MSNBC Covers Professor Steven E. Jones, Omits WTC7 Coverage - Video Inside
- Thread starter Gold9472
- Start date
P
PhilosophyGenius
Guest
That was lame. He made a sloppy case and the producers at MSNBC did not even show the building 7 footage he sent them.
P
PhilosophyGenius
Guest
I guess your right on the sloppy part. But he was too slow though, problably didn't realize how short the segments are on those kinds of shows.
9
911=inside job
Guest
they didnt want anyone to see it!!!! there is no way around it... fucking assholes!!!! i would be happy if they would have just showed it.... tucker could of fucked him up and didnt, i dont know why he was so nice....
9
911=inside job
Guest
what happened to the other thread like this one.. i looked for it and couldnt find it...
9
911=inside job
Guest
the one that said he was going to be on...
R
Rebel Patriot
Guest
I am sure Mr Stephen Jones will get a media learning curve education shortly.
I sent an email to Tucker Carlson thanking him for his coverage, for his "respectfullness" to this guest, and recommended Griffin and William Rodriguez for future spots if he wanted to add to this discussion later.
I sent an email to Tucker Carlson thanking him for his coverage, for his "respectfullness" to this guest, and recommended Griffin and William Rodriguez for future spots if he wanted to add to this discussion later.
P
PhilosophyGenius
Guest
But Carlson did leave open a possiblity of him returning to finish that discussion though. It sucked how when the Professor kept asking for the footage to be played, the producer just kept showing the picture of that steel building and the WTC debret.
A
aceace
Guest
I ripped his ass and called him a shill, which is exactly what he is. I think it was a message to other professors not to touch his hypothesis for a revue.
Here's my letter to Mr.Carlson.
Mr Carlson,
Your interview of Professor Stephen Jones was a joke. Not running the video clip that he sent the show in advance so that he might explain his hypothesis using the visual aid was disingegenenous to the extreme.
Your simple apology after the segment for not being able to understand what Professor Jones meant was insulting to Professor Jones and to all viewers of the program. I would have expected such coverage, or the lack of same, from Fox News. It now appears to me that MSNBC has fallen to the same level as Fox.
I know why I never watched at CNN and now I know your a shill for the Neo-cons. Millions of people believe that the US Govt was responsible for 911 and its growing, each day. 911 was a convienent excuse for Regime change in Afghanistan so a pipeline could be built and the poppy fields could bloom. It was used to invade Iraq and steal Oil. It brought about Patriot Act 1 & 2. Even FBI Director Robert Mueller has admitted in public that there is actually no evidence that proves the named 9-11 hijackers were actually on the aircraft. Feel free to have me on your show in the future. I can and will charge the neo-cons with 3000 counts of murder. I have seen enough evidence long before Mr Jones.
(Note: having a thread on this in the new news forum is confusing as hell)
Here's my letter to Mr.Carlson.
Mr Carlson,
Your interview of Professor Stephen Jones was a joke. Not running the video clip that he sent the show in advance so that he might explain his hypothesis using the visual aid was disingegenenous to the extreme.
Your simple apology after the segment for not being able to understand what Professor Jones meant was insulting to Professor Jones and to all viewers of the program. I would have expected such coverage, or the lack of same, from Fox News. It now appears to me that MSNBC has fallen to the same level as Fox.
I know why I never watched at CNN and now I know your a shill for the Neo-cons. Millions of people believe that the US Govt was responsible for 911 and its growing, each day. 911 was a convienent excuse for Regime change in Afghanistan so a pipeline could be built and the poppy fields could bloom. It was used to invade Iraq and steal Oil. It brought about Patriot Act 1 & 2. Even FBI Director Robert Mueller has admitted in public that there is actually no evidence that proves the named 9-11 hijackers were actually on the aircraft. Feel free to have me on your show in the future. I can and will charge the neo-cons with 3000 counts of murder. I have seen enough evidence long before Mr Jones.
(Note: having a thread on this in the new news forum is confusing as hell)
9
911=inside job
Guest
Feel free to have me on your show in the future. I can and will charge the neo-cons with 3000 counts of murder. I have seen enough evidence long before Mr Jones.
thats awesome!!!1 HAHHAHAHA!!!! i wish you could go on there also...
thats awesome!!!1 HAHHAHAHA!!!! i wish you could go on there also...
S
somebigguy
Guest
I just watched it and thought it was pretty good. No shouting matches or name calling, just calm discussion.
He made the following excellent points:
- That even Fema admitted there was a low probability of fire and diesel bringing down building 7.
- The kink in building 7 which is indicative of controlled demo.
This is exactly what we needed, someone to raise these questions in the mainstream media without making what others would consider "wild" accusations of who was responsible.
Millions of seeds were planted last night, the snowball is getting bigger!!!!
He made the following excellent points:
- That even Fema admitted there was a low probability of fire and diesel bringing down building 7.
- The kink in building 7 which is indicative of controlled demo.
This is exactly what we needed, someone to raise these questions in the mainstream media without making what others would consider "wild" accusations of who was responsible.
Millions of seeds were planted last night, the snowball is getting bigger!!!!
S
somebigguy
Guest
He also mentioned the molten steel, and his paper has other sources for it, I've never been able to find any other sources except that Loizeaux character.
S
somebigguy
Guest
I just finished reading his paper, he does mention "inside job" once!!! Furthermore, he uses the phrase "pull" on numerous occasions, perhaps setting the stage for a future paper that includes Silverstein's quote.
S