Michael Berger spoke in St. Louis for the Tea Party event we had there.... he gave a very fine speech.... was expecting to see it on YouTube... but I have yet to see it.

He seems very informed and well spoken... whomever that other guy is... should be a good listen

I was the caller who mentioned www.patriotsquestion911.com and the following points:

Could Bin Laden and Al Qaeda:

1. make NORAD standdown?

2. call U.S. public officials and tell them not to fly on and prior to 9/11?

3. do insider trading traced back to former CIA ties?

4. schedule war games on 9/11?

5. put war plans on Bush's desk on 9/9/01 for invading Afghanistan?

6. conveniently put U.S. troops in the Caspian Basin countries just north of Afghanistan and two aircraft carriers in the Arabian Sea just prior to 9/11?

Who did those things Roger? I don't know! LOL

"A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves" – Edward R. Murrow

He's getting pissed.... Is he waking up right in front of us?..... he didn't want to believe this and he's getting so frustrated.....

They are both listening very intently

This OT is setting himself up..... War Games..... HIT!

"I would plan it so all my people would be out of place...not right there to help ...doing drills"

He just listed all of the OT supporters websites!

Berger did a commendable job of addressing a large number of the issues and questions. One important thing to remember in any debate is to not get pigeonholed into discussing one topic and having the audience get lost in the minutea of the discussion. Reggie and Roger were very much interested in only discussing the WTC collapses, and tried to avoid the issues of foreknowledge, war games, lack of air response, ISI, highjackers, etc. until Mike or knowledgable callers brought them up. These larger issues can really help cement the idea in the audience's mind that this isn't just about the towers, and that their are major discrepanacies in the offiicial theory wherever one cares to look in greater depth.

In general, Roger's response to most of the issues Mike brought up was to simply weave this massive straw man conspiracy argument and that everyone was involved. If Mike brought up a discrepeancy with the flight data recorders, it must meen the FBI and NTSB are in on it. If Mike brings up the shortcomings of the official reports in coming up with an adequante explanation, it must be that those NIST and FEMA boys are on the CIA payroll and on and on. Roger's primary response is to simply dismiss issues through continued threading of this "massive conspiracy" meme that he tries to plant in the audience's mind, and in the case of Reggie, it clearly worked.

When the argument of the consipiracy is then taken up, and Mike mentions that many whistleblowers have come forward who were later fired, Roger's response is simply incompetence + CYA. Roger is clearly forcing his world view (incompetence) of the event to dismiss evidence and muddy the water. It is also interesting that Roger often prefaces his statements with "I think" or "my guess is" or "my explanation" without really using any evidence to back his assertions up. My reading was that Roger had not actually done a large amount of research on this topic, similiar to the Berger-Rothschild debate earlier this year. It is clear that Roger had never even read the NIST/FEMA report (and of course Reggie has not as even he admits he is bad at physics) and so really could not offer any real debate on this point, other than appeal to the thousands of pages and engineers who worked on it. When Mike brought up the fact that in reality a small number of engineers was responsible for the critical sections of the reports, Roger was silent and simply moved on.

In addition, it is crystal clear that Roger had not read the FEMA report ch 5 on WTC7 or else he would not have claimed that it has been explained already and that essentially NIST's report would merely be windowdressing on this conclusion. In reality, FEMA categorically stated that their hypothesis was speculative and not "evidentiary" and that this hypothesis had a low probability of occurence. I don't know about you, but if someone's best explanation has only a low probability of occurence, I would not be inclined to then draw conclusions from that hypothesis. That however is what Roger and many other self professed "debunkers" continue to do.

Overall an excellent debate with a lot of good information. Berger should definately be commended. The only counter hypothesis that could be made (with no evidence by the way) was incompetence and that Berger is a kook because it would have to be a massive conspiracy of 1000s of people in multiple agencies all coordinating together, a ludicrous assertion. In reality if a conspiracy did indeed take place, it would most likely require a small (20 or less) number of people to carry out.

and if you're in there, bring up Sibel Edmonds and ask them to stop talking about CD

/////////////////////
911dvds@gmail.com - $1 DVDs shipped - email for info

My feedback:

You claim that you are undecided. You, however, at the end of your show posit your own conspiracy theory, that it was all "covering your ass," and it was incompetence. This is bunk.

You have discussed the dozens of warnings before the fact. Does that not compute?

You were informed about numerous war games occurring during the attacks (nine at last count by Paul Thompson). These were legally under the control of Dick Cheney, who was given the authority in May 2001 by executive order. Therefore Cheney was in charge during the 9/11 attacks, and the 911 commission lied about it.

If you want to know about 9-11 you need to know about P-Tech, where a company which one of its principal investors was Osama bin Laden's nephew was allowed to design an enterprise software system for the FAA and the Air Force for two years.

Further, you need to understand what was going on in Venice Florida. Get DANIEL HOPSICKER on your show to explain that in detail. The Huffman aviation operation imported drugs from Venezuela, and was busted by DEA for doing so. No one was prosecuted, ie. protected operation.

Mohamed Atta and his compatriots were involved with the covert drug smuggling. Atta's best friend, a German named Wolfgang Bohringer, has claimed to work for the CIA after he was arrested recently for trying to set up another flight school.

Another issue that has no airtime: 5 Mossad agents were arrested videotaping the towers collapsing because of too much celebrating, with "cries of joy and mockery." Reported in Haaretz.

200 Israeli agents were arrested, all of them released, and the entire matter made "classified" by Michael Chertoff.

You have very little understanding of the conspiratorial nature of the US federal government.

Apart from Operation Northwoods, there was Operation Gladio, with CIA dn NATO blowing up train stations across Europe. 73 people were murdered in this terrorism in Bologna. This was completely secret until the Italian Prime Minister disclosed it in 1991.

Iran Contra was a conspiracy. BCCI was a conspiracy. Iraqgate was a conspiracy.

These are the same people in charge! Get a clue, man. You need an extensive education on the real world of covert ops before you spout off.

You keep speculating about things you don't understand. You are using your own faith based belief system to promote the idea that there are no conspiracies in America.

PS

RE: Daniel Pearl

The man who is on trial for allegedly killing him was the man who wired the $100,000 to Mohamed Atta, on orders of the Pakistani ISI chief Lt. General Mahmoud Ahmad.

His name is Omar Saeed Sheikh. He has strong links to the Pakistani ISI. When he was exposed as the "money man" by the FBI, the head of Pakistani intelligence resigned immediately, 10-9-2001.

The CIA and the ISI have a working relationship going back to the Mujahadeen operation in the 1980s, which was the largest and most expensive operation in CIA history.

You shouldn't babble about things you know so little.

______________________________________________
John Doraemi publishes Crimes of the State at:
http://crimesofthestate.blogspot.com/

We always win, well almost always, provided they don't put Fetzer or Reynolds on.

The harder they try to make it go away, and to ridicule, the more they only forward the truth through the three stages of truth.

So it looks like we took the cake on this one too eh? Could someone post the whole debate? Thanks.

I'm guessing by the web site that it will be available in audio and video in the near future. Is this correct?

Thanks.

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

I'd like to see the debate if it's saved somewhere. I thought Michael Berger did a great job with Improbable Collapse. If someone has a link, I'd appreciate it.

thanks