What a great point that most people, esp. scientists, are non-committal. It's very hard to find a scientist who will openly and publicly defend the NIST report, yet... it's by the same token equally hard to find a scientist who has that extra step of courage to openly and publicly call an apple and apple and confirm that the buildings were indeed blown up.
That was exemplary. He now knows there is a video of him being handed the thermite paper and he will be held accountable. The seed has been planted and he has been put on notice. The more people we can get doing this the better. I have personally delivered evidence to staffers for Barbara Boxer and Tom McClintock but that's not enough.You have inspired me to do more direct action.
Is there any way that an official list can be compiled and kept updated showing exactly who (and who's staffers) have been "served" with this information and how many times?
Repeat "service" is growing and I think it's statistically significant whether it's only once, 10 times, or 50+ (which it may end up being for some of these people over time).
AE911truth has "served" quite a few.
These guys are "serving" people all the time.
Growing numbers of unaffiliated individuals are "serving" people - on and off camera.
As we become ever more emboldened in this effort, it has tremendous political capital for the movement to the degree that we organize, publicize, and distribute it.
Jeremy made a great point. There is courage in numbers.
Everyone who is "served" may think they're the only one. I was asked directly by someone I served awhile ago, "Who else has received this material?" Their query had unclear motive, but I wish I could have handed them a long list (better yet to have included it in the packet) of those who had been "served" than toss out the one or two names that I knew at the time.
The list is VERY impressive. So what if no one responds in an impressive way. Do we really expect they will? No and that's not the point. The point is that they got it. Their name and the fact that it's documented that they received the information - and how many times - and that they have still have said and done nothing -- is actually far more powerful ----> especially if made public.
Congressional voting records are critically important: Who voted for what and which way is something they may not care whether anyone knows, but we do.
As greater numbers of Americans become enlightened about 911 truth, many will look to - and at - their elected officials. It would help if they knew, for example, that their Senator had not yet personally received any information on the factual evidence or had already been served 15 times dating back to....
MB
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Ghandi
huh... what sort of civic-minded citizen have we here? Dr Wieman, we've got the Patriot Act, the War on Terror, the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq, illegal spying on Americans, torture camps - all justified by the events of 9/11 - and you have No knowledge, No opinion!
Don't you care about this in the slightest, not even enough to get informed? I consider that pathetic, cowardly, irresponsible.
"huh... what sort of civic-minded citizen have we here? Dr Wieman, we've got the Patriot Act, the War on Terror, the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq, illegal spying on Americans, torture camps - all justified by the events of 9/11 - and you have No knowledge, No opinion!
Don't you care about this in the slightest, not even enough to get informed? I consider that pathetic, cowardly, irresponsible."
Fantastic follow up questions! An approach with these questions, johnscriv is very relevant and necessary.
is very disappointing. You should question the overestimated role of it in society.
The science professionals are no less sheeple than the common man, nothing to learn from them.
I lived in the same dorm at MIT with Carl. Hard to believe he's only a year younger than me. He may or may not remember me. One of my best friends from those days is a Physics PHD who has opened up on the issue.
I'm preparing a short presentation with David Chandler's material to present to scholars and scientists who will give me 15 minutes.
When I'm ready, I'll approach Carl, too.
David Slesinger dslesinger@alum.mit.edu
911courage.org
911courage.blogspot.com
Stop-Martial-Law.com
JenningsMystery.com
YourCowardiceIsBelowYou.com
443-682-8725
Well done!
I would like to collect "a LIST of architects and engineers who publicly support the official NIST Building 7 Report." http://truthaction.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5946
i.e. AE4911NIST Report.
do all agree on the final reports? Have we ask them? The final report or summary often contradicts the findings of the chapters made by real scientists.
I asked Richard Gage: "How many architects or engineers have withdrawn their names from his petition as a result of reading and accepting the NIST report on WTC7?" He said; "NONE."
He added that 6 or 7 have withdrawn their names for unspecified reasons (Could it be that they felt pressured? Dr. Jones might have some insights into that as may Van Jones.)
You probably won't find too many who will join that group. "Architects & Engineers who PUBLICLY support the Building 7 NIST Report" LOL. Another possible name could be: "Architects & Engineers who Oppose Richard Gage's Message."
Upon reading DRG's WTC7 book, it's clear that even the NIST report actually leaks out evidence in our favor. Reminds me of Stalin's Russia, where media journalists sprinkled some truth "between the lines" while overtly appearing to tow the official line. (For example, even NIST no longer accepts the whole idea of diesel fuel fires being primarily responsible for the collapse. Neither do they accept the idea that falling debris from the north tower severely compromised the structural integrity.)
For the most part, we simply face a lack of courage among scientists, not a scientific ignorance.
Right now, the best our opposition has been able to muster is "boloboffin's" (a notorious JREFer) pathetic attack site ae911truth.info. And if you look at its alexa traffic ranking, it's obviously making zero dent in our cause at all.
Jeremy Roth-Kushel was truly exemplary, as Adam wrote above.
While it may be that people are often cowed by their professional peers (i.e., basically sheeple) who attack the egregious among them ("Don't tell the truth -- they'll fire you!"), Dr. Wieman is far more cowardly than that. Since his topic that day seemed to include the crucial job in education of shifting students' paradigms toward greater truths (which Roth-Kushel shrewdly reminded him), then he doesn't stand anywhere near (let alone "on") his own principles when he tried to dismiss the facts and true nature of 9/11 as though they were irrelevant in any way. Wieman is hypocritical to the point of absurdity. This is a Nobel-awarded scientist?
Roth-Kushel brilliantly brought the very crux of the issue to Wieman's own purported turf by invoking the whole world as a classroom in need of enlightenment, and it was not he who failed his principles and aspirations. It was Wieman.
Despite all the hype, the glamour, and the money (which really isn't much these days) the Nobel Prize and it's recipients shouldn't be put on pedestals.
This was an honor created "by man, for man" and, thus, has been susceptible to all human greatness and failings.
Indeed, all awards are just positive opinions writ large and megaphoned.
No pedestal here. No god need be invoked. All human culture is just that.
What I find ironic - and worth noting - is that this man who received a 'writ large' crown for breaking some kind of new ground, could not bear to consider the idea of taking seriously HIS OWN PROPOSED TOPIC of shifting paradigms for an audience larger than a classroom. He utterly failed the intellectual integrity pop quiz.
It’s time to starting calling these people what they are, accessories after the fact. It’s time that people in media, politics, military and education who willingly ignore the overwhelming evidence about the lies of 9/11 have the prefix of accessory after the fact attached to their name. If every time a citizen referenced or confronted one these people the accessory after the fact prefix was used it would have an effect. For example, I was watching Hardball with Accessory After the Fact Matthews and the guest was Accessory After the Fact Barney Frank.
It is nothing new that scientists are vulnerable to the political winds. It takes courage to reveal that science shows that the earth is spherical when all others say it is flat.
nausea7543
When the student is ready the teacher will come.
Great Work Jeremy and camera person.
As Martin Luther King stated: Silence is Betrayal
There are many levels of betrayal to truth.
There are many people in civilian, military, politics, media, entertainment and the academics that could say more about the lies and evils of 9/11 but for their own personal reasons do not.
Those that are close minded or just can't believe their government would do such a thing, and so refuse to look into it, need to better educate themselves to the real world around them.
If a person does come to the realization about the real truth of 9/11 and understands the official government account was a lie and then chooses to stay quiet, even though he or she understands it was evil and goes against the laws of humanity and peace in the world, then that person is either taken over by fear or has an undeveloped sense of morality. Either way it seperates that person from those that fight for truth.
Those that knowingly were involved in enacting and contributing to the crimes of 9/11 along with those that knowlingly (they knew the real perpetrators of 9/11) and benefitted from the crimes of 9/11 are evil.
Those that fight for truth educate themselves to the evils that surround their life and then take actions that help correct those evils.
this is another awesome truth action to be aspired to. Its hard work like this that gives truth and peace a chance. I believe in the Mark Twain quote, its a matter of time before scientists peers start to come out and speak up, and then the big change happens.
/***************************************************/
Are you listening to Truth Rock? What would the 60's have been without music? Make music for the movement...
/*************************************************
Excellent line of questioning (again), from WACLA.
A problem we're perpetually up against, is that so many scientists' and researchers' careers are dependent upon those all important grants from either the government or the private/corporate sector; its not the best diplomacy to "bite the hand that feeds you". There is great fear throughout academia about publicizing scientific research with political baggage... the precious life support system upon which so many scientists depend, can be rapidly cut off without so much as a prior warning..."Tell the truth and you're fired". Look what happened to Dr. Jones and others. Certain people within NIST also faced a similar problem ..... no doubt, there are some employees in that agency who knew that a cover-up was been orchestrated, using junk science to come to a "politically acceptable" conclusion. Could they have spoken up? Of course, but what would have happened.. especially in these hard economics times? The possibility (probability) of losing employment, getting a "blot" on their resumé, or worse, not finding alternative work, getting into intractible debt, falling behind on the bills, mortgage payments, the specter of being homeless on the street, are all harsh realities.
Is it conceivable that NIST, as a federally funded agency, could have done the real rigorous science, and told the truth? Such a course of action would have raised mighty difficult questions re. the conduct of other government departments and agencies. Hence the employment of NIST to do this work, rather than an independent body. NIST's "research" was like the "fox investigating the henhouse", or a police department investigating charges of police brutality; of course it's going to be biased and bogus by default. Journalists in the corporate media have exactly the same dilemma.. some may do excellent work and research, but if it strays into verboten territory (like 9/11 Truth), they'll either get fired or won't get published.
If it wasn't for the black cloud of "financial terrorism" that hangs over the heads of so many, I would hazard a guess that ae911truth, for example, would have 90,000 members, rather than 900. High profile entertainers, scientists, sports personalities, and public figures from all walks of like would be speaking up, or would have spoken up already. So far, only the bravest (with the knowledge) have stepped up to the plate. One of our tasks is to find ways of bypassing this endemic state of affairs.
My older teenaged daughters noticed your shorter "do." They were going on and on about how handsome they think it makes you look and and how professional, in a young, hip kind of way. They also liked that you ditched your glasses. I didn't notice anything, but I promised them I'd tell you that they did.
Anyway, you guys have gotten so good at this and get better all the time. It was fascinating to see this guy's reaction, which was not that much different than the pols. I don't know what I was expecting from him, but not that.
jeremy, i really love your work... the comments you made on camera after the prof left would have been worth making right BESIDE the nobel laureate just after he gave your question the polite (noncommittal) brush-off, with him in camera view just behind you and you speaking loud enough that he could overhear you as he talked to others ... maybe your words would prick his conscience.
Also i just watched your action with Gen Myers... gutsy action guys... i didn't like the way that thuggoon dragged you out by the neck, you should sue the brute... that would make a great action in itself... i can see the headlines already ... Man Sued for Assaulting Truth Activist
The good doctor seems to immediately sense a threat and responds by avoiding the situation on all levels. I find it hard to believe he is not aware of the facts and controversies involving 911. Like so many others he deliberately seems to avoid involvement on any level. Personally, I found his behavior very suspicious to say the least. Where is his intellectual curiosity on being presented such a unique scientific paper? Enough said great work as always JRK!
Someone needs to establish a new organization: Architects and Engineers FOR the official story of 9/11. Then we'll know how many so-called experts we're up against.
Bravo and well said, Jeremy
Bravo and well said, Jeremy Roth-Kushel!
What a great point that most people, esp. scientists, are non-committal. It's very hard to find a scientist who will openly and publicly defend the NIST report, yet... it's by the same token equally hard to find a scientist who has that extra step of courage to openly and publicly call an apple and apple and confirm that the buildings were indeed blown up.
Be Your Own Media
A good encounter.
Offer a point and ask a question.
Well done Jeremy
That was exemplary. He now knows there is a video of him being handed the thermite paper and he will be held accountable. The seed has been planted and he has been put on notice. The more people we can get doing this the better. I have personally delivered evidence to staffers for Barbara Boxer and Tom McClintock but that's not enough.You have inspired me to do more direct action.
Carry on
Chris
Creating an official list
Is there any way that an official list can be compiled and kept updated showing exactly who (and who's staffers) have been "served" with this information and how many times?
Repeat "service" is growing and I think it's statistically significant whether it's only once, 10 times, or 50+ (which it may end up being for some of these people over time).
AE911truth has "served" quite a few.
These guys are "serving" people all the time.
Growing numbers of unaffiliated individuals are "serving" people - on and off camera.
As we become ever more emboldened in this effort, it has tremendous political capital for the movement to the degree that we organize, publicize, and distribute it.
Jeremy made a great point. There is courage in numbers.
Everyone who is "served" may think they're the only one. I was asked directly by someone I served awhile ago, "Who else has received this material?" Their query had unclear motive, but I wish I could have handed them a long list (better yet to have included it in the packet) of those who had been "served" than toss out the one or two names that I knew at the time.
The list is VERY impressive. So what if no one responds in an impressive way. Do we really expect they will? No and that's not the point. The point is that they got it. Their name and the fact that it's documented that they received the information - and how many times - and that they have still have said and done nothing -- is actually far more powerful ----> especially if made public.
Congressional voting records are critically important: Who voted for what and which way is something they may not care whether anyone knows, but we do.
As greater numbers of Americans become enlightened about 911 truth, many will look to - and at - their elected officials. It would help if they knew, for example, that their Senator had not yet personally received any information on the factual evidence or had already been served 15 times dating back to....
MB
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Ghandi
No opinion, no knowledge ...
huh... what sort of civic-minded citizen have we here? Dr Wieman, we've got the Patriot Act, the War on Terror, the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq, illegal spying on Americans, torture camps - all justified by the events of 9/11 - and you have No knowledge, No opinion!
Don't you care about this in the slightest, not even enough to get informed? I consider that pathetic, cowardly, irresponsible.
"huh... what sort of
"huh... what sort of civic-minded citizen have we here? Dr Wieman, we've got the Patriot Act, the War on Terror, the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq, illegal spying on Americans, torture camps - all justified by the events of 9/11 - and you have No knowledge, No opinion!
Don't you care about this in the slightest, not even enough to get informed? I consider that pathetic, cowardly, irresponsible."
Fantastic follow up questions! An approach with these questions, johnscriv is very relevant and necessary.
Sincerely,
Bruno
WeAreChangeLA - http://www.wacla.org
The science community
is very disappointing. You should question the overestimated role of it in society.
The science professionals are no less sheeple than the common man, nothing to learn from them.
Re interview with Wieman
I lived in the same dorm at MIT with Carl. Hard to believe he's only a year younger than me. He may or may not remember me. One of my best friends from those days is a Physics PHD who has opened up on the issue.
I'm preparing a short presentation with David Chandler's material to present to scholars and scientists who will give me 15 minutes.
When I'm ready, I'll approach Carl, too.
David Slesinger dslesinger@alum.mit.edu
911courage.org
911courage.blogspot.com
Stop-Martial-Law.com
JenningsMystery.com
YourCowardiceIsBelowYou.com
443-682-8725
Go get 'em David Slesinger!
& great job WAC LA.
....
Great stuff, Dave!
"...assert their own responsibility in our larger society...."
Well done!
I would like to collect "a LIST of architects and engineers who publicly support the official NIST Building 7 Report."
http://truthaction.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5946
i.e. AE4911NIST Report.
Out side of NIST...A Short List
If Not Me? Who? If Not Now? When?
http://www.northtexas911truth.com/
NIST scientists
do all agree on the final reports? Have we ask them? The final report or summary often contradicts the findings of the chapters made by real scientists.
The only one I know who fit is
http://neon.mems.cmu.edu/fruehan/fruehan.html
I asked Richard Gage
I asked Richard Gage: "How many architects or engineers have withdrawn their names from his petition as a result of reading and accepting the NIST report on WTC7?" He said; "NONE."
He added that 6 or 7 have withdrawn their names for unspecified reasons (Could it be that they felt pressured? Dr. Jones might have some insights into that as may Van Jones.)
Now that's an interesting angle!
I hope you do it.
Haha,
You probably won't find too many who will join that group. "Architects & Engineers who PUBLICLY support the Building 7 NIST Report" LOL. Another possible name could be: "Architects & Engineers who Oppose Richard Gage's Message."
Upon reading DRG's WTC7 book, it's clear that even the NIST report actually leaks out evidence in our favor. Reminds me of Stalin's Russia, where media journalists sprinkled some truth "between the lines" while overtly appearing to tow the official line. (For example, even NIST no longer accepts the whole idea of diesel fuel fires being primarily responsible for the collapse. Neither do they accept the idea that falling debris from the north tower severely compromised the structural integrity.)
For the most part, we simply face a lack of courage among scientists, not a scientific ignorance.
Right now, the best our opposition has been able to muster is "boloboffin's" (a notorious JREFer) pathetic attack site ae911truth.info. And if you look at its alexa traffic ranking, it's obviously making zero dent in our cause at all.
Who deserves the Nobel?
Jeremy Roth-Kushel was truly exemplary, as Adam wrote above.
While it may be that people are often cowed by their professional peers (i.e., basically sheeple) who attack the egregious among them ("Don't tell the truth -- they'll fire you!"), Dr. Wieman is far more cowardly than that. Since his topic that day seemed to include the crucial job in education of shifting students' paradigms toward greater truths (which Roth-Kushel shrewdly reminded him), then he doesn't stand anywhere near (let alone "on") his own principles when he tried to dismiss the facts and true nature of 9/11 as though they were irrelevant in any way. Wieman is hypocritical to the point of absurdity. This is a Nobel-awarded scientist?
Roth-Kushel brilliantly brought the very crux of the issue to Wieman's own purported turf by invoking the whole world as a classroom in need of enlightenment, and it was not he who failed his principles and aspirations. It was Wieman.
With all due respect to Alfred Nobel...
Despite all the hype, the glamour, and the money (which really isn't much these days) the Nobel Prize and it's recipients shouldn't be put on pedestals.
This was an honor created "by man, for man" and, thus, has been susceptible to all human greatness and failings.
With all respect due anyone....
Indeed, all awards are just positive opinions writ large and megaphoned.
No pedestal here. No god need be invoked. All human culture is just that.
What I find ironic - and worth noting - is that this man who received a 'writ large' crown for breaking some kind of new ground, could not bear to consider the idea of taking seriously HIS OWN PROPOSED TOPIC of shifting paradigms for an audience larger than a classroom. He utterly failed the intellectual integrity pop quiz.
Awards are like hemorrhoids
Sorry, but I can't resist the line by Sarah Morton (Charlotte Rampling) in Swimming Pool:
"Awards are like hemorrhoids. Sooner or later every asshole gets one."
Accessory After the Fact Wieman
It’s time to starting calling these people what they are, accessories after the fact. It’s time that people in media, politics, military and education who willingly ignore the overwhelming evidence about the lies of 9/11 have the prefix of accessory after the fact attached to their name. If every time a citizen referenced or confronted one these people the accessory after the fact prefix was used it would have an effect. For example, I was watching Hardball with Accessory After the Fact Matthews and the guest was Accessory After the Fact Barney Frank.
Great work Jeremy!
It is nothing new that scientists are vulnerable to the political winds. It takes courage to reveal that science shows that the earth is spherical when all others say it is flat.
Silence Is Betrayal
nausea7543
When the student is ready the teacher will come.
Great Work Jeremy and camera person.
As Martin Luther King stated: Silence is Betrayal
There are many levels of betrayal to truth.
There are many people in civilian, military, politics, media, entertainment and the academics that could say more about the lies and evils of 9/11 but for their own personal reasons do not.
Those that are close minded or just can't believe their government would do such a thing, and so refuse to look into it, need to better educate themselves to the real world around them.
If a person does come to the realization about the real truth of 9/11 and understands the official government account was a lie and then chooses to stay quiet, even though he or she understands it was evil and goes against the laws of humanity and peace in the world, then that person is either taken over by fear or has an undeveloped sense of morality. Either way it seperates that person from those that fight for truth.
Those that knowingly were involved in enacting and contributing to the crimes of 9/11 along with those that knowlingly (they knew the real perpetrators of 9/11) and benefitted from the crimes of 9/11 are evil.
Those that fight for truth educate themselves to the evils that surround their life and then take actions that help correct those evils.
Take Care Matt
A++
this is another awesome truth action to be aspired to. Its hard work like this that gives truth and peace a chance. I believe in the Mark Twain quote, its a matter of time before scientists peers start to come out and speak up, and then the big change happens.
/***************************************************/
Are you listening to Truth Rock? What would the 60's have been without music? Make music for the movement...
/*************************************************
Excellent line of
Excellent line of questioning (again), from WACLA.
A problem we're perpetually up against, is that so many scientists' and researchers' careers are dependent upon those all important grants from either the government or the private/corporate sector; its not the best diplomacy to "bite the hand that feeds you". There is great fear throughout academia about publicizing scientific research with political baggage... the precious life support system upon which so many scientists depend, can be rapidly cut off without so much as a prior warning..."Tell the truth and you're fired". Look what happened to Dr. Jones and others. Certain people within NIST also faced a similar problem ..... no doubt, there are some employees in that agency who knew that a cover-up was been orchestrated, using junk science to come to a "politically acceptable" conclusion. Could they have spoken up? Of course, but what would have happened.. especially in these hard economics times? The possibility (probability) of losing employment, getting a "blot" on their resumé, or worse, not finding alternative work, getting into intractible debt, falling behind on the bills, mortgage payments, the specter of being homeless on the street, are all harsh realities.
Is it conceivable that NIST, as a federally funded agency, could have done the real rigorous science, and told the truth? Such a course of action would have raised mighty difficult questions re. the conduct of other government departments and agencies. Hence the employment of NIST to do this work, rather than an independent body. NIST's "research" was like the "fox investigating the henhouse", or a police department investigating charges of police brutality; of course it's going to be biased and bogus by default. Journalists in the corporate media have exactly the same dilemma.. some may do excellent work and research, but if it strays into verboten territory (like 9/11 Truth), they'll either get fired or won't get published.
If it wasn't for the black cloud of "financial terrorism" that hangs over the heads of so many, I would hazard a guess that ae911truth, for example, would have 90,000 members, rather than 900. High profile entertainers, scientists, sports personalities, and public figures from all walks of like would be speaking up, or would have spoken up already. So far, only the bravest (with the knowledge) have stepped up to the plate. One of our tasks is to find ways of bypassing this endemic state of affairs.
Jeremy
My older teenaged daughters noticed your shorter "do." They were going on and on about how handsome they think it makes you look and and how professional, in a young, hip kind of way. They also liked that you ditched your glasses. I didn't notice anything, but I promised them I'd tell you that they did.
Anyway, you guys have gotten so good at this and get better all the time. It was fascinating to see this guy's reaction, which was not that much different than the pols. I don't know what I was expecting from him, but not that.
Keep up your amazing work and leadership!
MB
great action
jeremy, i really love your work... the comments you made on camera after the prof left would have been worth making right BESIDE the nobel laureate just after he gave your question the polite (noncommittal) brush-off, with him in camera view just behind you and you speaking loud enough that he could overhear you as he talked to others ... maybe your words would prick his conscience.
Also i just watched your action with Gen Myers... gutsy action guys... i didn't like the way that thuggoon dragged you out by the neck, you should sue the brute... that would make a great action in itself... i can see the headlines already ... Man Sued for Assaulting Truth Activist
I found his body language interesting....
The good doctor seems to immediately sense a threat and responds by avoiding the situation on all levels. I find it hard to believe he is not aware of the facts and controversies involving 911. Like so many others he deliberately seems to avoid involvement on any level. Personally, I found his behavior very suspicious to say the least. Where is his intellectual curiosity on being presented such a unique scientific paper? Enough said great work as always JRK!
ENOUGH!
Someone needs to establish a new organization: Architects and Engineers FOR the official story of 9/11. Then we'll know how many so-called experts we're up against.