Support 911Blogger


PART 5: Legislators, Pundits & 9/11 Controlled Demolition Questions

Federal legislators and pundits are asked questions about the 9/11 controlled demolition evidence on C-SPAN's program "Washington Journal".

This is Part 5 in a series.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCLpELlZr9g

Highlights include:

*Positive responses from Reps. Diana Degette and Charles Dent.

*Rep. Cuellar is called out for eluding a Building 7 question during a previous appearance on the show. Cuellar then denies he did it.

*Caller stands up for Building 7 callers and criticizes the corporate media during an open lines segment.

*Duncan Hunter confidently stands by all the government 9/11 investigation reports and believes they're adequate even though he's never read them.

*Caller told that he's being disrespectful to the CIA.

*Maj. General McConville asked why soldiers should obey orders from the government in a war based on avenging 9/11 when they haven't been given the full story.

To call C-SPAN's Washington Journal program:

Democrats: 1-202 585-3880

Republicans: 1-202-585-3881

Independents: 1-202-585-3882

It is on live every day at 7AM -10AM EST

Previous videos in this series are listed below:

Part 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=qnVZovV5dyw

Part 2

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=B-kBXM4dygc

Part 3

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqWmOUUHeY0

Part 4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RryusiAHm8s

John McCain questioned in April (before part 1):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7bIgiu-BXg

Major General James C. McConville

In the above video Major General James C. McConville states of the 9/11 attacks attributed to al Quaeda: "It is our responsibility to hold them responsible for that and it is our responsibility to make sure it never happens again......"

Below are the latest Travel Advisories from The State Department for Afghanistan and Iraq:

Afghanistan

August 23, 2013

The Department of State warns U.S. citizens against travel to Afghanistan. The security threat to all U.S. citizens in Afghanistan remains critical. This Travel Warning supersedes the Travel Warning for Afghanistan issued on January 29, 2013, and reminds U.S. citizens of ongoing security risks, including kidnappings and insurgent attacks.

Iraq

September 05, 2013

The Department of State warns U.S. citizens against all but essential travel to Iraq. Travel within Iraq remains dangerous given the security situation. This Travel Warning replaces the Travel Warning dated February 25, 2013, to update information on security incidents and to remind U.S. citizens of ongoing security concerns in Iraq, including kidnapping and terrorist violence. The ability of the Embassy to respond to situations in which U.S. citizens face difficulty, including arrests, is extremely limited.

Pests or reporters?

With all due respect to the work of compiling these bits of interview (and well-intentioned phone questioning), I wonder about the value of questioning these people in an off-topic style. If the interviewee is not there to discuss 911, they have an automatic out. It seems to shine an unflattering light on the truth movement.

There is much value in these calls.

There is much value in these calls.
It gets the word out about Building 7.

We win if we stay firm and continue to insist that people take another look at 9/11.

The importance of the truth about 9/11 should make this subject the top focal point of every news broadcast (in any sane society).

Fantastic effort

Yes the value in raising awareness and making it clear that this issue is not going anywhere until properly addressed is huge. It is shameful to see a media so reluctant to even hear the question, let alone have it answered. But it is equally satisfying to see what people can achieve in terms of coverage for the issue of WTC7. Who knows just how many 1000s of people have googled WTC7 because of these good people asking questions. They're polite, well informed and articulate, whilst the hosts are hostile and dismissive and the guests uninformed of, or unwilling to address the issue. Their inability to meaningfully address the issue is as telling to the viewer as anything said by the callers, and to draw attention to that alone is difficult. but to use their forum to do it is brilliant, because it has serious reach.