| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
blackcat
Validated Poster
Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 6:08 pm Post subject: BBC5 Live in Chaotic, Rambling 9/11 Truth Debunk-Fest |
 |
|
| Quote: | BBC Show Engages In Chaotic, Rambling 9/11 Truth Debunk-Fest
Alex Jones faded out of uninformed "debate" whenever he raised salient points
Steve Watson, Infowars.net, Wednesday, April 30, 2008
A Popular BBC talk radio show yesterday engaged in 45 minutes of uninformed debunking and ridicule of "9/11 conspiracy theories", interspersing questions over the official government version of events on 9/11 with barely intelligible members of the public talking about fake moon landings and Joan of Arc not actually being burned at the stake.
Alex Jones was invited onto the Richard Bacon show on BBC Radio Five Live, the BBC's talk radio station, but could barely get a word in edgewise before being faded out of the discussion and countered by a series of debunkers, two of whom frequently admitted to knowing very little about what was being discussed.
"Everybody stop, I don't know what the hell anyone is talking about" announced presenter Richard Bacon after the first few minutes, a statement which accurately summarized the total lack of awareness the debunkers had of any subject Alex Jones attempted to bring before them.
Alex was the sole "conspiracy theorist" (read: informed individual) up against three other debunkers, including Guy Smith, producer of the BBC Conspiracy Files series, the show responsible for a poorly researched and bias hit piece against the 9/11 truth movement last year.
"It depends, I don't know, I haven't looked into it in real detail" was the stable response of both the studio guests to Alex's detailed rants about events such as the attack on the USS Liberty and the Gulf of Tonkin incident, both now corroborated as staged false flag events by declassified government documents, as well as the infamous green lighted Operation Northwoods.
Citing the Iran-Contra affair and the Watergate scandal, one debunker stated "They were found out, people were punished, why is this not happening with the 9/11 conspiracy?" seemingly unaware of the huge progress the 9/11 truth movement has made over the past six years and the public statements of support for the movement from hundreds of engineers, scholars and former government and intelligence officials.
"No evidence has been given for 9/11" the debunker continued, while Alex, trying to counter and give evidence of a cover up, was faded out.
The two debunkers are clearly unaware of the basic fact that there would not have even been a 9/11 Commission, totally lacking though it was, had it not been for activists demanding explanations to unanswered questions.
The conversation eventually moved on to WTC building 7 after one surprisingly intelligible caller broached the subject.
After Guy Smith announced that the BBC would soon be releasing a new documentary devoted to Building 7, presumably given that they completely omitted the topic in their last hit piece, a strange new debunker was introduced as "Ronald Wick".
Mr Wick was introduced as a broadcaster in New York and "a well known 9/11 conspiracy theory debunker", yet having written about the 9/11 truth movement and the attacks for over six years, I have never heard of the man, neither has Prisonplanet editor Paul Watson and neither has Alex Jones. Furthermore, a Google search produces no related results. Seemingly then "Ronald Wick" is either not a "very well known" debunker or is hiding behind a pseudonym.
"Wick" attempted to counter revelations that the BBC had reported the collapse of building 7 a full 26 minutes before it's actual fall by suggesting that everyone had expected the building to collapse from fire damage for hours before it did. This claim does not hold up when put into context with statements from firefighters, reporters and first responders on the ground who have stated that they had to literally run for their lives when a 20 second demolition countdown began and the building suddenly fell.
"Wick" and the other debunkers also attempted to suggest we believe the BBC were somehow "in on the conspiracy" and were specifically approached and fed with a "script of events" on 9/11 because, according to Guy Smith, laughable though this opinion is, it is the media outlet most opposed to George W. Bush.
While others within the truth movement may have postulated this, we have not stated we believe this to be the case. Given that CNN, AP wires and radio stations were also reporting the collapse before it occurred, it is clear the BBC were not "hand picked" to read a script, by whoever carried out the attacks. Furthermore, the fact that BBC anchor Phil Hayton was recently shocked to learn of the pre-collapse reports, also suggests a more general announcement of the building's impending destruction was announced.
"Wick" also accused Alex Jones of lying when he said that firefighters had told people to get back because they building was going to be "brought down". Multiple witnesses have attested to this, and we even have video of firefighters stating "get back, the building is about to blow up". NIST has even promised to examine the claims of explosives in 7 in it's official report, finally due out this summer.
As Alex was faded out "Wick" stated "you are not telling the truth, the firemen did not say it was being brought down in a controlled demolition, that is an outright falsehood" and accused Alex of saying that firefighters were complicit in the destruction of the world trade center buildings, a claim that we have never made and is clearly preposterous given the loss of life suffered amongst fire crews in the towers.
As Alex was again faded down, the debunkers contradicted their earlier assertions that fire caused the collapse of 7, by suggesting that there was critical damage from the falling debris of the towers which gouged out huge chunks of the building causing it to later collapse straight down into it's own footprint in 6 seconds, a contention that is neither supported by witness statement, nor substantial photographic evidence nor by any official statement or report.
"Wick" also weakly attempted to frame the debate on the fact that 1800 degree molten steel was found under all three collapsed buildings. Given that it is undeniable that Molten steel was present, "Wick" attempted to shift the focus of the issue by stating that explosives could not cause heat strong enough to cause molten steel and that you can "place your hand" on an area where a shape charge has been set off.
According to engineering and physics experts, including former Brigham Young professor Steven Jones, buildings not destroyed by explosives would have insufficient directed energy to produce the large quantities of melted metal that was discovered. The "flowing" molten steel was found five days after the collapse, on Sept. 16, when the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) used an Airborne Visible/Infrared Imaging Spectrometer (AVIRIS) to locate and measure the site’s hot spots.
The USGS Spectroscopy Lab produced images which showed dense thermal hot spots days and weeks after the attacks. ABC News reported that, "the temperature at the core of "the pile," is near 2000 degrees Fahrenheit, according to fire officials, who add that the fires are too deep for firefighters to get to."
It requires temperatures of at least 2800 degrees fahrenheit to melt steel. Steel supports were "partly evaporated," but it would require temperatures near 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit to evaporate steel. The fires in Building 7, fueled by office furniture and small amounts of debris alone could not have reached temperatures anywhere close to this, indicating that extra explosive and/or reactionary forces were responsible for the molten steel and raging underground fires.
Any rational person who listened to this chaotic exchange will have gone away wanting to hear more from Alex Jones, who draws his knowledge and discussion points from the study of history, declassified government archives, expert analysis and mainstream reports, rather than take heed from the total lack of any insight whatsoever from the two studio guests and the strange accusatory tone and debate framing of the mysterious "Mr Wick". |
LISTEN TO THE FULL BBC "DEBATE" HERE
_________________
"The conflict between corporations and activists is that of narcolepsy versus remembrance. The corporations have money, power and influence. Our sole influence is public outrage. Extract from "Cloud Atlas (page 125) by David Mitchell. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Alexander
Moderate Poster
Joined: 25 Nov 2007
Posts: 143
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 8:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The debunker's name is Ronald Wieck i believe. He's gone up against the Loose Change boys and NY 911Truth person Les Jamieson before and done a pretty good job against them. He's a repulsive character but quite effective imo. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jack
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Dec 2006
Posts: 115
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 9:35 pm Post subject: Alex Jones on BBC5live with Richard Bacon |
|
|
http://prisonplanet.com/audio/300408bbc.mp3
It's true that Alex did pretty well on the show but this article is rubbish. It obsesses over "the mysterious 'Mr Wick'" when the guy is a known 9/11 "debunker" - his name is Ronald Wieck, he hosted a debate between the Loose Change guys and Mark Roberts on his TV show, Hardfire, and he writes for the American Thinker. Ugh, sloppy!
If someone knows a better email address to contact the prisonplanet gang at than the ones on the site, could they alert them of this error? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TonyGosling
Editor
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 18335
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
karlos
Validated Poster
Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 2516
Location: london
|
| Posted: Thu May 01, 2008 1:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
The exchange did show the typical BBC bias.
however, the main points about WTC7 were made so hopefully some listeners will have been influenced positively.
Alex Jones does tend to rant though and that may not translate to British audiences.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jayhawk
Moderate Poster
Joined: 28 Mar 2006
Posts: 188
|
| Posted: Thu May 01, 2008 8:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I agree about Alex Jones, he does himself no favours. He has it all at his fingertips but if you aren't aware of the facts it's all too much to take in. What we need is someone like DRG who is more cool and collected. Having said that, James Whale usually gives Alex a fair shot - his problem here was not being on the spot, and as he pointed out, having them ganging up didn't help. To be fair on Richard Bacon he did repeatedly pull up the other guy who had to admit the Gulf of Tonkin was fact, but seemed very keen to get off that subject! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blackcat
Validated Poster
Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376
|
| Posted: Thu May 01, 2008 8:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
The great "conspiracy debunker" let all the listeners know that he believed Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in murdering JFK. Case solved. Obviously quite the expert - we have no chance against geniuses like him.
_________________
"The conflict between corporations and activists is that of narcolepsy versus remembrance. The corporations have money, power and influence. Our sole influence is public outrage. Extract from "Cloud Atlas (page 125) by David Mitchell. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
IanFantom
Validated Poster
Joined: 31 Jan 2007
Posts: 296
Location: Halifax, West Yorkshire
|
| Posted: Thu May 01, 2008 9:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Compared with what we're used to, this is brilliant.
... then they attack you ... [Gandhi]
It will have got people thinking, at least. If people who would otherwise ignore the whole issue now become antagonistic, then that's progress, because sooner or later they will realise they have to justify what they're saying.
We can expect phone-ins to have all sorts of crackpots and stooges phoning in.
As regards style, I think it takes all types. Alex Jones got onto the programme and managed to make his points. Great stuff, Alex!
Regards, Ian. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SHERITON HOTEL
Moderate Poster
Joined: 18 Jun 2006
Posts: 988
|
| Posted: Fri May 02, 2008 12:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I don't know, maybe Richard Bacon is fertile ground for planting the truth?!? he seemed genuinely ignorant of the 'Bay of Tonkin' false flag pretext for the US's intervention in Vietnam '64 and repeatedly grilled the shills to the effect 'wouldn't this, if true, prove they were capable of anything?' |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SHERITON HOTEL
Moderate Poster
Joined: 18 Jun 2006
Posts: 988
|
| Posted: Fri May 02, 2008 2:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| What was that shill type saying about the BBC 9/11 tapes 'reappearing'? What's the story? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jomper
Validated Poster
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 99
|
| Posted: Fri May 02, 2008 5:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This article is terrible. It's a good example of how 'conspiracy theorists' can become hysterical.
For example:
| Quote: | | After Guy Smith announced that the BBC would soon be releasing a new documentary devoted to Building 7, presumably given that they completely omitted the topic in their last hit piece |
This is entirely wrong. As anyone who saw that piece of television would know, Guy Smith did consider Building 7, and produced a laughably arrogant and terribly young man (he looked about 17) to make the 'official case', such as it is, courtesy of Popular Mechanics.
Guy Smith's original 9/11 conspiracy programme was truly pathetic in purely journalistic terms, but it didn't actually overlook the question of WTC7, and it's quite stupid to say it did. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TonyGosling
Editor
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 18335
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PaulStott
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 326
Location: All Power To The People, No More Power To The Pigs
|
| Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 9:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TonyGosling wrote: | The fact is that many British journalists have now woken up to the fact that 9/11 was an inside job war provocation. They know they were had and they're annoyed.
|
Some names please to illustrate your claim?
_________________
http://paulstott.typepad.com/911cultwatch/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blackcat
Validated Poster
Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376
|
| Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 11:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Fred Smith, Joe Bloggs, Lady Penelope, Little Red Riding Hood and Goldilocks just for starters. Borrowing your kind of argument I know but it keeps the nonsense flowing that passes for debate among "critics".
_________________
"The conflict between corporations and activists is that of narcolepsy versus remembrance. The corporations have money, power and influence. Our sole influence is public outrage. Extract from "Cloud Atlas (page 125) by David Mitchell. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
