9/11 Theorist Clearly Hits A Nerve (Tucker Carlson)

[Gold9472]

9/11 theorist clearly hits a nerve (Tucker Carlson)

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8063563/#051116a

(Gold9472: Wait until the very last sentence, and prepare yourself to be infuriated.)

11/16/2005

We've never had an e-mail response like the one we got after Monday's segment with Stephen Jones, a professor in the department of physics and astronomy at Brigham Young University. Jones believes that the World Trade Center buildings were likely brought down by bombs, rather than by hijacked planes on 9-11. "Use of powerful, pre-positioned explosives in the WTC buildings would imply an 'inside job'," Jones writes in a paper available on the BYU website. "Clearly, we must find out what really caused the WTC skyscrapers to collapse as they did."

When one of my producers first told me about him, my first thought was: Stephen Jones is insane. And he may be. On the other hand, he does have a legitimate job and a responsible-sounding title. He's not living in the park, or writing me letters in crayon. How crazy could he really be? In the interest of open-mindedness, we booked him.

That was probably a mistake. Talking about 9-11 is a lot like discussing someone else's religion: You can do it, but you've got to tread carefully. Most of the time, it's best to stick to platitudes and move on. The subject is still too raw for debate, particularly here in the New York area. (The little town where I live lost six people on September 11th; the town next door lost more than 20.) Professor Jones wasn't up to the job. If you saw last night's show, you know what an uncomfortable six minutes it was. If not, I'll summarize: Jones was almost totally incapable of explaining his own ideas. By the end of the interview I understood no more about his hypothesis than when it began. He was an epically bad guest.

Yet - and here's the interesting part - he seemed to connect with a huge number of viewers. Some who e-mailed were offended that Jones would dare question the official version of 9-11. Some were confused by what he was trying to say. But the overwhelming majority wrote to thank me for my "courage" in putting him on, and to complain that we didn't give him more time to explain the conspiracy.

In other words, a lot of people seem to think it's possible that the U.S. government had a hand in bringing down the World Trade Center buildings.

Ponder that for a second: The U.S. government killed more than 3,000 of its own citizens. For no obvious reason. Then lied about it. Then invaded two other countries, killing thousands of their citizens as punishment for a crime they didn't commit.

If you really thought this - or even considered it a possibility - how could you continue to live here? You couldn't. You'd leave the United States on the next available flight and not come back. You'd have no choice. Continuing to pay taxes to a government capable of something so evil would make you complicit in the crime.

So of course most of the people who wrote to say they think the government might have been behind 9-11 don't really think the government might have been behind 9-11. For whatever reason, they just like to say so. Which as far as I'm concerned makes them phony and irresponsible.

Incidentally, we still have an open mind here on the Situation, even after Professor Stephen Jones. So if evidence ever does arise that the government lied substantially about what happened on September 11th, we'll be on it immediately. I promise.

Keep those e-mails coming to Tucker@msnbc.com

[Gold9472]

"For no obvious reason"... BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!

That is the funniest thing I think I've ever seen.

[Gold9472]

"Then invaded two other countries, killing thousands of their citizens as punishment for a crime they didn't commit."

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Ok, that's the funniest thing I've ever seen.

[Gold9472]

Hmmmmm Tucker... if the U.S. Government were to pull off 9/11, why do you think they would do that? Is it beyond your ability to think, or to speculate what the reasons might be? I mean, it's not like companies like Halliburton, and Bechtel, are making a fortune right now. Oh wait, they are. Look at EVERYTHING that's happened since 9/11. Look at EVERY person, company, etc... who has made BILLIONS because of 9/11. Tucker Carlson is an absolute moron.

[PhilosophyGenius]

"Gold9472: Wait until the very last sentence, and prepare yourself to be infuriated"

The way I see it, it's nothing to pissed off about, but rather it's good news. The guy just said that if he ever saw credible evidence about 9/11 having a govnt connection he would be all over it. Well then give him the evidence!!!! If he's a man of his word he'll have it put on the show.

Could be a groundbreaking moment for 9/11 Truthers since this guy works for mainstream media and is more than willing to talk about 9/11 Truth.

[Gold9472]

Hey PhilosophyGenius... how many emails do you think I've sent out over the last 3 years to media outlets?

[PhilosophyGenius]

I'm sure A Lot!!!!

But this guy has already allowed a 9/11 guy to come on his show and explain himself. And here, and on his show, he says he's open to being convinced, just hasnt heard good enough evidence. And sicne that show doesnt have a lot of viewers (which means less mail), then it's more likely that 9/11 Truth mail will get read and he'll put it on, since he's aready done so. Audience participaction is also a huge factor in the show with the emails and phone calls and such.

[911=inside job]

2?

[911=inside job]

it is a new show...

[PhilosophyGenius]

apparently that show gets crap ratings which is why they moved it back so late

[ThotPolice]

The story will never break in the mainstream, how the hell would america survive if it did?
The heads of media outlets would not want the story to get out because it could easily destroy the economy and their salary.

Sad but true, you should all move up here, it's a little better.

[PhilosophyGenius]

The story will never break in the mainstream, how the hell would america survive if it did?
The heads of media outlets would not want the story to get out because it could easily destroy the economy and their salary.

Sad but true, you should all move up here, it's a little better.

1. Well then how was Carlson or his producer able to book him in the first place?

2. You know you want to move down to America.

[PhilosophyGenius]

Another thing about Carlson, him and his producers seem to read most, if not all of there mail.

[Gold9472]

MSNBC Studios Telephone #: 201 583 5000

I just called, and spoke to Tucker's secretary... when you call, ask for "The Situation".

[Gold9472]

I'm sure A Lot!!!!

But this guy has already allowed a 9/11 guy to come on his show and explain himself. And here, and on his show, he says he's open to being convinced, just hasnt heard good enough evidence. And sicne that show doesnt have a lot of viewers (which means less mail), then it's more likely that 9/11 Truth mail will get read and he'll put it on, since he's aready done so. Audience participaction is also a huge factor in the show with the emails and phone calls and such.

Explain himself? I'm sorry, did you just say that outloud?

[PhilosophyGenius]

Explain himself? I'm sorry, did you just say that outloud?

Well ya he did allow the proffesor to make his case. I know they didn't play the 9/11 footage but that wasnt his fault. I mean if he didn't' want to hear it he wouldn't have been on the show in the first place.

[Gold9472]

9/11 theorist clearly hits a nerve (Tucker Carlson)

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8063563/#051116a

(Gold9472: I've never done this before, but I'm going to "red" the parts of this story that are meant to be misleading, on a subconscious level.)

11/16/2005

We've never had an e-mail response like the one we got after Monday's segment with Stephen Jones, a professor in the department of physics and astronomy at Brigham Young University. Jones believes that the World Trade Center buildings were likely brought down by bombs, rather than by hijacked planes on 9-11. "Use of powerful, pre-positioned explosives in the WTC buildings would imply an 'inside job'," Jones writes in a paper available on the BYU website. "Clearly, we must find out what really caused the WTC skyscrapers to collapse as they did."

When one of my producers first told me about him, my first thought was: Stephen Jones is insane. And he may be. On the other hand, he does have a legitimate job and a responsible-sounding title. He's not living in the park, or writing me letters in crayon. How crazy could he really be? In the interest of open-mindedness, we booked him.

That was probably a mistake. Talking about 9-11 is a lot like discussing someone else's religion: You can do it, but you've got to tread carefully. Most of the time, it's best to stick to platitudes and move on. The subject is still too raw for debate, particularly here in the New York area. (The little town where I live lost six people on September 11th; the town next door lost more than 20.) Professor Jones wasn't up to the job. If you saw last night's show, you know what an uncomfortable six minutes it was. If not, I'll summarize: Jones was almost totally incapable of explaining his own ideas. By the end of the interview I understood no more about his hypothesis than when it began. He was an epically bad guest.

Yet - and here's the interesting part - he seemed to connect with a huge number of viewers. Some who e-mailed were offended that Jones would dare question the official version of 9-11. Some were confused by what he was trying to say. But the overwhelming majority wrote to thank me for my "courage" in putting him on, and to complain that we didn't give him more time to explain the conspiracy.

In other words, a lot of people seem to think it's possible that the U.S. government had a hand in bringing down the World Trade Center buildings.

Ponder that for a second: The U.S. government killed more than 3,000 of its own citizens. For no obvious reason. Then lied about it. Then invaded two other countries, killing thousands of their citizens as punishment for a crime they didn't commit.

If you really thought this - or even considered it a possibility - how could you continue to live here? You couldn't. You'd leave the United States on the next available flight and not come back. You'd have no choice. Continuing to pay taxes to a government capable of something so evil would make you complicit in the crime.

So of course most of the people who wrote to say they think the government might have been behind 9-11 don't really think the government might have been behind 9-11. For whatever reason, they just like to say so. Which as far as I'm concerned makes them phony and irresponsible.

Incidentally, we still have an open mind here on the Situation, even after Professor Stephen Jones. So if evidence ever does arise that the government lied substantially about what happened on September 11th, we'll be on it immediately. I promise.

Keep those e-mails coming to Tucker@msnbc.com

[Gold9472]

Well ya he did allow the proffesor to make his case. I know they didn't play the 9/11 footage but that wasnt his fault. I mean if he didn't' want to hear it he wouldn't have been on the show in the first place.

They DID NOT allow him to make his case. Part of his case has to do with the footage itself. The reason they had him on, in my opinion, was to slander him, and make him look like a fool. Which is one of the reasons they had him on so fast. You think he's the first person to mention the hypothesis of demolition? Of course not. Yet, he was the first "credible" person to do so. So they had to "nip it in the bud" as quickly as possible. Not for people who follow this site, but for the "minions" of people out there who believe EVERYTHING the television tells them. Those are the people we're trying to convince to get off their asses, so those are the people they target.

Now, if someone like me goes to someone, and says, "Hey, did you know that a Physics Professor from BYU thinks the WTC was brought down by pre-planted explosives, and not by fire which was originally thought?", and they would say, "Yeah, I saw that guy on TV. He was a real moron."

THAT, and ONLY that is what they're trying to accomplish.

It's no different than when Jeremey Glick was on the "O'Reilly Factor". In fact, they almost did the same thing. They wouldn't let him speak, or make his case, and the next day, they accused him of something he didn't say, which was that Bush was behind 9/11. Neither Jones or Glick said that on TV, yet, that's what they lied about them saying... because as you know, anyone who even thinks that is a "Unpatriotic Nutty Conspiracy Theorist Tinfoil Hat Wearing Fruitcake".

[Gold9472]

Now you know why I don't watch TV anymore.

[somebigguy]

Think of the ratings the guy got!!! Once those numbers are in, he'll be asking Jones or DRG for a second appearance in no time.

[Gold9472]

Oh absolutely... those people who were on the "cusp" might have finally taken the red pill...

[ThotPolice]

1. Well then how was Carlson or his producer able to book him in the first place?

2. You know you want to move down to America.
1. Probably thought he would be a kook to bolster ratings. When he wasn’t, they panicked and threw in the disclaimer/discrediter at the end.

2. Only if I can have sex with Jessica Alba as a welcoming gift.

3. How do y’all think America would handle the truth? I’m thinking uncontrollable anarchy.

[Gold9472]

1. Probably thought he would be a kook to bolster ratings. When he wasn’t, they panicked and threw in the disclaimer/discrediter at the end.

2. Only if I can have sex with Jessica Alba as a welcoming gift.

3. How do y’all think America would handle the truth? I’m thinking uncontrollable anarchy.

Which is why they don't want it to come out.

[Gold9472]

Listen folks... I can tell you from experience that the media has not been our friend regarding 9/11 Truth. I can't tell you how many slanderous articles I've seen written about us. I can't tell you how many times I've been booted from sites for posting 9/11 Truth. I can't tell you how many times I've heard the "Mainstream Rhetoric" given to me as an "argument". Unfortunately, they have A LOT of power. Strength in numbers is all I can say.

[ThotPolice]

Which is why they don't want it to come out.

Right that's kind of the point I'm making. You just skip over my posts huh?

[Gold9472]

Right that's kind of the point I'm making. You just skip over my posts huh?

You haven't said anything I've disagreed with... except maybe Jessica Alba.

[ThotPolice]

No, you hijaked my point, just so you could sound all cool and all-knowing.
What you Love Alba...you just want her all to yourself:)

[Gold9472]

No, you hijaked my point, just so you could sound all cool and all-knowing.
What you Love Alba...you just want her all to yourself:)

This isn't anything new to me. It's not that I'm smarter, it's that I've done it longer, and have probably read more stuff, seen more things...

[ThotPolice]

Jon Gold=Truther Snob :)


Jokes.

[Gold9472]

Jon Gold=Truther Snob :)


Jokes.

Please... don't even USE the word Truther in my presence... you're not worthy...


:liverd:

[MamaSez]

Interesting question, Thot... how would America handle the news, if they really "got" it? To be honest, I don't think there would be much of any response. Sort of a "yeah, well what's new--they pull this shit all the time" kind of thing. I definitely don't think anarchy will result, or revolution. If that were the case, the last couple months' news would surely have done it, right? Katrina, oil prices, torture, bird flu non-preparation (even while trying to scare us with a non-existent threat), Able Danger, the WalMart movie... call me a pessimist, but that's how I feel here these days. On the other hand, getting real criminal proceedings underway would make a big difference because we'd get rid of them and, in the meantime, hopefully out the rest of the bad boys.

I think the key will be in how it's presented. A bunch of talking heads saying, "And today in Washington, two more military leaders and the president's mother's cousin were arrested on charges of having conspired with evil Arabs to demolish the World Trade Center buildings... Now, the weather." You know what I mean? It will be one more bit of bad news. I want to hear, "Breaking News Alert!! Today, the President and Vice President arrested for murder, treason, dereliction of duty, and were physically removed from the white house in handcuffs and shackles by miltary MP's. Karen Hughes and Condosleeza Rice, apparently in disguise, were seen escaping through the back door of the White House where they apparently disappeared into the throngs of irate citizens. At the same time, coordinated arrests were made in the highest levels of the Pentagon..." with video footage played round the clock for six weeks while we hear every detail of what color underwear they had on when they were led away in disgrace! Now THAT might make the people mad...

So, about Canada... you know how many people would be there if they let us in?!! It's harder than hell to get up there! Maybe Young Tuck would like to offer passports, visas, and one-way moving costs for anyone who wants out... ?

[Gold9472]

Interesting question, Thot... how would America handle the news, if they really "got" it? To be honest, I don't think there would be much of any response. Sort of a "yeah, well what's new--they pull this shit all the time" kind of thing. I definitely don't think anarchy will result, or revolution. If that were the case, the last couple months' news would surely have done it, right? Katrina, oil prices, torture, bird flu non-preparation (even while trying to scare us with a non-existent threat), Able Danger, the WalMart movie... call me a pessimist, but that's how I feel here these days. On the other hand, getting real criminal proceedings underway would make a big difference because we'd get rid of them and, in the meantime, hopefully out the rest of the bad boys.

I think the key will be in how it's presented. A bunch of talking heads saying, "And today in Washington, two more military leaders and the president's mother's cousin were arrested on charges of having conspired with evil Arabs to demolish the World Trade Center buildings... Now, the weather." You know what I mean? It will be one more bit of bad news. I want to hear, "Breaking News Alert!! Today, the President and Vice President arrested for murder, treason, dereliction of duty, and were physically removed from the white house in handcuffs and shackles by miltary MP's. Karen Hughes and Condosleeza Rice, apparently in disguise, were seen escaping through the back door of the White House where they apparently disappeared into the throngs of irate citizens. At the same time, coordinated arrests were made in the highest levels of the Pentagon..." with video footage played round the clock for six weeks while we hear every detail of what color underwear they had on when they were led away in disgrace! Now THAT might make the people mad...

So, about Canada... you know how many people would be there if they let us in?!! It's harder than hell to get up there! Maybe Young Tuck would like to offer passports, visas, and one-way moving costs for anyone who wants out... ?

:) Ditto!

[Gold9472]

But... there is ALWAYS hope... if not... what's the friggin' point?

[Gold9472]

And I LOVE this country, and it truly saddens me to see it this way... it makes me cry.

[Gold9472]

Great time to introduce this (http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showthread.php?t=90).

[rayrayjones]

And I LOVE this country, and it truly saddens me to see it this way... it makes me cry.


i don't know anyone here personally, but i love all of you here! And i know when shit goes down, we will be hunkering down together in some fox hole fighting for our freedom....i'm thinkin of Wolverines.

but more importantly, i'd like to comment on how many people seem to be posting/checking out dazinith's site...do you think it might be because of the recent news?

[ThotPolice]

Interesting question, Thot... how would America handle the news, if they really "got" it? To be honest, I don't think there would be much of any response. Sort of a "yeah, well what's new--they pull this shit all the time" kind of thing. I definitely don't think anarchy will result, or revolution. If that were the case, the last couple months' news would surely have done it, right? Katrina, oil prices, torture, bird flu non-preparation (even while trying to scare us with a non-existent threat), Able Danger, the WalMart movie... call me a pessimist, but that's how I feel here these days. On the other hand, getting real criminal proceedings underway would make a big difference because we'd get rid of them and, in the meantime, hopefully out the rest of the bad boys.

I think the key will be in how it's presented. A bunch of talking heads saying, "And today in Washington, two more military leaders and the president's mother's cousin were arrested on charges of having conspired with evil Arabs to demolish the World Trade Center buildings... Now, the weather." You know what I mean? It will be one more bit of bad news. I want to hear, "Breaking News Alert!! Today, the President and Vice President arrested for murder, treason, dereliction of duty, and were physically removed from the white house in handcuffs and shackles by miltary MP's. Karen Hughes and Condosleeza Rice, apparently in disguise, were seen escaping through the back door of the White House where they apparently disappeared into the throngs of irate citizens. At the same time, coordinated arrests were made in the highest levels of the Pentagon..." with video footage played round the clock for six weeks while we hear every detail of what color underwear they had on when they were led away in disgrace! Now THAT might make the people mad...

So, about Canada... you know how many people would be there if they let us in?!! It's harder than hell to get up there! Maybe Young Tuck would like to offer passports, visas, and one-way moving costs for anyone who wants out... ?
This is a tad bigger than corruption and incompetence. There are in my opinion a minority of free thinkers and open-minded people in our world. This group being the minority is what allows the kind of media we have to continue and the half-truths and lies to be easily accepted and presented without public outcry.

It would have the same collective psychological impact the official story did, but this time the enemy would be the system itself.

How would anyone trust the government or media again? Honestly I think America would burn like Paris.

If you want to get into Canada get a job in the trades, or I could draw up a contract for you and if you agree, we can marry and divorce in a few years.:)

[Gold9472]

i don't know anyone here personally, but i love all of you here! And i know when shit goes down, we will be hunkering down together in some fox hole fighting for our freedom....i'm thinkin of Wolverines.

but more importantly, i'd like to comment on how many people seem to be posting/checking out dazinith's site...do you think it might be because of the recent news?

I think it's Able Danger + Professor Steven Jones + EVERYONE who's been busting their ass, some as long as 1526 days.

[Gold9472]

This is a tad bigger than corruption and incompetence. There are in my opinion a minority of free thinkers and open-minded people in our world. This group being the minority is what allows the kind of media we have to continue and the half-truths and lies to be easily accepted and presented without public outcry.

It would have the same collective psychological impact the official story did, but this time the enemy would be the system itself.

How would anyone trust the government or media again? Honestly I think America would burn like Paris.

If you want to get into Canada get a job in the trades, or I could draw up a contract for you and if you agree, we can marry and divorce in a few years.:)

I'm sure she'd love that... :smellfing

[ThotPolice]

I'm sure she'd love that... :smellfingIt's mutually beneficial.

[911=inside job]

i don't know anyone here personally, but i love all of you here! And i know when shit goes down, we will be hunkering down together in some fox hole fighting for our freedom....i'm thinkin of Wolverines.

but more importantly, i'd like to comment on how many people seem to be posting/checking out dazinith's site...do you think it might be because of the recent news?
nice to see the bay area is in full force on the ybbs!!!! welcome rayray!!!

[PhilosophyGenius]

They DID NOT allow him to make his case. Part of his case has to do with the footage itself. The reason they had him on, in my opinion, was to slander him, and make him look like a fool. Which is one of the reasons they had him on so fast. You think he's the first person to mention the hypothesis of demolition? Of course not. Yet, he was the first "credible" person to do so. So they had to "nip it in the bud" as quickly as possible. Not for people who follow this site, but for the "minions" of people out there who believe EVERYTHING the television tells them. Those are the people we're trying to convince to get off their asses, so those are the people they target.

Now, if someone like me goes to someone, and says, "Hey, did you know that a Physics Professor from BYU thinks the WTC was brought down by pre-planted explosives, and not by fire which was originally thought?", and they would say, "Yeah, I saw that guy on TV. He was a real moron."

THAT, and ONLY that is what they're trying to accomplish.

It's no different than when Jeremey Glick was on the "O'Reilly Factor". In fact, they almost did the same thing. They wouldn't let him speak, or make his case, and the next day, they accused him of something he didn't say, which was that Bush was behind 9/11. Neither Jones or Glick said that on TV, yet, that's what they lied about them saying... because as you know, anyone who even thinks that is a "Unpatriotic Nutty Conspiracy Theorist Tinfoil Hat Wearing Fruitcake".

They did allow him to make his case, that's why that had him on, to see what he had to say. But unfortunatly the proffessor didn't realize that that segmant was a short 5 minute dilogue rather than an hour long (or more) monoluge he would have at his college. It seemed like he was totally unprepared to make is points in an efficient manner. If you watch any political debate show, you'll see that everyone comes prepared with there talking points and talks as fast as they can to make sure they get there point across in the time allowed. And there not dumb enough to bring somone on just to make them look like a nut case because they know there giving that person a lot of attention he wouldn't have already had.

P.S. "Unpatriotic Nutty Conspiracy Theorist Tinfoil Hat Wearing Fruitcake" ....I'm sorry someone called you that. *j/k*

[rayrayjones]

P.S. "Unpatriotic Nutty Conspiracy Theorist Tinfoil Hat Wearing Fruitcake" ....I'm sorry someone called you that. *j/k*

tucker show tonight (right now for me)....has WTC in his list of topics or whatever he calls it...coming up in 5 or so minutes

[rayrayjones]

tucker show tonight (right now for me)....has WTC in his list of topics or whatever he calls it...coming up in 5 or so minutes]


ok, just more attack on the integrity of Steven Jones...never mind...caller said something about wtc7 burning for several day...

WTF?

oh and the Tucker quote after caller called him a quack, "well he seemed reputable, i mean he is a professor from BYU"

[Gold9472]

They did allow him to make his case, that's why that had him on, to see what he had to say. But unfortunatly the proffessor didn't realize that that segmant was a short 5 minute dilogue rather than an hour long (or more) monoluge he would have at his college. It seemed like he was totally unprepared to make is points in an efficient manner. If you watch any political debate show, you'll see that everyone comes prepared with there talking points and talks as fast as they can to make sure they get there point across in the time allowed. And there not dumb enough to bring somone on just to make them look like a nut case because they know there giving that person a lot of attention he wouldn't have already had.

P.S. "Unpatriotic Nutty Conspiracy Theorist Tinfoil Hat Wearing Fruitcake" ....I'm sorry someone called you that. *j/k*

Did you see tonight's show? Did you see that they referred to him as a quack, and because we pay our taxes, which is the law, we're hypocrites. Because we believe what we do, we should leave this country, but he also said questioning your Government was patriotic. Ok... so obeying the laws, means you hate your country, and you should move, and questioning your Government is patriotic so long as those questions don't involve the murder of 3000 people. I would have thought obeying the rules was a form of patriotism. It shows pride in your country. So long as they're REASONABLE laws that weren't created to please a few.

This is such a confusing argument to word because he was all over the place... still, it was a vicious attack against the Professor.

They did the SAME thing on Penn & Teller's "Bullshit" with Jimmy Walter, and Eric Hufschmid. They had them speak their case, which, for whatever reason, included talk about the moon landing, and a man dressed up in an astronaut suit clucking like a chicken, but then they had on a 9/11 firefighter who said those buildings weren't wired with explosives... making the entire movement look like fools.

This is EXACTLY what Tucker Carlson did, EXCEPT, this time they didn't have a fool on. This time, they had a professor from Brigham Young University who didn't say what they wanted him to, so they lied about it to suit their needs. They lied about it, and we caught them red fucking handed. This is the media you protect, and cherish so much.

[Gold9472]

"Now, if someone like me goes to someone, and says, "Hey, did you know that a Physics Professor from BYU thinks the WTC was brought down by pre-planted explosives, and not by fire which was originally thought?", and they would say, "Yeah, I saw that guy on TV. He was a real QUACK.""

[PhilosophyGenius]

"Now, if someone like me goes to someone, and says, "Hey, did you know that a Physics Professor from BYU thinks the WTC was brought down by pre-planted explosives, and not by fire which was originally thought?", and they would say, "Yeah, I saw that guy on TV. He was a real QUACK.""

That's different. If a person were to intellegently make his case giving out fact after fact of undisuptable evidence, then people would give him a chance. Carlson gave the dr a chance and the dr couldn't produce.

[Gold9472]

That's different. If a person were to intellegently make his case giving out fact after fact of undisuptable evidence, then people would give him a chance. Carlson gave the dr a chance and the dr couldn't produce.

The Professor DID produce, but they wouldn't show what he PRODUCED. Are you going to tell me that WTC7 footage is hard to find? RayRayJones' avatar is building 7 coming down, over, and over again. If they don't acknowledge what he produces, then they DID NOT give him a chance.

[PhilosophyGenius]

The Professor DID produce, but they wouldn't show what he PRODUCED. Are you going to tell me that WTC7 footage is hard to find? RayRayJones' avatar is building 7 coming down, over, and over again. If they don't acknowledge what he produces, then they DID NOT give him a chance.

They did give him a chance. Letting him on the program was hischance. The reason Tucker was controlling the converstation was because the Doctor wasnt producing. As for WTC 7, I know, that was totally unfair because that's what the dr's case was built around.

And of course the caller and Tucker are gonna call him a "quack" today and rightly so. Because that's an outrage accusation to make (even though it's true).

Example: I find out that Area 51 really has aliens from outerspace and is testing UFO's. I tell you guys, "hey everyone, Area 51 is filled with aliens and the govn't is testing UFO's". What you guys gonna think? And then the only evidence I give is that people saw lights flashing around that area, you guys are gonna think I flipped the fuck out!

Same thing here, the Dr made a serious accusation and did not provide sufficent evidence.

[Gold9472]

They did give him a chance. Letting him on the program was hischance. The reason Tucker was controlling the converstation was because the Doctor wasnt producing. As for WTC 7, I know, that was totally unfair because that's what the dr's case was built around.

And of course the caller and Tucker are gonna call him a "quack" today and rightly so. Because that's an outrage accusation to make (even though it's true).

Example: I find out that Area 51 really has aliens from outerspace and is testing UFO's. I tell you guys, "hey everyone, Area 51 is filled with aliens and the govn't is testing UFO's". What you guys gonna think? And then the only evidence I give is that people saw lights flashing around that area, you guys are gonna think I flipped the fuck out!

Same thing here, the Dr made a serious accusation and did not provide sufficent evidence.

If it's true, then how is it "rightly so" to call him a "quack"?

[Gold9472]

And I already told you why they had him on. So that the end result would be that he is a "quack". They didn't have him on to give him a "chance". If they did, they would have ran something VERY similar to this (http://home.comcast.net/~gold9472/jonescoverage.mov).

[ThotPolice]

And I already told you why they had him on. So that the end result would be that he is a "quack". They didn't have him on to give him a "chance". If they did, they would have ran something VERY similar to this (http://home.comcast.net/~gold9472/jonescoverage.mov).Sweet!

[dz]

just posted a response to tonights tucker here:
http://www.911blogger.com/2005/11/tucker-carlson-resorts-to-calling-911.html

thanks jon for the footage.

[PhilosophyGenius]

If it's true, then how is it "rightly so" to call him a "quack"?

You're right on that, inviting somone to your show and then callilng him a "quack" the next day is not fair and simply disrespectful. If he thought the guy was a quack in the first place he shouldn't of had him on.