First hour: Dan Noel of Orange County 9/11 Truth and 911BabyStep.com says what’s truly astonishing about 9/11 is not so much that insiders explosively demolished the whole World Trade Center complex, including three massive skyscrapers, while falsely blaming “hijacked planes”…attacked the Pentagon with bombs and (maybe) a missile, leaving nothing remotely resembling a big plane crash scene…and absurdly claimed that an empty fifteen foot hole in the ground in Shanksville, PA was the site of a fourth “plane crash.”
The really remarkable feature of 9/11, Dan says, is not the crime, but the coverup. How can the media be made to report things that obviously did not happen, even according to their own footage and initial reports? How can such an in-your-face fraud, evident to anyone with eyes, fail to be reported by those whose job is to seek out and report facts? How can 19 innocent young identity-theft victims be falsely convicted by the media, despite the complete lack of evidence that any of them were even on the alleged flights, and abundant evidence that they were not? In short, how could such an insane, obscene media coverup possibly be orchestrated?
Let’s ask Dan!
Second hour: Jim Fetzer discusses issues raised in his latest articles. Questions raised in this interview include:
*Does the term “video fakery” cover all uses of video to create a false impression of events? (If so, pretty much everything on TV is “video fakery.”) Or should it be reserved for allegations that videos were technologically altered by computer animation, editing, and so on?
*How were the extant videos of planes hitting the World Trade Center towers produced?
*Is it reasonable to hypothesize that a classified nanothermitic composite explosive was partially or perhaps even entirely responsible for the explosive demolition of the Twin Towers? If not, what is the best explanation for the residue of unexploded nanothermite chips in the World Trade Center dust?