Richard Gage debate on "The Agenda" with Steve Pakin
Phaedrus Fri, 05/13/2011 - 6:48pm
Richard Gage debate on "The Agenda" with Steve Pakin, Tune In Today (Friday
May 13, 8:00 PM and 11:00 PM): AE911Truth Appears on TVO, Canada’s Answer
to PBS Panel: Jonathan Kay vs. Richard Gage, AIA; Barrie Zwicker; Paul
Zarembka
Tune In Today (Friday May 13, 8:00 PM and 11:00 PM): AE911Truth Appears on
TVO, Canada’s Answer to PBS Panel: Jonathan Kay vs. Richard Gage, AIA;
Barrie Zwicker; Paul Zarembka
- Phaedrus's blog
- Login to post comments
Link?
wrong link? it takes me to my hotmail account.
dtg
I can't believe they still
I can't believe they still refer to the popular mechanics book. The NIST reports themselves dismissed much of what is in them, especially WTC7, Each time I hear someone say we don't read the reports is proof to me they haven't read the reports themselves. If they had, they too would know how many falsehoods and speculation is in it.
Kay wins in this debate in my eyes because he keeps the debate off the irrefutable facts. Facts like the ramifications of free fall, the computer simulations that fail to account for a 2.25 sec, 105ft, free fall.The fact that no steel was tested from WTC7 by NIST and not addressing the FEMA Appendix C findings. The fact that NIST conducted NO experiments in the WTC7 study and experiments conducted in the Twin Tower reports do not support their conclusions.
Kay says that 100's workers couldn't have drilled the holes and set the changes without being seen but that is just as crazy as thinking that 8 stories of concrete and steel can just disappear or the laws of physics.being broken. The key to winning these debates is to stick to irrefutable facts and force them the acknowledge the ramifications. Don't allow them to ignore the facts. These two presentations by Kevin Ryan are great resources exposing the many falsehoods, exaggerations, and bare assertions made by the NIST reports.
Bush Science: A new standard in deception:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5251598947014396846#
Kevin Ryan in Hartford:
Peace all
dtg
Debate
National Post Managing Editor - Author- Jonathan Kay "Among the Truthers"
Author, Media Critic- Barry Zwicker
Architect and Engineers founder AIA Richard Gage
Publisher Paul Zarembka
16 minutes - 13 seconds - B.S POLLS
B.S. Poll conducted says The numbers of people who doubt the official 9/11 story is shrinking- Most Believe the official Story!
who conducted these no name polls I ask myself?
Here is a poll that does have a name of integrity added to it- An Ipsos Reid poll published in the National Post ( Kay's Newspaper) tells us that only 32% of Canadian journalists and only 25% of our national politicians are regarded as “highly trustworthy”- I trust Kay falls out of the grace referred to as " Highly Trustworthy" few...
My response
My response to "The Agenda" blog page.
I would be impressed if Mr Kay actually discreditted the evidence Mr Gage claims to have. Instead all he did was continually attempt to discredit the messengers. And in the process came across looking like a propagandist agent attempting to divert the attention of other people who might have questions. Or make them reluctant to do their own investigating for fear of being tarred with the same "conspiracy theorist" brush.
I can imagine other authoritarian governments throughout history using these techniques to cover up such evils as, for instance, concentration camps? torture? false flag operations? or government overthrows? maybe? Don't deal with the evidence, discredit the messenger.
On the other hand, Barrie Zwicker didn't do himself or his cause any favors by whining about some petty name calling. He would have been more credible by sticking to the evidence that casts doubt on the "official conspiracy theory."
Meanwhile I remain skeptical based on all the inconsistencies in the official story and Mr Kay has done nothing to change my mind. He may have succeeded in warding off a few people who are more interested in their reputation or self image than in actually doing some serious investigation into the actual evidence, of which there is an incredible amount available.
That was good entertainment
In a debate, I could not take Mister Kay positions so serious. It would be also entertaining. For example, I would give him right, that my girl friend would be happy, if I got rid of my 911-internet-"addiction".
Therefore in the debate the "truthers" should have shown more their sense of humor. For example, it was funny as Paul Zarembka was asked whether he believes, that JFK was killed. His answer: "This name does not tell me anything." I do not know, whether he meant it serious or as a joke, but that was the best moment.
What was also very funny as Mister Kay said, among the "truthers" were almost just males. The answer should have been: "From a male person, i am not going to do not answer this accusation."
What is a crank? lol.