strained common sense and credulity in every respect.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Shermer's real job should be to prove the OCT, not disprove Ryan's. Kevin might point that out at the beginning, in addition to pointing out that the 9/11 skeptics' analyses are cumulative, while the government's story is deductive. (We can be wrong on one or two things and still disprove the government's overall claim, but if the OCT is wrong in any respect, the government is shown to be lying and has to account for the change in their narrative.)
Looking forward to it
In mid-September, a local radio host tried to goad me into a debate with Phil Mole. As part of that exchange, Shermer got involved and sent an unsolicited, sneering email about bombs and Watergate. That's how he was cornered into this opportunity to examine his curious brand of "skepticism" on a nationally syndicated radio show.
Input from real skeptics is most welcome.
Best of Luck Kevin...
Not that you need it... ;-{)
This will be a MUST listen show and I'm really looking forward to it...
You have so many great blogs, but the one that makes my hair stand-up is the one about the "Experts" and the roles they play.
Many thanks for all you do and very best wishes.
I too am looking forward to this
you are an excellent speaker with the vast majority of the facts stored in memory for quick response.
I hope that you hit him hard on what anyone sane know are virtually irrefutable such as how was it possible for these buildings to defy the Laws of Physics?
How did 1150 human bodies completely vaporize without a trace, 1700 others were collected in about 20,000 TEST TUBES! How did at least 760 tiny bone fragments wind up scattered in buildings across the street some 400'+ away? How did several beams & columns weighing several tons each end up BLOWN 500-600' away across West 57th St? How did virtually all of the reinforced concrete end up pulverized into talcum powder fine dust which can be seen starting before the building collapsed even 10'? How could any of these 3 buildings collapse at virtually free fall speed given the "Official Conspiracy Theory" idea that basically 80+ floors of the Towers were untouched yet somehow managed to offer no more resistance than thin air?
Also I would suggest getting a private eye of sorts to dig up any dirt you possibly can on this Shermer character, if there is anything then hit him with it the second he starts attacking your character fight fire with fire to shut him the hell up and force him to answer the question with either an "I have no explanation" or "Pure Reich wing babble" of which you can say well Controlled Demolition DOES explain it or easily show how absurd his Reich wing babble is.
You know the only defense he has is to attack YOU the messenger, if he can destroy your character then it doesn't matter what you say from that point on.
This is why Politicians use attack ads because they know all they need to do is attack the character of their opponent, destroy their credibility and the simple minded American public will then not listen to anything the opponent says and the message/issue becomes moot and is never debated.
I would wish you luck but honestly I don't think you are going to need it, actually I doubt this little Reich wing turd will even show up unless he can dig up some dirt on you because that is all he has.
How's this for one talking point?
From the eSkeptic magazine:
"Griffin never explores that possibility that No. 7 was demolished because it had been contaminated by the white dust from the nearby North Tower. Explosives were used because, at 45 stories, No. 7 was too tall for a wrecking crane."
http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/06-01-23.html
You could use that to demonstrate the length to which "skeptics" are willing to go to defend the official story. It's also noteworthy in that it suggests that WTC 7 *was* taken down (but somehow FEMA and NIST have not been informed). :)
Amazing that "skeptics"
Amazing that "skeptics" would admit this in a "debunking". To argue the "possibility" of WTC7 being CD is to admit that 1) a burning 47-storey steel building was secretly rigged in several hours under hazardous conditions and 2) that FEMA and NIST continue to deny and cover-up the fact with elaborately implausible theories at taxpayers' expense.
They have already admitted their inability to defend the OCT.
“On the altar of God, I swear eternal hostility against all forms of tyranny over the mind of man."--Thomas Jefferson
That's an interesting argument
for the way it admits the building was demolished but provides hollow conjecture as to why it was demolished. The argument is irrelevant, of course. Who knows why they demolished Building 7. Our point is simply that they did.
Shermer is the tool who went on The Colbert Report and said CD of the Towers was impossible because CD is done from the bottom up, and the towers collapsed top down. Of course, at blogger we've seen more than one video of a building being demolished top down.
I hope the debate doesn't devolve into baseless conjecture. Begin with the bedrock arguments for 9/11 Truth: Bush didn't want an investigation, Bush/Cheney wouldn't testify under oath, NORAD generals lied to the commission, Zelikow was an insider extraordinaire, etc. That is, establish that there has never been a valid investigation. If Shermer wants to defend the 9/11 Commission, and the FEMA and NIST studies, let him. He will lose that debate.
What debunkers always ignore is the fact that the onus is on THEM, not us, to provide a full accounting of events. Any ambiguity in the official story (and there is much) is THEIR problem, not ours. For example, when FEMA says its own theory of building 7 has a "low probability of occurence," that should be an admission of ambiguity debunkers can not avoid. Likewise, when the head of the NIST investigation says they have not been able to figure out building 7, that's a very relevant admission. Debunkers act like such details don't matter; all that matters is that some kind of study was done.
I almost pity Shermer the
I almost pity Shermer the well-deserved ass-kicking he will receive. Good hunting, Kevin!
“On the altar of God, I swear eternal hostility against all forms of tyranny over the mind of man."--Thomas Jefferson
Agreed to terms of the debate?
Any public terms of the debate available? Just curious.
One term should be no straw men or passive aggressive jabs at "the mind of conspiracy theorists".
I think he'll explode under those terms or suffer a break in cognition.
Thankfully Kevin Ryan
is the 9/11 truth advocate in this debate, will be very hard for Shermer to attack his character and destroy his credibility unless he just out right lies which is always a possibility.
All Shermer would have to do with someone like Alex Jones is ask him about Global Warming, Peak Oil, etc and sit back and watch him self destruct, within 5 mins the debate would be over without a single issue honestly debated. AJ is good on 9/11, however his denial of scientific fact concerning other issues blows his credibility right out of the water.
Sadly Steven Jones would be another which has done great work on 9/11 yet someone like Shermer would just bring up his little invisible friend that visited North America 2000 years with a merry band of Egyptians and Bam0 credibility shot to hell, then just talk over him because he so soft spoken cordial and nice.
If all the Official Conspiracy Theorist has to do is attack your character on unrelated issues then sit back and spew Reich wing talking points then they will come out sounding sane to the uninformed.
They know this and it is really the only way they can win an argument in the court of public opinion.
Kevin has a cool head
Kevin is a pro at handling spikes
Global Warming, Peak Oil: Elitist Pretexts for Global Genocide
The Earth has been warming and cooling in cycles (including lesser cycles within larger cycles) millions of years before man ever came on the scene, and it will continue to do so, just as always. The nature of nature is change.
Although it would be an utterly blessed thing if the Earth were to warm, since carbon dioxide levels also rise *after* the Earth warms (due to the reduced solubility of CO2 in the oceans as the tempurature rises, among other factors). With the combination of increased warmth and CO2 levels, the Earth's biosphere would be able to support much more life (and hence, more crops; more livestock; as well as more seafood, due to the increased plankton levels). Life loves a warm, CO2-rich Earth.
For the lag in CO2 levels coming 800 (+/- 200) years after warming of the Earth, see:
"Timing of Atmospheric CO2 and Antarctic Temperature Changes Across Termination III," Nicolas Caillon, Jeffrey P. Severinghaus, Jean Jouzel, Jean-Marc Barnola, Jiancheng Kang, Volodya Y. Lipenkov, Science, Vol. 299, No. 5613 (March 14, 2003), pp. 1728-1731 http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/299/5613/1728
The following are more articles on the matter of natural climate change:
"Survey: Less Than Half of all Published Scientists Endorse Global Warming Theory," Michael Asher, DailyTech, August 29, 2007 http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=8641
"Global Warming: The Cold, Hard Facts?," Timothy Ball, Canada Free Press, February 5, 2007 http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/global-warming020507.htm
"Why Politicized Science is Dangerous," Michael Crichton, excerpted from State of Fear (New York, New York: HarperCollins Publishers, December 2004) http://web.archive.org/web/20060406003326/http://www.crichton-official.c...
"Mars Melt Hints at Solar, Not Human, Cause for Warming, Scientist Says," Kate Ravilious, National Geographic News, February 28, 2007 http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/bigphotos/images/070228-mars-war...
"Global warming 'is good and is not our fault,'" Sophie Borland, Telegraph (U.K.), September 14, 2007 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/09/14/nclimate...
See also the below archive:
"The Man-Made Global Warming Hoax," Prison Planet http://www.prisonplanet.com/archives/global_warming/index.htm
-----
The originator of the Peak Oil theory, Marion King Hubbert, was a geophysicist for Royal Dutch Shell (at the time owned in large part by Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands, now owned in large part by his daughter, Queen Beatrix) at a research lab in Houston, Texas. Prince Bernhard was one of the founders of the Bilderberg group and the World Wildlife Fund (later renamed World Wide Fund for Nature). Queen Beatrix has been a long-time member of the Bilderberg group and the Malthusian Club of Rome.
There are more *proven* oil reserves than the world knows what to do with. By *proven* oil reserves it is meant reserves that are known to be economically viable to bring to market with current technology; which is to say, the oil reserves are actually larger, as advancing technology makes bringing to market previously economically unviable oil reserves profitable.
As Leonardo Maugeri notes in Science (Vol. 304, Issue 5674, May 21, 2004, pp. 1114-1115 http://web.archive.org/web/20051103134750/http://phys4.harvard.edu/~wils... ):
""
All these factors partly explain why the life-index of world reserves (gauged as the ratio between proven oil reserves and current production) has constantly improved, passing from 20 years in 1948 to 35 years in 1972 and reaching about 40 years in 2003. Today, all major sources estimate that proven world oil reserves exceed 1 trillion (10^12) barrels, while yearly consumption is about 28 billion barrels (10-13). Overall, the world retains more than 3 trillion barrels of recoverable oil resources (14).
""
So one can know with certainty that the world is in absolutely no danger of running out of oil anytime soon. Indeed, the more time goes on the greater the life-index of proven world oil reserves increases.
Definitely read the below David McGowan article, which gets into the globalist elite's agenda to reduce most of the world's population (i.e., quite literally murdering off most people on the Earth) using the "Peak Oil" scam as one of the pretexts--an elitist, misanthropic, Malthusian agenda promoted by population reductionists like Michael Ruppert:
"Beware the 'Peak Oil' Agenda," David McGowan, Center for an Informed America, Newsletter #70, October 12, 2004:
http://davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr70.html
"I advocate an immediate convening of political, economic, spiritual and scientific leaders from all nations to address the issue of Peak Oil (and Gas) and its immediate implications for economic collapse, massive famine and climate destruction (partially as a result of reversion to coal plants which accelerate global warming). This would, scientifically speaking, include immediate steps to arrive at a crash program – agreed to by all nations and in accordance with the highest spiritual and ethical principles – to stop global population growth and to arrive at the best possible and most ethical program of population reduction as a painful choice made by all of humanity."--Michael C. Ruppert, in a March 2004 email to David McGowan, "Ruppert Responds!," David McGowan, Center for an Informed America, Newsletter #54, March 18, 2004 http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr54.html
For much, much more on this, see my below page:
"The 'Peak Oil' Scam," TetrahedronOmega, December 5, 2005-March 25, 2006 http://www.armleg.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=54&mforum=libertyandtruth
-----
Nor is the world isn't so-called "overpopulated" or becoming so. The more people there are the more resources and wealth there are per capita, because people create resources and wealth, and the more people there are the more opportunities there are for efficient divisions of labor, hence obtaining a more efficient economic system.
In short, the more people there are on Earth, the more wealthy people become per capita (and hence, the more wealth there is in the world in total). Thus, the rational thing to do is to eagerly welcome increasing world populations, since it makes people per capita better off.
For more on this, see the below:
"The Doomslayer: The environment is going to hell, and human life is doomed to only get worse, right? Wrong. Conventional wisdom, meet Julian Simon, the Doomslayer.," Ed Regis, Wired, Issue 5.02, February 1997 http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/5.02/ffsimon_pr.html
The Ultimate Resource 2 by Prof. Julian L. Simon (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, revised edition, 1998) http://www.juliansimon.com/writings/Ultimate_Resource/index.html
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0691003815/
Of course, the governmental ruling elites are murderously against this, because they fear losing their power to increased populations which they can no longer control and to ever-increasing wealth in the hands of the common masses which makes the common masses more powerful and independent. This is the real reason behind all the governmental school and mass media indoctrination and propaganda which seeks to scare the masses to no end about so-called "overpopulation," "Global Warming," and "Peak Oil" in order to provide justifications for mass-slaughter in order to reduce the world's population. It has nothing to do with helping the common masses, and everything to do with the governmental ruling elites setting forth an agenda to justify murderously slaughtering large portions of the world's population in order so that they can maintain their power.
More than six times the amount of noncombatants have been systematically murdered for purely ideological reasons by their own governments within the past century than were killed in that same time-span from wars. From 1900 to 1923, various Turkish regimes murdered from 3.5 million to over 4.3 million of its own Armenians, Greeks, Nestorians, and other Christians. The Soviet government murdered over 61 million of its own non-combatant subjects. The communist Chinese government murdered over 76 million of it own subjects. And Germany murdered some 16 million of it own subjects in the past century. And that's only a sampling of governments mass-murdering their own noncombatant subjects within the past century. (The preceding figures are from Prof. Rudolph Joseph Rummel's website at http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/ .)
All totaled, neither the private-sector crime which government is largely responsible for promoting and causing or even the wars committed by governments upon the subjects of other governments come anywhere close to the crimes government is directly responsible for committing against its own citizens--certainly not in amount of numbers. Without a doubt, the most dangerous presence to ever exist throughout history has always been the people's very own government.
Not only were all of these government mass-slaughters conspiracies--massive conspiracies, at that--but they were conspiracies of which the 9/11 attacks are quite insignificant by comparison.
For more on the globalist elite's misanthropic, Malthusian New World Order population reduction agenda (using the globalist elite's "Peak Oil" and "Global Warming" [or is it "Global Cooling"?] scams as pretexts), see the below articles:
"Forrest Mims did not Misrepresent Prof. Eric Pianka's Statements," James Redford, expanded edition, April 13, 2006 http://www.geocities.com/tetrahedronomega/pianka-mims.html
"Top Scientist Advocates Mass Culling 90% Of Human Population--Fellow professors and scientists applause and roar approval at elite's twisted and genocidal population control agenda," Paul Joseph Watson and Alex Jones, PrisonPlanet.com, April 3, 2006 http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2006/030406massculling.htm
"Burnet's solution: The plan to poison S-E Asia," Brendan Nicholson, The Age, March 10, 2002 http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/03/09/1015365752044.html
"Kissinger's 1974 Plan for Food Control Genocide," Joseph Brewda, December 8, 1995 http://web.archive.org/web/20050306082354/http://www.schillerinstitute.o...
"National Security Study Memorandum 200: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests," National Security Council, Washington, D.C., April 24, 1974 http://web.archive.org/web/20050306091656/www.africa2000.com/SNDX/nssm20...
"China trades prisoners' organs," video report by Rupert Wingfield-Hayes, BBC News, September 27, 2006 http://news.bbc.co.uk/nolavconsole/ifs_news/hi/nb_rm_fs.stm?nol_storyid=...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/avdb/news_web/video/9012da680051d70/nb/09012...
rtsp://rmv8.bbc.net.uk/news/media/avdb/news_web/video/9012da680051d70/nb/09012da680051e06_16x9_nb.rm
rtsp://rmv8.bbc.net.uk:554/news/media/avdb/news_web/video/9012da680051d70/nb/09012da680051e06_16x9_nb.rm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaselector/check/nolavconsole/ukfs_news/hi?redir...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nolavconsole/ukfs_news/hi/newsid_5380000/newsid_53...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nolavconsole/ukfs_news/hi/newsid_5380000/newsid_53...
Below is a BBC News article on the above BBC News video report:
"Organ sales 'thriving' in China," BBC News, September 27, 2006
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/5386720.stm
Below is a partial transcript of the above BBC News video report:
"Evidence of Chinese organ harvesting," transcript of a BBC News video by reporter Rupert Wingfield-Hayes, broadcasted September 28, 2006 on Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC)
http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2006/s1751561.htm
And the below article concerns the Communist Chinese government's response to the above BBC News video report wherein the Communist Chinese government lies about not selling executed prisoners' organs:
"China denies death-row organ sale," BBC News, September 28, 2006
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/5388464.stm
"Bloody Harvest: Revised Report into Allegations of Organ Harvesting of Falun Gong Practitioners in China," David Matas, Esq. and Hon. David Kilgour, Esq., January 31, 2007 http://organharvestinvestigation.net
http://organharvestinvestigation.net/report0701/report20070131-eng.pdf
http://investigation.go.saveinter.net
http://investigation.go.saveinter.net/report0701/report20070131-eng.pdf
"A legacy of tainted blood," Steve Sternberg, USA Today, July 11, 2006 http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2006-07-11-hemophiliacs-cover_x.htm
"France Approved Use of AIDS-Tainted Blood," Alan Riding, New York Times, October 20, 1991 http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9D0CE7DB1E3DF9...
"Bayer Documents: AIDS Tainted Blood Killed Thousands of Hemophiliacs," Alliance for Human Research Protection (AHRP), May 22, 2003 http://www.ahrp.org/infomail/0503/22.php
"2 Paths of Bayer Drug in 80's: Riskier Type Went Overseas," Walt Bogdanich and Eric Koli, New York Times, May 22, 2003 http://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/22/business/22BLOO.html
http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2003/05/21/business/20030522_BLOO_slide...
http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2003/05/21/business/20030522_BLOO_slide...
http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2003/05/21/business/20030522_BLOO_slide...
http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2003/05/21/business/20030522_BLOO_slide...
"Selling Medicine In Spite of Danger," New York Times, May 21, 2003 http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2003/05/21/business/22BLOODch.html
Page One, Sheryl WuDunn, Discovery Times (Discovery Channel and New York Times), May 22, 2003 http://www.nytimes.com/videopages/2003/05/22/multimedia/20030522_PAGEONE...
http://www.nytimes.com/videopages/2003/05/22/multimedia/20030522_PAGEONE...
http://www.nytimes.com/videosrc/2003/05/22/multimedia/20030522_PAGEONE_H...
"Bayer Sold HIV-Risky Meds: Says Can't Judge Mid 80s Actions By 2003 Standards And Knowledge," David McHugh, Associated Press (AP), May 22, 2003 http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/05/22/health/main555154.shtml
"Thousands Contracted HIV Using Tainted Bayer Drug," Charles Joseph Scarborough, Scarborough Country (MSNBC), August 23, 2003: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XS3mhjt7TrY
"Government knew of HIV risk from imported blood: Expert panel decided against import ban--since then 1,757 have died," Sarah Hall, Guardian (U.K.), May 25, 2007 http://society.guardian.co.uk/health/story/0,,2087945,00.html
____________
"Terrorism is the health of the State."--James Redford, author of "Jesus Is an Anarchist," June 1, 2006 http://praxeology.net/anarchist-jesus.pdf
The importance of preparation...
... cannot be overstated. Make notes of the most important talking points, analyze Shermer's previous performances, refuse to discuss peripheral points like phone calls, etc. Don't forget historical examples of false flag operations, like Operation Gladio.
This is what the Skeptic Magazine writes concerning WTC 7:
"Griffin never explores that possibility that No. 7 was demolished because it had been contaminated by the white dust from the nearby North Tower. Explosives were used because, at 45 stories, No. 7 was too tall for a wrecking crane."
http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/06-01-23.html
I think that is absolutely hilarious.
ROTFL
yeah that so called "review by Richard Morrock " is absolutely hilarious. I don't think I have seen so many utterly stupid & flat out false statements made all in one short review before. Like the one you pointed out above.
This buffoon obviously has zero understanding of even a single subject in DRG's book, I seriously doubt he bothered to actually read it.
Sadly however about 50% of this country would read such pure drivel as that and agree with it which shows the mentality of what we are dealing with. Just plain common sense & simple logic don't even come into play let alone scientific facts.
Basically we cant force idiots to understand even the most basic facts if they flatly refuse to accept them.
It's the classic can lead a mule to water but cant make him drink it situation.
Hmm . . .
"I think he'll explode under those terms or suffer a break in cognition."
Actually, I think he'll "implode" instead.
Staying on Topic.
Here's my list of things to stay on track: (feel free to add what I am forgetting)
Norad Stand Down
FBI Arrest of Explosive Laden Van btw New York and New Jersey
http://www.911blogger.com/node/11425
PNAC Quote - New Pearl Harbor - motive
Larry Silverstein Quote - "Pull It"
WTC 7 - BBC reports collapse 20 minutes early
Sibel Edmonds - silenced
Norman Minetta Testimony
Anthrax from U.S. Labs
Operation Northwoods
Molten Metal
Symmetrical Free Fall Speed Collapse into their own footprints.
Put Options
Footage of the Pentagon not released.
William Rodriguez pulling burnt man out of basement
Cheney's avoidance and lack of funding for investigation
Crime Investigation:
Motive
Opportunity
Benefit.
http://www.911blogger.com/node/11441
Another ‘dual citizen’ like Henry Kissinger, Michael Chertoff, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Doulas Feith, Dov Zakheim, Ari Fleischer, Elliot Abrams, Scooter Libby, or William Kristol.
NO! No "Pull it." Bogus claim alert.
Tales of 9/11 Truthiness
http://crimesofthestate.blogspot.com/2007/02/tales-of-911-truthiness.html
God damn, I'm sick of this nonsense. Silverstein's "pull it" (pull the firefighting operation) quote is bullshit, out of context and completely misrepresented around here. I've shown repeatedly how this claim can be challenged, and is so weak, so bad that it can destroy your credibility.
I literally cringed when I saw Martin Sheen repeating it (as does Charlie). This is bad activism, based on bogus claims. It should be eliminated from the movement as unsupportable. Period.
Bogus?
Well I don't claim to be infallible. Does everything else look alright to you on the list?
List
-Norad Stand Down
Big fight. They'll bring up the NEADS tapes. Needs to be countered with Mineta/Rumsfeld/Cheney /AndrewsAFB/Orders to defend not issued until AFTER pentagon strike.
-FBI Arrest of Explosive Laden Van btw New York and New Jersey
http://www.911blogger.com/node/11425
Still can't prove it happened. We are trying to get some FOIA records, but nothing yet. It does however point to the other van, that was acknowledged, and the whole Urban Moving Systems operation. Covered up. Made classified. Need to unclassify the Israeli angle. Whenever you bring up Israelis they are going to attack you in a hail of blustering zionist propaganda.
-PNAC Quote - New Pearl Harbor - motive
Also the need to fight multiple theater wars simultaneously, the need to invade Iraq "transcends" the regime of Saddam
-Larry Silverstein Quote - "Pull It"
BAAAH! Not evidence at all. Eliminate.
-WTC 7 - BBC reports collapse 20 minutes early
Could be a miscommunication. CNN said something similar. Not strong enough.
-Sibel Edmonds - silenced
The quotes Sibel said are accusations of conspiracy.
-Norman Minetta Testimony
Careful not to claim too much. Mineta's description points to Cheney only confirming previous standing "orders", as in the June 1st scramble orders requiring "approval" from missing in action co-conspirator Don Rumsfeld. Where was Rummy during the attacks? Where was his "approval" to launch interceptors?
-Anthrax from U.S. Labs
Touchy because you go straight to Doctor Phillip Zack, a rabid Zionist who was fired for racially attacking an Islamic coworker. Zack was spotted on security cameras in the anthrax storage area AFTER he was fired. 1) This doesn't prove he sent the letters, but makes it highly likely. 2) It brings up the "anti-semitism" shrieks of hysteria.
-Operation Northwoods
AND Operation Gladio. Gladio actually was implemented and murdered European civilians in state sponsored acts of terroirsm linked directly to CIA.
-Molten Metal
Ryan knows better than me.
-Symmetrical Free Fall
Ditto.
-Speed Collapse into their own footprints.
Ditto.
-Put Options
I've backed away because we never did prove the case. There was some talk about financial newsletters recommending the trades and the 911 commission tried to explain away the airline put options. They IGNORED a lot of the other put options with the reinsurance companies and some WTC tenants, AND the unclaimed $2.5 million, AND Mayo Shattuck and Buzzy Krongard. Unresolved, and not that strong, but still interesting.
-Footage of the Pentagon not released.
A strategy of listing ALL of the hidden evidence (airport videos of hijackers probably more important), the black boxes, etc. is a good argument.
-William Rodriguez pulling burnt man out of basement
Rodriquez appears to be sticking to his story. Some debunker claims he changed stories, but I haven't investigated.
-Cheney's avoidance and lack of funding for investigation
And Bush. And the 27 redacted pages, and Bob Graham's "foreign governments assisted the hijackers" and Max Cleland resigning, and a lot of whistleblowers, and all the people who suspected before the attacks and changed plans, etc.
The "pull it" comment is clearly not beyond a reasonable doubt
but neither is your contention that Silverstein was talking about pulling firemen out. That is pure Clintonian, "depends on what the definition of is is" type crap.
As far as we know Silverstein might not have been talking to the NYFD when he said "pull it" that is what that lying sack of shit "claims".
He could just as easily been talking to whomever was in charge of "Controlled Demolition Inc" whom was hired to "clean up the crime scene".
Either way it is not scientific evidence, nor is it eye witness accounts where several corroborate each other.
I would file it under very suspicious remarks made by someone we know was involved, but its not as bad as you are making it out to be.
You want to "cringe" then save that for when you see a 9/11 truther spewing far Reich wing talking points and various bat shit crazy stuff like "Global Warming is a hoax" "Peak oil is a hoax" "The holocaust was a hoax" "The moon landings were a hoax". THEN you can cringe because all of us lose credibility when any of us say such bullshit.
You can't even bring yourself to accept the claim at face value.
"That is pure Clintonian, "depends on what the definition of is is" type crap."
Except it's not "crap." It actually does depend on the meaning of "it." For you to not even understand that, you really shouldn't be debating in public.
"As far as we know Silverstein might not have been talking to the NYFD when he said "pull it" that is what that lying sack of shit "claims"."
So "pull it" has to mean "pull building" and "fire department commander" can mean whatever you want it to mean.
That's a good solid foundation for a "truth" movement.
Unbelievable.
I know he meant "Pull my finger." He was talking to the alien commander at Area 51. Finger is alien code for "underground nukes."
We sure are getting to the truthiness of it now.
http://crimesofthestate.blogspot.com/2007/02/tales-of-911-truthiness.html
Because its coming from someone
that I know has to be involved and is no doubt lying through his teeth, so NO I don't take a damn word that little troll says at "face value" I would be a freaking idiot if I did.
You are the one BTW making the Clintonian definition of what IT is claim, I simply don't believe the little shit is all, I have no reason to, question is why do you?
I was basically agreeing with you for the most part, other than trusting what Silverstein says went down was exactly what really happened is only difference.
I see no reason at all to trust anything he says.
You may continue to make an ass of yourself if you wish.
Admitting that you're
Admitting that you're prejudiced against certain evidence is no way to prove the evidence is false. The "Pull It" quote is not strong evidence. It's a distraction.
I never said it was strong evidence
in fact quite the opposite, I'm just saying I don't believe what Silverstein is claiming either.
The only one claiming anything remotely as "strong evidence" here is johndoe which believes Silverstein. Well until I see evidence that he in fact was talking to the NYFD and unless someone corroborates that conversation was as he says and the time it was said then I don't believe a damn word , or at least not anymore than "pull it" meaning pull the building. The ONLY thing we have confirmation of is that he in fact said it because its on video and that the building indeed collapsed due to CD, again on video with eyewitnesses.
Everything else is hearsay.
duplicate
duplicate comment
pull it, footprints, exercises, Anthrax
I would also drop "pull it". Time is limited, and this does not belong to the strongest arguments. Shermer can always simply point out that Silverstein's spokesman has clarified that he didn't mean *that*. Also, it's not a good idea to say that the three skyscrapers fell *into their footprints*. WTC 7 came closest to doing that. The Twin Towers came to the ground, but certainly not into their footprints.
I would talk about the anti-hijacking exercises going on simultaneously with the real hijackings.
And yes, I'd certainly talk about the anthrax attacks, how of the senators only those (Democratic) senators trying to halt the progress of the legislation (the name of which I somehow fail to remember right now) received it, and how the investigations came to a halt after it was discovered that it came from a U.S. military laboratory.
WTC 7 DID do that
the towers didn't because they were more what I like to call UNcontrolled Demolition, they used far more explosives than "normal" because this wasn't close to normal CD.
If Shermer suddenly makes
If Shermer suddenly makes reference to some evidence that has yet to be publicly released, or was just recently released, such as new photos and/or video that support the OCT, I would probe him heavily on his knowledge of it. Basically, if any privileged information he presents doesn't appear to have required any previous need for government secrecy, he should be asked why he believes it was secret to begin with.
More on Shermer...
"The association of challenges to the official myth of 9/11 with deniers of the Nazi Holocaust of Jews is one of the more potent weapons in the arsenal of the apologists for the official myth, although its use so far has been limited. In a column in Scientific American attacking the 9/11 Truth Movement, Michael Shermer states:
The mistaken belief that a handful of unexplained anomalies can undermine a well-established theory lies at the heart of all conspiratorial thinking (as well as creationism, Holocaust denial and the various crank theories of physics)."
http://911review.com/denial/holocaust.html#serendipity
In regards to PNAC RAD:
"process of transformation" 27 times in 90 pg doc
"constabulary"
"New Pearl Harbor"
Bush said "New Pearl Harbor" around 11pm on 9/11 and other people said it at other times.
Members of PNAC are also dual citizens and some are members/directors of CFR and more.
"Process of transformation"
http://www.911blogger.com/node/11021
"The important thing is to not stop questioning" - Einstein
"Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance" - Einstein
Many hands make light work!
RRREMA=realize, recognize, reconcile, educate, motivate, activate
Will someone record the program?
Will someone be sure to make a recording of the debate? I usually have no trouble downloading mp3 files, but I don't understand how to get podcasts, which I'm sure lots of other people understand perfectly.
Apparently one can only get a current or recent show by getting the podcast THAT DAY. Otherwise one has to be a paid subscriber. So I hope someone who understands how to do it will do it and make it available for the rest of us as an mp3.
Fred W
Found it!
Actually, further searching seems to have revealed a place for downloading it:
http://www.620kpoj.com/cc-common/podcast.html
You can right-click on the "Listen" button, and save to disk.
Fred W
edited mp3 of the debate
I edited out the commercials and the other two hours of the show - http://www.mediafire.com/?5npmhm7idm1