gray@theherald.com.au

Kind regards John

Very proud of this article published in my hometown newspaper. In my discussions with Greg Ray, I’ve found him to be intelligent and informed. He is a highly respected journalist and author. His current book is a big hit - “Newcastle: The Missing Years” - a collection of historically significant photographs combined with Greg’s narrative.

Hopefully the following comments from Greg will make my life in Newcastle a little bit easier:

“A decade after the September 11 attacks it still isn’t fashionable in many circles to draw attention to the defects in the official account of circumstances surrounding the disaster. That’s a shame, because this event has had immense consequences … I’ve read volumes on this topic since I last expressed some doubts about the official story (and copped it from people who insisted the official story must be true).”

Will be shouting Greg a beer or two and will thank him sincerely for this wonderful article.

First, it's encouraging to see a journalist expressing criticism of the OCT, and an MSM for publishing views like this.

However, it diminishes Ray's cred that his criticism includes some easily debunked claims:

"at least some of whose names weren’t even on the passenger lists of the planes they allegedly hijacked"

Victim's lists published by media left those named as hijackers off; copies of passenger lists and manifests have been made public that include these names: http://arabesque911.blogspot.com/2008/08/911-misinformation-flight-passenger.html Someone might claim they're fake, or there's no evidence they're authentic; it's fine to be skeptical, but being skeptical isn't evidence; there's no evidence they're fake, or not authentic

"The explanation was that burning jet fuel melted the structural steel – including the colossal columns that ran up the middle of the buildings –and lower floors gave way as higher ones crashed onto them."

This was a claim made early on by some media, prior to any investigation, that the jet fuel fires had melted steel. It is not a claim made by any official investigation. It is, however, a valid question as to why video shows molten metal, that can't be aluminum, pouring out of the side of the WTC prior to collapse; why numerous witnesses observed molten STEEL in the WTC wreckage, and why there's evidence of molten iron documented in the FEMA, USGS and RJ Lee reports - when the official reports acknowledge the fires didn't get hot enough to melt steel.

"Scores of people said on the day of the disaster that they heard explosions in the lower parts of the building."

In the LOWER PARTS? SCORES? Is there anyone other than Willie Rodriguez who says this? Yes, there are lots of people, incl. irst responders are on record reporting explosions, and explosive sounds have been captured on some video.

There are many hundreds of reasons to doubt the OCT. A great deal of evidence points to a limited number of possible perpetrators, and even specific people, none of whom are acknowledged by the Establishment as having links to Al Qaeda: http://www.historycommons.org/project.jsp?project=911_project

There are probably just as many bogus claims that have been made about 9/11, that provide fish for the debunkers to shoot in a barrel, and make unwary 9/11 skeptics look foolish in the eyes of the public.