| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Annie
9/11 Truth Organiser
Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Posts: 830
Location: London
|
 Posted: Sat Jun 23, 2007 5:52 pm Post subject: Greg Palast attacked for 9/11 slur |
 |
|
An interesting development about Greg Palast:
http://warofthewords.co.uk/Joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=vi ew&id=136&Itemid=28
Also, this is a very good new site - check it out.
_________________
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing - Edmund Burke.
Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem Americanam appellant - Tacitus Redactus. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Wokeman
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 881
Location: Woking, Surrey, UK
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 23, 2007 6:43 pm Post subject: Roosting |
|
|
Annie,
If Greg Palast has worked for the Beeb, eventually, I think of chickens and roosting. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mediadisbeliever
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Posts: 128
Location: North Humberside
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 23, 2007 8:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for the link to the INN interview Annie...I wonder if Palast is a shill. He provides no reasonable explanation for the collapse of the towers himself, but if he isn't a shill he may just wish to save his job with the BBC, and not wish to harm potential sales of his new book.
Interestingly, if we rule out control demolitions and aircraft collisions being responsible for the collapses what are we left with as the cause! Perhaps he is subtly opening-up the case for further scientific challenges to the official story and Dr Jone's hypothesis.
If this is the case then what other scientific theory of sound hypothesis could explain it? (just thinking aloud)
Interesting!
Cheers
Ian |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mediadisbeliever
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Posts: 128
Location: North Humberside
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 23, 2007 8:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for the link to the INN interview Annie...I wonder if Palast is a shill. He provides no reasonable explanation for the collapse of the towers himself, but if he isn't a shill he may just wish to save his job with the BBC, and not wish to harm potential sales of his new book.
Interestingly, if we rule out control demolitions and aircraft collisions being responsible for the collapses what are we left with as the cause! Perhaps he is subtly opening-up the case for further scientific challenges to the official story and Dr Jone's hypothesis.
If this is the case then what other scientific theory of sound hypothesis could explain it? (just thinking aloud)
Interesting!
Cheers
Ian |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zabooka
Moderate Poster
Joined: 03 Dec 2006
Posts: 446
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 23, 2007 9:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lets not start name calling again.
Remember George Galloway was a SHILL or DYSINFO AGENT by some accounts here, before William went onto his show and educated him on the reality of our movement. Name-calling really does injustice. Its simplistic and does not explain anything. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zabooka
Moderate Poster
Joined: 03 Dec 2006
Posts: 446
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 23, 2007 9:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
haha! If no one has bothered to follow Annie's link in the original post here, ... well DO READ IT!
http://warofthewords.co.uk/Joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=vi ew&id=136&Itemid=28
| Quote: | Retired Attorney Ron Rattner has launched a scathing attack through an open letter demanding that Greg Palast retract what Mr Rattner refers to as "gratuitously malicious dispargements" against Professor Stephen Jones on INN TV.
Greg Palast, a self-styled "Sam Shady" type of journalist has failed to respond to Dr Jones and numerous others in their demands for him to make a public retraction or explain his allegations.
Pelast, who is not a known physicist (having a degree in financial studies) called into question Professor Jones (a Ph.D. in Physics) hypothesis of "controlled demolition" whilst labelling him as a "fraud" and a "fruitcake".
Dear Greg Palast:
I have not yet had the courtesy of your response to my June 6, 2007, letter (below), requesting you to reconsider and retract your outrageous and gratuitously malicious INN TV public disparagements of Dr. Steven E. Jones.
After proclaiming that "zero evidence" supported Dr. Jones' 9/11 'controlled demolition' hypothesis, you publicly called him a "fruitcake" and a "fraud" and, thereupon, you histrionically dared him to respond to your bizarre performance. But, you completely failed to offer any explanation, or to cite any credible evidence, supporting your assertions.
Please do so by responding to my letter (below) without further undue delay.
Your erstwhile admirer,
Ron Rattner, retired attorney
San Francisco
June 6, 2007
Dear Greg Palast:
Until recently, you were one of my aggressive progressive ‘heroes’, because of your important investigative reporting on election fraud and other issues crucial to US democracy. But on May 10, 2007, in an INN TV interview, you made statements which have greatly disturbed and disillusioned me about your journalistic integrity and credibility. I recently watched the interview on YouTube at: http://youtube.com/watch?v=r2oFTiEpIBQ
Responding to direct questions by INN host Lenny Charles about possible controlled demolition of World Trade Center Building 7 on 9/11, you contradictorily first disclaimed any relevant expertise and then emphatically proclaimed that you and your BBC team had found “zero evidence” and "ruled out” any possibility of 9/11 “controlled demolition", asserting that it “just didn’t happen”.
Whereupon, you gratuitously and maliciously defamed distinguished physicist Dr. Steven E. Jones, who has done important scientific research on controlled demolition, calling him a “fruitcake” and a “complete and utter fraud”. Apparently, you intended to professionally discredit Dr. Jones and his work, and thereby to ingratiate yourself with those who have been systematically censoring both you and Dr. Jones in the US corporate media.
In my opinion, your emphatic proclamation that “zero evidence” supports the “controlled demolition” hypothesis, was a knowing and calculated lie. But most disturbing to me was your gratuitously outrageous and malicious defamation of Professor Jones as an alleged “fruit cake” and “complete and utter fraud”.
Professor Jones is a distinguished, patriotic, and credible scientist citing irrefutable laws of physics, hard evidence, significant laboratory test results, and eye witness testimonies about the unprecedented destruction of three WTC steel skyscrapers on 9/11.
As you well know, his work – like yours – has been acknowledged as important by Project Censored and its distinguished panel of judges.
He is not - and can not be - discredited by those like you who cite no facts disputing him, only unsupported and insupportable opinions, negative innuendos, and totally unfounded ad hominem attacks. That’s vicious defamation, not science. That’s how Galileo was “discredited”. Like Galileo, Dr. Jones has been defamed, not “discredited”.
The manner in which you gratuitously attacked Professor Jones tells us much more about your lack of integrity, than about the validity of his scientific research. Apparently, in the tradition of Fox News, you would ‘crucify’ a 9/11 truth-teller rather than concede the truth of his message – the truth which can set us free from ignorance and oppression.
What Dr. Jones says about 9/11 must be carefully considered, not censored or mindlessly ridiculed by those who 'protesteth too much'. I urge that you reconsider and retract your disparagements of Dr. Jones, and that you cover the 9/11 issue, with facts, not attacks.
Your erstwhile admirer,
Ron Rattner, retired attorney
San Francisco
Below is Professor Jones own response to Greg Palast found >>here<<
Dear Mr. Palast,
On May 10, 2007, in an INN TV interview, you made statements which were blatantly defamatory when you called me, by name, a "complete and utter fraud" and a "fruitcake." I demand either a retraction or substantiation of your accusations -- publicly.
A lawyer friend affirms that your statements, available here: http://youtube.com/watch?v=r2oFTiEpIBQ , constitute "malicious defamation."
You taunted: "Mr. Jones, come at me!"
Here I am.
I am ready to respond to your specific objections to my papers, or issues you wish to raise which support the "official story" of the Bush/Cheney administration, after you have first verified that you have actually read what I have written on the subject of controlled demolition at the World Trade Center:
http://journalof911studies.com/volume/200704/JonesWTC911SciMethod.pdf
http://journalof911studies.com/volume/200609/Why_Indeed_Did_the_WTC_Bu il...
I will respond then to your statements which support the Bush/Cheney or "official story" for 9/11 events, and I will assure that the exchange will be made public. I propose publication of our exchange in the letters section of the Journalof911Studies.com, but you may choose another venue which is open to the public. Be sure to include your explanation of the iron-aluminum-rich microspheres which I discovered in the WTC dust if your explanation differs from mine, as well as the rapid straight-down collapse of WTC 7.
Again, my lawyer friend describes your public remarks on INN on May 10, 2007, as "malicious defamation" and I think he is correct. Do you? You called me a "complete and utter fraud" and a "fruitcake." I maintain that I am of sound mind and not a fraud. However, I invite you to present your substantiation of these claims -- or retract your egregious defamations.
Sincerely,
Steven E. Jones, Ph.D.
PS -- If you do not respond by July 25, 2007, I will consider other options. Thank you. |
http://warofthewords.co.uk/Joomla/index.php?option=com_content&ta sk=view&id=136&Itemid=28 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fish5133
Site Admin
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 2568
Location: One breath from Glory
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 12:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Listen to the Palast interview from about 15mins in. (just to save your time) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cruise4
Validated Poster
Joined: 12 May 2007
Posts: 292
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 5:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
This is strange to me and deserves an explanation.
I can only think that embracing 911 truth might impair his other work and he knows there's plenty of others taking the flak on this one.
But I have no idea. Odd. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rodin
Validated Poster
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 5:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Palast is controlled opposition. Plays for the same team as Monbiot etc.
_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cruise4
Validated Poster
Joined: 12 May 2007
Posts: 292
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 5:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Could it be a deliberate attempt to 'publicly out' the Jones info in court? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anthony Lawson
Validated Poster
Joined: 20 Feb 2007
Posts: 370
Location: Phuket, Thailand
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 6:19 am Post subject: Ask Palast, Directly |
|
|
Ask Palast
It would be a good idea for everyone who respects the work of Steven E. Jones to write to Greg Palast asking for an explanation for his unwarranted attack on someone who so obviously believes in what he says and writes.
Whether or not his findings are correct, to call someone like Professor Jones a fruitcake and a fraud is unforgivable.
http://www.gregpalast.com/contact/
_________________
The truth won't set you free, but identifying the liars could help make the world a better place. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mediadisbeliever
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Posts: 128
Location: North Humberside
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 7:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | haha! If no one has bothered to follow Annie's link in the original post here, ... well DO READ IT! |
I for one have read it and I still stick to what I have said although I may have falsely stated that Palast is still working for the Beeb.
Ian |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TonyGosling
Editor
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 18335
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
outsider
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 30 Jul 2006
Posts: 6060
Location: East London
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 25, 2007 9:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TonyGosling wrote: | I always initially suspect people who go to court to silence writers' views. Not surte about this though... S Jones seems a terriffic guy who's been on the wrong end of far too much flak. I may be wrong.
| rodin wrote: | | Palast is controlled opposition. Plays for the same team as Monbiot etc. |
No Rodin - Neither are controlled - both are rightly sceptical about the 9/11 Truth movement AND the official story but by no means pro NWO. They do about as much as you can within the mainstream - I would imagine George Monbiot is regretting his 9/11 Truth hit piece having been conned into writing it.
Assume nothing! |
When a writer's 'views' include calling somebody a 'fraud' and a 'fruitcake' they can expect to be brought to account in the courts. Remember, Stephen Jonees has given him an opportunity to apologise or explain why he says what he does. I personally hope Greg Palast does not apologise. The court hearing would be good publicity. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rodin
Validated Poster
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 25, 2007 9:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TonyGosling wrote: | I always initially suspect people who go to court to silence writers' views. Not surte about this though... S Jones seems a terriffic guy who's been on the wrong end of far too much flak. I may be wrong.
| rodin wrote: | | Palast is controlled opposition. Plays for the same team as Monbiot etc. |
No Rodin - Neither are controlled - both are rightly sceptical about the 9/11 Truth movement AND the official story but by no means pro NWO. They do about as much as you can within the mainstream - I would imagine George Monbiot is regretting his 9/11 Truth hit piece having been conned into writing it.
Assume nothing! |
OK - but don't assume they are NOT controlled either. Remember - name calling is a troll trait.
_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
