Bad news: It blanketed North America from 1 a.m. to 3 a.m. Mountain Time.
KOA radio in Denver spreads its night signal over 30 states plus most of Canada and Mexico. So when Rick Barber interviewed me Wednesday, there were more than a few night owls listening.
Unlike Mike Pintek, the other mega-station interviewer I faced recently, Rick Barber asked good questions and actually listened to what I had to say. Once again, the call-ins were overwhelmingly pro-9/11-truth or leaning in that direction. Memo to Hannity: If “most people think I’m a nut,” how come almost all the callers to these huge AM radio stations agree with me?
Now, thanks to the magic of Ed Rynearson’s editing, you can hear the whole interview, minus commercials, at any time of the day or night that suits you!
http://radiodujour.wordpress.com/2009/08/12/questioning-the-big-lie/
Ed has also archived my interview with Craig Ranke of Citizen Investigation Team, whose research casts severe doubt on the government’s story of what happened at the Pentagon on 9/11. Craig, Aldo and CIT have been targeted by the same wrecking crew of cyber-stalkers who (individually and/or collectively) have tormented me, William Rodriguez, Rob Balsamo, Carol Brouillet, Webster Tarpley, Sofia, Dr. Steven Jones, Ellen Mariani, and other competent and accomplished voices of 9/11 truth. Stay tuned to this blog for a detailed discussion of cyber-stalking, the bane of the 9/11 truth movement. (I will be naming names…at least when the culprits have real names, rather than absurd pseudonyms like “Arabesque” and “Col. Sparks”!) Now the same cyber-stalkers are harassing Peter Dale Scott and myself, and presumably also David Ray Griffin and Richard Gage, because we have publicly endorsed the hard investigative work, if not necessarily all of the conclusions, of CIT.
Through extremely hard work and exacting research, CIT has made a strong case that the large aircraft that witnesses assumed struck the Pentagon on 9/11 flew over the building rather than hitting it. By establishing a flight path on the north side of the Citgo station, CIT has shown that evidence supporting the official story’s flight path to the south of the Citgo station–including downed lightpoles and the ridiculous C-ring hole–was probably manufactured. There would have been no need to manufacture this evidence if a large plane actually hit the building.
The wreckers are so desperate to support the government’s version of Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon that they have been sending insulting emails to Peter Dale Scott! Peter’s response:
This is a form letter in response to the flood of letters that has been showered on me by those who do not like CIT.
I have not endorsed the flyover theory for Flight 77, and I do not personally believe it. All I endorsed was their assemblage of witnesses who said that Flight 77 approached the Pentagon on the north side of the Pike. I do not draw the conclusions from their testimony that CIT does. But I believe that the testimony needs to be seriously considered by those trying to find out what actually happened.
I must say that I am disappointed by number of ad hominem attacks I have received. I do not believe one incoming letter so far has dealt with the substance of what the Turnpike witnesses claimed and I endorsed.
In his famous American University speech of June 1963, John F. Kennedy famously said, “And we are all mortal.” I would add, “And we are all fallible.” For this reason I would ask everyone in the 9/11 truth movement to focus their energies on the substance of what happened on 9/11, and not discredit the truth movement by wanton attacks on each other.
Sincerely,
Peter Dale Scott
Hear, hear! And lest it be said that I am not being fair and balanced, I commend recent radio guest Frank Legge’s excellent article on the topic of what may or may not have hit the Pentagon. I do think there are some problems with the article, but overall it is an excellent contribution to the discussion. Frank Legge’s article, and his subsequent email dialogue with key people who took issue with parts of it, is a model of the kind of reasoned discussion we need.
This comment has been removed by the author.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Kevin, do you construe posting comments on your blog as cyber-stalking?
That you are still promoting William Rodriguez as a "competent and accomplished [voice] of 9/11 Truth" shows that you live in a fantasy world. If you'd had the guts to debate me about him some time in the almost two years I've been trying to get you to debate me about him (or if you'd even read my emails to you) you'd know how much damage his bogus tales have done to the truth movement.
In your April 2007 press release about Mr. Rodriguez you discounted his claims of fifteen single handed rescues to ten. What algebra was involved there? If fifteen was too many, why would you believe ten? What was your source for the ten? Did you consider, Mr. tenure-class Humanities Guy, the adage Testis Unus, Testis Nullus?
Some of us focus on "the substance of what happened on 9/11" by trying to do away with confusing noise about stuff that clearly did NOT happen on 9/11–nonsense put forth by people like you and Willie and CIT that wastes our time and hurts our credibility.
CIT's entire evidence for a flyover is the testimony of one witness who thinks he saw a 757 make a U-turn in five seconds. Ask your buddy Mr. Balsamo to analyze the G-forces involved, would you?
You are not one of us, Kevin. You are a liar, a bigot, and an advocate of violence. You discredit any cause and any person that associates with you. You have done, and continue to do, enormous damage to the credibility of the truth movement, and your appearances in the media are no cause for celebration.
At last we get a critical opponent who provides factual disparities in popular evidence publicized within the 911 Truth movement.
There are so many contradicting claims in snug.bub's diatribe that it will take considerable colloquy to reach a conclusive determination of who and what is accurate.
Although I believe that bigotry is an arbitrary determination, when was the last time you advocated violence and lied, Mr. Barrett?
WB, if I have made contradictory claims, please point them out. Did you mean contradicting claims, that is, claims contradicting Dr. Barrett's?
I have challenged Dr. Barrett to a wee chat at the sf911truth googlegroup. It appears that the one who likes to talk about his own cojones lacks the guts for dialog and prefers to hide behind a woman's skirts.
Kevin! What a socko interview with Rick Barber (I just listened to the podcast). He's too young to have known my dad who was an engineer (they called them "operators" in those days) at KOA in the 40's — he died in '49) but it did me good to hear the call letters.
But man, you are amazing at reeling off names and facts and numbers. I know of no one else who is quite so meticulous off the cuff. Did you hear the survey that lists 8% of scientists as Republicans? LOL
One thing though: When you mentioned Barksdale as being the sleaziest and most corrupt airbase, he brought up Mena (AR), and you thought he meant Minot, (ND), which is pronounced MY-not, rather than MEE-not.
Mena is where, presumably under the shepherding of Gov. Clinton, the pilots Barry Seale and Eugene Hasenfus lugged out locally made weapons and ammo, and brought back hundreds of tons of cocaine to be sold on the streets of South Central LA, to pay for the weapons, after the Boland amendment cut off funding for the Contras.
I wanted to say to him, "Mena isn't an airbase: it's a little county airport (with too many outbuildings for any purpose but refitting CIA tailnumbers and special installs). Have you ever looked at the photos? Check out http://mena.pamrotella.com/