Tenth anniversary - Ian Henshall - why Reinvestigate 9/11?

[mushroom]

A predictably busy programme last night on Talksport, with the staunch OCT defender Collins fighting a vigorous rearguard battle against the advancing tide of scepticism.

Opening with a plea for enlightenment as to why so many people reject the OCT, he threw in smears of such disbelievers, whose lives are 'discombobulated'.

Also smeared were 9/11 Truth researchers who 'make money from books'. Perhaps they are expected to write them for nothing and live on fresh air?

In to bat for 9/11 Truth was Ian Henshall. He gave a good summary of reasons for scepticism, in the limited time available. Interestingly, Collins decided that such a summary is, by its nature, invalid. It's 'sweeping everything together', in order to hoodwink the unwary. Summings-up in courts should therefore be banned, then.

A psychologist contributed thoughts as to why we might disbelieve the OCT. A psychologist, not a former intelligence operative, or a pilot, or a structural engineer, or a mechanical engineer, physicist, chemist...

Alex Jones also contributed. As did David von Kleist.

In response to Collins' opening question, I explained via e-mail that it's awkward questions from structural engineers, architects and physicists which do it for me. I referenced Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth and Richard Gage. This aired; Collins thought that he has interviewed Richard Gage in the past, but he can't be sure. (Does anyone know?) Then came a reference to a statement by 'the guy who designed the Towers': that 'the steel would have softened'.

I have searched for such a statement from (presumably) John Skilling; no luck. And, of course, softening does not cause sudden, symmetrical destruction, molten iron, the microspheres, the nano-thermite...

Along with the theme of 'why do they disbelieve?', another main theme was 'there will always be anomalies in an event of that size'.

I offer, in conclusion: the MSM needs more thorough input on the so-called 'anomalies', plus the distortions and downright lies in the official investigations. It also needs to hear the evidence from the engineers and scientists.

Although it's hard to take the fast-talking whitewash and diversionary psychoanalysis of shows like this, it's still worth making the effort to get the truth out. B******t and spin will be rendered more obvious to the underinformed when there is some 9/11 Truth to lend contrast.

[scienceplease 2]

Nice report.

It was WTC7 that did it for me. When I saw it on the web a cold shiver went through my body: Why hadn't I heard about WTC7 before?! It was so clearly demolished and my disbelief in twin towers explosions surfaced immediately. It was all rigged to blow up...

[TonyGosling]

Errr...
Has anyone got a recording?

[item8]

http://www.talksport.co.uk/radio/the-late-show/listen-again

You will find it somewhere in this link.

[TonyGosling]

yes it's here - UK R911 author Ian Henshall on from the start

http://www.talksport.co.uk/radio/listen-again/episode/45407

[TonyGosling]

[mushroom]

The post-11:30PM on Talksport will be with Galloway; I think he survived the recent reshuffle.

George stated last week that he is 'increasingly persuaded' that the official story re. Building 7 is not reliable. Here's the crack in the dam. Send comments via text, e-mail; try the phone lines.

Remember, he's not a physicist or a structural engineer! - keep it simple.

9/11 Truth booklets, free to download:
www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=ac1039fd00817eecd2db6fb9a8902bda

[Frazzel]

if anyone has recordings of interviews and progs re: 9/11 on the past week please can the y let me know and can i have a copy?
also wanted are any critiques of the 911 progs on the tv. thanks
ta
frazzel

[xmasdale]