Clout! Thursday: Month of Truth Week 2
We continue our Month of Truth debate series asking what brought down the twin towers and WTC building 7. Do you believe the official story? Do you find reason to doubt it? Is this pseudo-science of the painful truth? Tell us what you think.
Guests Kevin Barett, John Brown, Professor Steven E. Jones, Richard Gage and Tony Szamboti present different hypotheses.








keep talking
I'm listening... I'm interested.... And you are NOT crazy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thanks for your show.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By greatradioMay 8, 2008 - 9:20pmMARVIN BUSH!!!!
Why has nobody mentioned the involvment of Marvin Bush in this whole charade?! Yes...the little known brother of "W". He was very much involved in the security company that managed WTC. This company, Stratesec was also called Securacom, A KUWAITI OWNED COMPANY!!!! Why, during the aftermath of 9/11 wasn't Marvin's name brought up? The brother of the President!!! Google Ol' Marvin, Stratesec and Securacom. Lots of very interesting events leading up top 9/11. Building wide powerdowns and evacuations...etc...etc...Low and behold after 9/11 Marvin divests himself from Securacom aka Stratesec. The facts are all there everyone, add em up.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By greycamodeMay 8, 2008 - 10:39pmMarvin
The Marvin Bush angle is a red herring. A waste of time. He was not a major player in 911
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By shaun_janoschkaMay 8, 2008 - 11:08pmMARVIN BUSH!!!!
Why has nobody mentioned the involvment of Marvin Bush in this whole charade?! Yes...the little known brother of "W". He was very much involved in the security company that managed WTC. This company, Stratesec was also called Securacom, A KUWAITI OWNED COMPANY!!!! Why, during the aftermath of 9/11 wasn't Marvin's name brought up? The brother of the President!!! Google Ol' Marvin, Stratesec and Securacom. Lots of very interesting events leading up top 9/11. Building wide powerdowns and evacuations...etc...etc...Low and behold after 9/11 Marvin divests himself from Securacom aka Stratesec. The facts are all there everyone, add em up.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By greycamodeMay 8, 2008 - 10:41pmTalking truth
To expand your comment. Yes we are listening to the truth of 911 as a controlled demolition (CD) and not as the commission report (a lie). No, 911 truth and the CD is not crazy. Crazy are those that believe BUSH. The show was great!!
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By shaun_janoschkaMay 8, 2008 - 11:15pmRichard Greene
How is anyone supposed to be able to promote your show with 2 or 3 hours notice Richard?
Last week you invited the 9/11 Truth movement to an online "meet-up" and you left us standing at the altar.
Stop blaming us, and start taking some responsibility for crappy PR.
Furthermore, this page wasn't updated until the show started. That is incredibly lame.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By reprehensorMay 8, 2008 - 9:44pmI agree completely
Last week was a disappointment.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By seemslikeadreamMay 8, 2008 - 10:06pmMuch Better
Yes, last week was a little week, but this SHOW WAS GREAT!!! Thanks Richard Greene
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By shaun_janoschkaMay 8, 2008 - 11:18pmIf the 9/11 truth movement doesn't get with it, they will have b
If the 9/11 truth movement doesn't get with it, they will have blown a tremendous opportunity.
Weeks ago Air America announced intentions to air a month of 9/11 truth.
Why anyone who wants 9/11 truth would insult Air America is bizarre in the least.
THANK YOU AIR AMERICA, AND THANK YOU RICHARD GREENE !!
Anyone who wants 9/11 truth, if they are sane, would do everything they can to get massive listenership to these month of truth programs.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By BillDouglasMay 8, 2008 - 10:37pmIt would have been a good idea to send out a REMINDER
If the show wanted to get folks here that might have been a good idea
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By seemslikeadreamMay 8, 2008 - 10:45pmLate invite
Yes, it was a late invite and yes the page was not updated until the show started, but the show was great, and Richard did a fine, fine job. Please HELP Richard with next week's PR
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By shaun_janoschkaMay 8, 2008 - 11:11pmBuilding # 7
this is really as simple as the assassination of JFK. just watch the Zapruder film, or watch the google film,
This is an Orange,
this is not complicated. it was obvioulsy a controlled demolition. only psychological factors prevent one from seeing this...
watch this is an orange.
get real!
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By LetsSaveDemocracyMay 8, 2008 - 9:55pmNIST "doesn't know"
When one obvious answer (to the collapse of the towers and Bldg 7) is disregarded because it is unacceptable to the government, the failure of NIST to call out or even investigate the obvious (that has already been identified in scientific tests) by independent researchers is no huge mystery.
When their answer is to say they didn't investigate the presence of explosives because there was no reason to believe that explosives were used, it demonstrates an intellectual dishonesty that is truly breathtaking.
All the characteristics of the collapse of Bldg 7 conform to those of a controlled demolition. None of them conform to what one would imagine to be a collapse of a steel-frame building due to fire (because there is no examples in history)
Is there any big mystery here? We have a fascist group in charge of our government who immediately become criminal suspects when controlled demolitions are confirmed.
"A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves".
.................B. De Juvenal
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By Maturin42May 8, 2008 - 9:55pmThank you for covering this, Richard! Our country is in trouble!
The world was treated to a complete PsyOp by the ruling elite on 9/11 – the money-interests who see themselves above and beyond allegiance to nation states. Nothing new under the sun.
The effect of the theatrics of September 11th on the masses amounted to a planned psychological pressure and release scenario....with the pressure of the TV drama of the towers being blown up on live television and the immediate release (relief) of being told so quickly that the culprits were SOLELY al qaeda. Something is VERY wrong with what has been paraded as the official story.
A major problem is that the ruling elite claimed "incompetence" and "ignorance" of many leads beforehand and then suddenly had many important answers when the event happened. Ridiculous.
The other circumstantial evidence is astounding. Criminal conspiracies happen all the time and the American people (and people of Planet Earth) have not been given PROOF on behalf of the official story.
Much evidence and facts point to a cover-up of massive proportions.
9/11 was necessary for the already-planned post 9-11 wars and social policies. Not hard to figure out.
Unfortunately, your guest John Brown exudes arrogance and does nothing to support the official account.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By Rick TrumanMay 8, 2008 - 10:02pm25 former U.S. military officers have severely criticized
criticized the official account of 9/11 and called for a new investigation.
by Alan Miller
http://www.opednews.com
Official Account of 9/11: “Impossible”, “A Bunch of Hogwash”, “Total B.S.”, “Ludicrous”, “A Well-Organized Cover-up”, “A White-Washed Farce”
January 14, 2008 – Twenty-five former U.S. military officers have severely criticized the official account of 9/11 and called for a new investigation. They include former commander of U.S. Army Intelligence, Major General Albert Stubblebine, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, Col. Ronald D. Ray, two former staff members of the Director of the National Security Agency; Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski, PhD, and Major John M. Newman, PhD, and many others. They are among the rapidly growing number of military and intelligence service veterans, scientists, engineers, and architects challenging the government’s story. The officers’ statements appear below, listed alphabetically.
more.....
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By seemslikeadreamMay 8, 2008 - 10:20pm9/11 Denial
It continues to amaze me how many people acknowledge that the Bush administration has lied about nearly everything it has done, engaged in kidnapping ("extraordinary rendition"), torture ("severe interrogation"), war profiteering, and illegal surveillance of American citizens, but somehow, on the issue of 9/11, they believe this same administration has told the absolute truth. It's particularly ironic, because it was the events of 9/11 that enabled the administration to engage in these activities. (What a coincidence!)
Perhaps this denial is fueled by the nominally bi-partisan make-up of the 9/11 Commission. But the research director of the Commission was Dr. Phillip Zelikow, a longtime Bush family insider. Dr. Zelikow was an adviser to GHW Bush's National Security Council, and he co-authored a book with Condaleezza Rice in the mid 80's. His conflicts of interest should be obvious. As an indication of the poor quality of the Commission's work, it should be noted that the collapse of Building 7 was not mentioned in its report, neither was the fact that at least three of the men identified as hijackers were known to be alive, 12 days after 9/11, as reported by the BBC. See:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1559151.stm
Check it out. Pull a few threads and the whole official story unravels.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By Gordon KMay 8, 2008 - 10:23pmNanothermite
Mr. Brown needs to read more and talk less. He didn't know about nanothermite, didn't know about Dr. Jones' peer-reviewed paper published in mid-April. Thinks that pop-pop-pop going around a building is explainable by random electrical faults.
I think Mr. Brown's ability or his liklihood of understanding the evidence of controlled demolition is in inverse relationship to his dependence on the government for his livelihood.
Maturin's second law of defending the government story.
"A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves".
.................B. De Juvenal
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By Maturin42May 8, 2008 - 10:26pmTHANK YOU AIR AMERICA FOR DOING WHAT MEDIA SHOULD ALL BE DOING !
We've been lied to about 9/11. Facts point to controlled demolition and inside job.
Corporate media has betrayed Americans by refusing to look at the facts regarding the 9/11 events.
As far as future guests:
USAF Colonel (rtd) Robert Bowman would be an excellent interview regarding the Air Force's effective stand down on 9/11.
9/11 father, Bob McIllvaine would be an excellent guest to talk about how the government tried to stop any 9/11 investigation, and the fact that many if not most 9/11 family members know that a cover up is taking place, that points to govt. complicity in the 9/11 attacks.
at www.PatriotsQuestion911.org you'll find hundreds of high level military and intelligence experts who not only doubt the official story, but most convinced 9/11 was an inside job.
The corporate media is engaged in the most horrific cover up in history, but refusing to talk to any of these people.
A Japanese Senator on national TV in Japan has charged 9/11 as an inside job. An investigative presentation was held at the European Parliament. Tens of millions of Americans now believe 9/11 was an inside job.
How long can corporate media aid and abet the crimes of 9/11?
THANK YOU AIR AMERICA !!!!
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By BillDouglasMay 8, 2008 - 10:34pm9/11
At last ... now we need discussion in the main stream media.....corporate media is not letting this information and debate air
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By bwinnMay 8, 2008 - 10:36pm9/11
Talk about the security of the world trade center....who was in charge of security....
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By bwinnMay 8, 2008 - 10:39pmSneaking bombs into the building...
They pulled the bombsniffing dogs out of the buildings after the powerdown on the weekend prior to 9/11.
The World Trade Center was destroyed just days after a heightened security alert was lifted at the landmark 110-story towers, security personnel said yesterday [September 11]. Daria Coard, 37, a guard at Tower One, said the security detail had been working 12-hour shifts for the past two weeks because of numerous phone threats. But on Thursday [September 6], bomb-sniffing dogs were abruptly removed. [NY Newsday]
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By Maturin42May 8, 2008 - 10:41pmhttp://www.reuters.com/articl
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN2257342820080222
Rick Renzi a law student - ''The plane came in at an incredibly steep angle with incredibly high speed,''... was driving by the Pentagon at the time of the crash about 9:40 a.m. The impact created a huge yellow and orange fireball, he added. Renzi, who was interviewed at the scene by FBI agents, said he stopped his car to watch and saw another plane following and turn off after the first craft's impact.
http://www.911-strike.com/eyewitness_explosion.htm
Renzi: I was three-hundred yards away from the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. I saw the destruction and loss of life first hand. I will never forget the acts of terrorism committed on our soil, against our fellow citizens. ... Having worked in the intelligence field, I know first hand that we need to rebuild our intelligence community to guarantee better communication among the agencies. Through my service on the Select Committee on Intelligence, I will work to strengthen our human intelligence capabilities in order stop threats from taking action. I will stand with President Bush and support his efforts to root out those who would conduct evil acts against the United States and make sure we defeat terrorism at every turn.
http://www.vote-usa.org/PoliticianIssue.aspx?Issue=BUSHomelandSecurity&I...
Remarks by the Vice President (Dick Cheney) at a Luncheon for Congressman Rick Renzi
March 15, 2004
On issue after issue, from national security, to economic growth, to improving our schools, President Bush has led the way in making progress for the American people. Rick has stood with us on vital issues, and he shares our optimism about the years ahead.
President Bush has a clear vision for the future of this country: Abroad, we will use America's great power to serve great purposes, to turn back the forces of terror, and to spread hope and freedom throughout the world.
Here at home, we will continue building prosperity that reaches every corner of this land so that every child who grows up in the United States will have a chance to learn, to succeed, and to rise in the world.
Once again, thank you all for your commitment to the cause we share. It's an honor to stand with you in supporting Rick Renzi. You are united behind a strong leader and a congressman with the right priorities for his state. Rick is showing his talent, and dedication, and reflecting great credit on the people of the first district of Arizona. President Bush and I look forward to working with him for a long time to come.
Thank you very much. (Applause.)
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By seemslikeadreamMay 8, 2008 - 10:42pm9/11
Yeah ... world trade center 7 completely destroyed ..... controlled demolition....that was probably the command center...
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By bwinnMay 8, 2008 - 10:45pmYes
and it wasn't even hit by a plane!
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By seemslikeadreamMay 8, 2008 - 10:47pmI'm not complaining - This is great
Richard, please keep it up . This will get better with practice.
We are confident in our knowledge of the Reichstag. We can take-on all doubters.
The only disappointment is having to listen to the painful personal attacks, ignorance and arrogance of John Brown.
I'm disappointed the Scott Ritter was not on the show as a role model for this
disappointing "Marine". Brown repeatedly is hoisted by his own pitard with every point he tries to make.
By the way...the bomb-sniffing dogs never allowed to return to the WTC following the unprecedented power-down "upgrade" which presented the opportunity to plant explosives - or the final assembly.
H Saive
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By hsaiveMay 8, 2008 - 10:50pmWho is John Brown?
Please post links to the background of John Brown. Who is he?
He has done a terrible job of supporting the official account of the explosive destructions of WTC 1 & WTC 2.
His default responses are bitter and filled with careless sarcasm. The official account has not provided how the towers were destroyed, so I guess John Brown has a hard task to do.
However, please advise who John Brown is and why the defenders of the official account put someone out so poor in debate to defend what cannot be defended with truth.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By Rick TrumanMay 8, 2008 - 10:52pmI agree
Brown is an embarrassment to the USMC. I can't stand it.
He debates with his "right-brain". If it feels good...say it.
Brown is a hysteric. If he saw significant combat, that could explain his apparent mental illness.
HWS
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By hsaiveMay 8, 2008 - 10:58pmBrown was the only one they could find to defend
If you listened to the beginning of the program, Greene describes the effort to find defenders of the official story. They were able to find only this deluded young soldier.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By OceaNotionMay 9, 2008 - 3:20amJones is a crackpot
This is the moron who's previous claim to scientific fame involved cold fusion, and "proving" that Jesus walked among the Central Americans during his life on earth, a central Mormon myth.
There are a MILLION holes in the government's official story, but using a crackpot LDS physicist with NO academic background in building demo or thermite, and with a history of bogus research is just plain stupid of the part of the 9/11 truth movement.
C'mon, get your act together.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By green libertarianMay 8, 2008 - 10:55pmNice...
OK, you have fired your little popgun of personal smear in the general direction of a distinguished academic. Do you have anything useful to contribute about the validity of his work or conclusions? Want to peer-review his papers?
Didn't think so.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By Maturin42May 8, 2008 - 11:02pmNice try! Jones has found nano-thermate in the WTC debris
Nice try! Jones has found nano-thermate in the WTC debris. This is a fact. His papers are published in peer reviewed journals, one already, and two more coming.
These smear tactics on Jones don't work. What works is an independent investigation that analyzyes more iron spheres in the WTC debris, and salvages whatever steel wasn't destroyed in the cover up by shipping it overseas to be recycled BEFORE it could be investigated.
AN INVESTIGATION IS COMING. A Japanese senator on national TV in Japan, and European Parliament ministers are calling for a new investigation.
These character assasinations on Professor Jones, a hero for sacrificing his career for truth, will not stop the coming 9/11 investigation.
Keep demanding answers!! www.PatriotsQuestion911.org
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By BillDouglasMay 8, 2008 - 11:05pmJones yes and no
Yes 911 could have a better physicist without the "bags" of Steven. However, Dr. Jones the fully qualified to be the expert he is, and he courage is as strong as anyone's (prehaps without his Christian LDS beliefs he would not be as courageous), so I'm quite happy to have his man brave enough to do the hard work, risk his reputation, and risk public scorn. You might want to take more seriously, or find someone better. I assume you know the WTC on 911 was a CD, so the only thing to do is find the best expert to point out the obvious.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By shaun_janoschkaMay 8, 2008 - 11:07pmI agree with Japan
I agree with Japan Parliament member Fujita when he declared the 9/11 movement already has plenty of evidence but now it's time to get out from behind the keyboard and hit the streets.
The 9/11 Truth evidentiary teams are glutted with enough evidence to choke a globalist.
HWS
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By hsaiveMay 8, 2008 - 11:23pm9/11
Mr. Greene... you need to notify your listeners more notice... next time give two weeks... :-)
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By bwinnMay 8, 2008 - 10:56pmHe has announced already this is coming May Thursdays!
How about a month in advance? Is that good enough for you?
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By OceaNotionMay 9, 2008 - 3:27amThis Brown guy is not qualified
This Mr. Brown is a complete moron, and does not deserve to be debating these respected scholars. It's like they are arguing with a child. It is really sad when you have to teach someone the rules of debating before you can have a decent discussion. This guy needs to go back to high school. This is seriously the only person who would come on to defend the governments lies?
Richard, keep covering 9/11 and I'll keep listening.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By DiscordStuMay 8, 2008 - 10:56pmBuilding 7 was a controlled demolition to destroy the evidence!
It should be noted that Silverstein fired the security staff months before 911 and a new crew was hired to install the remote controls for the planes that crashed into the towers and plant the charges to destroy the building and hense the evidence that 911 was an inside job. Nothing hit building seven but it was the control center for the holocaust that killed 3000 of our fellow Americans and never has there been such a crime in the annals of time! They only got away with it because America was sleeping then and they are still sleeping and open for more attacks to come.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By 911bldg7May 8, 2008 - 10:57pmFantastic Show!!!!
Thank you, Thank you, Thank you, Thank you, Thank you, Richard for your courage!!
To Mr. Program Director, please, for the sake of your country, KEEP THIS PROGRAM - 911 TRUTH!!! Without a doubt, the WTC on 911 was a controlled demolition! Only if you are brainwashed/mindcontrolled would you believe the official story... and I DO pity those that believe the commission report, sincerely... truth is not always easy to swallow. Richard, you are so brave, a million thanks. Please note: be careful to include the very real possibility of "exotic" weapons IN ADDITION to thermite, or "standard explosives, namely clean atomic or particle weapons... the critical points are these.. 1) micro sized particles (the building turned to dust, impossible with fire) 2) the dust cloud volume went upward and outward BY MILES with the volume calculated at 10 times the weight of the building (impossible without massive additional energy) 3) evidence destroyed and investigation delayed 4) events planned prior to the event (namely drills including the exact event) 5) motive seen in events after the event (namely the Iraq War and and Patriot Act, profits, and domestic and foreign power.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By shaun_janoschkaMay 8, 2008 - 10:58pm9/11
Thanks for the show... I will tune in next week....
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By bwinnMay 8, 2008 - 10:58pmWaaaay over his head.
Mr. Brown is way over his head. His personal attacks are typical of the defenders of the official conspiracy theory because they eventually get all the way to the bottom of their meagre store of what they accept as facts. After they have denied all the evidence from the other side on the basis that they don't know about that evidence they are left with attacking the messenger. It's a pattern that repeats at every level of this debate and it's discouraging, because it signals the end of rational debate with that particular person.
You are right, Scott Ritter would be an excellent addition to any of these discussions. Tough, because more time is needed for the academics to get their entire case out.
Good job, Richard. Thanks for the venue. Looking forward to next week. Good show, Kevin, Dr. Jones, Richard.
SFL
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By Maturin42May 8, 2008 - 10:59pmGreat show - thanks for exposing the questions surrounding 9/11
Many thanks to Dr. Jones, Richard Gage AIA, Kevin Barrett, Tony Zamboti, and of course Richard Greene. You guys are real patriots.
Mr. Brown - you are either uninformed or COINTELPRO. Nice try, but you guys have been exposed. Give up, now.
130+ Senior Military, Intelligence Service, Law Enforcement, and Government Officials
430+ Engineers and Architects
110+ Pilots and Aviation Professionals
240+ Professors Question 9/11
200+ 9/11 Survivors and Family Members
130+ Artists, Entertainers, and Media Professionals
would take exception to Mr. Brown's disinformation.
http://www.ae911truth.org
http://www.patriotsquestion911.com
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By keneichlerMay 8, 2008 - 11:08pm9/11 truth show
Thank you for the courage to air discussions of this subject. I believe there is nothing more important than for the people of this country to know what really happened on 9/11.
I must say, though that whoever your guest was that was so adamantly refusing to hear anything that dr. Jones was saying was a major detraction from the quality of the program. Dr. Jones is such a well-mannered and polite man, it was hard to hear him attacked by yet another wild animal. Mr. Greene, please find guests with some rudimentary etiquette in the future, and keep them under control when they behave like maniacs.
I believe Scott Ritter does have manners, and the last I heard him speak (january 08) he mentioned al Qaeda and 9/11 in the same sentence as if he believed they actually had something to do with the murderous events.
I will spread the word that you are airing this series.
thanks again, t
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By tomreedMay 8, 2008 - 11:14pmThe key to 9/11 is not a single key... it's a freaking keyring.
To Mr. Silverstein, it can be seen as an elaborate real-estate/ insurance scam and opportunity to make a major financial killing with insurance and to get away with an officially sanctioned mass murder - about as officially sanctioned as is possible without a declaration of war.
To the shadow government - it's a way to get the New Pearl Harbor that touches off a new phase of American imperialism. It's the launch of the Global War on Terror, an all-purpose label that can be slapped on any new stage of the endless war for the remaining resources of the planet.
To Israel - it's an opportunity to engage the big sock puppet across the ocean in their endless war with all their neighbors.
To Bush/Cheney it's a ticket to reelection of the worst president in the history of the presidency -ANY presidency, not just American. That's a real trick, even if the challenge is to just get it close enough for them to steal.
Go ahead. Add to it yourself. Anyone can play.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By Maturin42May 8, 2008 - 11:15pmWTC 1 and 2 demolitions different than WTC-7
Richard Gage points out the differences in demolition methods in his lectures.
I believe that access to planting charges in WTC 1 and 2 presented a significant tactical problem that was resolved by the NT charges and calculated "over-kill" of detonation to make sure the building came down "on the first try."
The inner core was the only (but acceptable) clandestine access availabe which made calculating a successful take-down so uncertain that using a more "measured" too risky. This - combined with the undetermined and untested strength of the towers' construction (very strong, indeed) caused the take-down to necessarily reveal the highly explosive charges at every camera angle.
They probably could have used smaller charges and succeded in creating a more plausible denial....but dared ot take the risk.
HWS
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By hsaiveMay 8, 2008 - 11:16pmGood exposure but
a little much of people talking over one another. I only caught the last twenty minutes. If this were done in a more formal debate style, perhaps the result would be better. It is well established, and, in fact, obvious when pointed out, that the energy required to demolish the towers was far greater than the energy from the aircraft impact, the combustion of jet fuel, and the gravitational potential energy of the buildings.
Richard Green has a lot of guts to host these programs, which must be of great interest to New Yorkers in particular, but also to people the world over.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By PeothreMay 8, 2008 - 11:18pmI second this comment from
I second this comment from Rick Truman.....
"Please advise who John Brown is and why the defenders of the official account put someone out so poor in debate to defend what cannot be defended with truth."
Richard Greene How did you find this John Brown?
Please remember to keep the debates in the future cool calm and deliberate.. in the 9/11 truth movement you have some really smart people with excellent debate skills and the truth of 9/11 behind them... Maybe America does have a chance now.. Thank God for your show today.....
bobby winn
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By bwinnMay 8, 2008 - 11:24pmMust have missed the comment...
One of the major difficulties that the Truth movement runs into, and this show was reportedly no exception, is finding qualified experts willing to go on the air and defend the government version of events. When you think about that, it's a mind-boggling indictment of those who dummy up in public while having the professional expertise to evaluate critically the conflicts between the story and the evidence. For the most part, they are unwilling to go beyond the predigested propaganda that was spread in the two or three days after 9/11.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By Maturin42May 8, 2008 - 11:38pmPoor debater
Brown is not that unusual. His (mental) clone lives here in Gainesvile and argues the same way.
I argued the evidence with this one for weeks. He would always reply with some nonsense from the "Popular Mechanics" tribe.
I ultimately lowered the bar from "proof" to accepting a position of "reasonable doubt" ...and he accepted it.
I thought I had finally gotten through to him but then he admitted that he didn't want me to ask him to be an activist...or hold signs, or anything requiring exposure to the public.
So now I working with the clue that his "pathological denial" is actually a manifistation of some kind of social phobia. After all...this guy has a degree in chemistry and had to take physics as a requirement.
Interesting learn for me....HWS
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By hsaiveMay 8, 2008 - 11:43pmThe truth is plain...
My thanks to Richard Greene and Air America for having the courage to even approach the dirtiest secret of the 21st century. With REAL journalists in such short supply, your organization’s willingness to shine a light into a darkness no one wants to see is laudable. Thank You.
As a person who works with steel & glass in high temperature kilns every day, I can authoritatively say that the “official” report of the events of 9/11/01 are completely unsubstantiated by both science and fact. The idea that a contained jet fuel fire could melt the steel supports of both towers at all, let alone all the way to the basement in such a short period of time is ludicrous. Even had there been a sufficient supply of oxygen available to achieve maximum thermal output, temperatures and time would still have fallen far short of the numbers required to create the kind of results on record.
However, the evidence for the use of controlled demolition at the WTC on 9/11 is voluminous and irrefutable. Any open minded realist can plainly see that the collapse of WTC 7 was the result of a premeditated controlled demolition. Larry Silverstein admitted as much, and look at how much money HE made on his double indemnity insurance policies on two white elephants that had been repeatedly refused demolition permits. The “hollow” core of the towers were actually filled with more than two dozen massive steel support columns. There is no plausible explanation for the simultaneous collapse of these massive I-Beams other than the use of thermite cutting charges. There is a large body of photographic evidence that clearly shows the diagonal thermite cuts with molten edges on a number of the conveniently sized beam pieces being carted away. Thermite residues have been collected from the few remaining pieces of the structure and confirmed by several reputable groups.
No reasonable person can review the evidence and come to any conclusion other than that the conspiracy of 9/11 included far more people than the 18 Saudi hijackers. This wanton act of mass murder on the part of partisan interests is perhaps the greatest crime ever committed in the history of the United States of America. If our democracy is to survive this devilish deception, every patriot, every citizen soldier of our democracy MUST steel themselves to look at the evidence for themselves with open and rational minds. And if what they see there is unthinkable, they must be prepared to think just that.
We must settle for nothing less than justice, or we are lost.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By whitehorseMay 8, 2008 - 11:26pmGreat feedback
Whitehorse, your comments are excellent.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By shaun_janoschkaMay 9, 2008 - 12:49amCross-fire?
The producer could shut off all the mikes except for the guest who's turn it is to speak.
This would go a long way in controlling the "Browns".....gad...take his gun....please!
HWS
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By hsaiveMay 8, 2008 - 11:29pmI only caught the tail end of the discussion, but...
I regret not hearing the entire show as I was only able to hear the last couple of minutes. The pro "official conspiracy theory person" really frustrated me. He was employing the tactic I have seen used by Republican operatives in interview situations. They talk over the other parties, insult them and dominate the time allotment until it is over. They are not interested in getting the truth. They are bullying the other parties in an effort to interfere with a real discussion.
It angered me that there wasn't a producer who could have asserted some control.
Whoever is running the board in the control room should have stepped in. When someone begins to run over the other person, you have the power to turn off their channel temporarily while letting them know the rules of engagement. Simply pot them down with the slider until you establish control. You could have done this and it would have forced the bullying, over talking party to change his behavior.
I think Richard Greene is doing something very important by allowing this forum on his show. I would just tell the board operator/producer to stand by. When one party begins talking over the other in a belligerent and unfair fashion, be ready to take control. This will produce a more fair discussion of any topic.
Thanks to Richard Greene, Dr. Jones, Richard Gage, Kevin Barret and Tony Szamboti for helping to expose the real truth about 911.
By the way, when you get a military person to defend the official story, you have to consider that this person could have actually killed people or sent people to their death because they bought the official story. Their resistance to the truth may be hard to overcome because if they choose to believe that the official account is bogus, they will have to deal with the fact that they may have killed someone, or sent someone to their death for a bogus reason.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By ROBinDALLASMay 8, 2008 - 11:46pmClout! On Demand???
Hey, why isn't this all important 9/11 program available on demand???
I mean Lovely's got an assinine Rush puppet thing going, but something that really matters?
Come On AA! Let's USE the media! Podcast! Promote! Stream!
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By whitehorseMay 9, 2008 - 12:04amIt's about time
Yes we're listening. Keep talking the facts, more will listen. It's about time coverage moved beyond the internet.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By philippisMay 9, 2008 - 12:27am911 - Truth
I do not believe any "official stories" put out by this administration. Something diabolicle occured and I believe that Bush&Co. was instrumental in this tragedy either directly or passively ( gross malfeasance of Office, arrogance, or just plain stupidity) and either of these links should have , at the very least, required Bush's removal from office.
Please keep these 911 Truth Reports coming, We have to get the information out and then , and only then, can we determine the truth of the matter.
Thank you for keeping this vital issue relevant! J.M.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By jkay65May 9, 2008 - 1:17amLogging my attentiveness to the 9/11 Truth show
Although I don't listen "24/7" to Air America radio shows, I believe that I have a pretty good idea of what each of them have to offer. In my opinion, Clout is one of the best, being hosted by R. Greene, able to put across a great deal of caring and compassion on the air.
Tonight's show on 9/11 Truth is of great importance and I am listening to it, even though in my city, Albuquerque, A.A.R. is hosted by a Clear Channel station and we get Clout very late at night indeed. I would have told others but my friends mostly live in Austin, Texas.
In Austin, a liberal community, the A.A.R. radio station inexplicably has become a carrier of canned Tejano music, Spanish oldies. I feel frustrated that A.A.R. is so precariously perched in most markets if at all, favoring increased local radio ownership and less conglomerates.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
By OceaNotionMay 9, 2008 - 2:53amHelp sustain this push for truth
Great show and guests! Please everyone that supports 9/11 truth, do whatever you can in order to promote this series to others, both believers and otherwise. We need to prove that 9/11 truth is mainstream and highly marketable in the media. Hopefully other talk show hosts will catch on and follow suit if the word gets out that this topic is an instant ratings booster which it clearly is. There are millions of us now and collectively as consumers, we have the ultimate power and influence to pave our own destiny by means of creating a strong market demand for the subject. When people ask, "What can I do?", this is what you can do. Please take the initiative to do it.
As far as the actual content of the program. The debunker John Brown appeared to become increasingly volatile and confrontational as the show unfolded. I’m always very suspicious of the motives of anyone who has become so emotionally attached to this subject and to the point of almost unraveling. Why the need to react with such unprovoked anger and sarcasm? Why the great resistance to hearing an opposing viewpoint? It was almost if he actually feared it. I guess the truth can be painful, especially when you're not willing to accept it.
If you had noticed, Brown did very little listening and failed to acknowledge that many of his questions had already been answered. It was as if the cognitive dissonance was setting in and denial became the involuntary defense mechanism. I often see this irrational reaction in many debunkers who want so dearly to be a part of what they falsely perceive as being the status quo. I also feel that one becomes defensive in nature when it’s becoming apparent that he/she is losing the argument. When Brown admitted that he wasn’t even aware of the existence of nano-thermate, it didn’t speak well at all to his professed knowledge of the subject. This seemed to trigger agitation within him and a need to change the subject quickly.
Debunkers tend to cherry pick only the data that satisfies their arguments and ignore or play dumb about countering data. It’s a very un-scientific approach commonly known as junk (or pathological) science where you begin with a conclusion and then work backwards to a supporting hypothesis instead of the other way around, as it should be. Michael Shermer of skeptic magazine is an example of someone who is very guilty of this technique I believe. He often replies to offerings of evidence for which he doesn’t agree with by simply saying, “I haven’t heard of that”. This serves the convenient purpose of preventing him from actually having to confront the information which he probably doesn’t have a logical answer for. Debunkers love to say, “None of the evidence that we’ve looked at supports a conspiracy on 9/11”. That’s probably true, it’s hard to find