EXPLOSIVE!

MSNBC - Tucker Carlson - MAIN STREAM MEDIA ATTENTION

Do I have your attention?

Here's the video clips

Steven Jones Shows WTC Demolition Evidence

[edit on 9/3/06 by JAK]

Interesting...

How convenient for msnbc to NOT show WTC7's collapse.

Jones was irked about it too... and I don't blame him.

Sounds like a typical Howard vs ???? Post on ATS.

Anyway I didnt learn anything from this, for they showed nothing at all. They tried to make this guy to look like some kinda crackpot or something.

Jones: "...can you roll the video clip that i've send to you ?..."
Tucker: "...ok, i'm not sure if we i can but..."


Hahahahahahah. Yeah right. I'm not sure if they wanted to :>

[edit on 9-3-2006 by STolarZ]

right when he is about to make his point they try to cut to a break.


This is the big story why did they give him so little time and try to make him look like a nut case?

[edit on 12-3-2006 by Tasketo]

My sentiments EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think that Dr. Jones was trying to present his case quite well, but was not given the chance to do so, nor the time, and yeah......interesting that the video clip that Jones sent was NOT played.

Especially when you consider that the footage of WTC7s collapes was nationally televised by every station and their hamsters, and MSNBC, being one of the biggest, is certain to have a clip of the footage in their archives anyway.

Where is Howie, he is usually on these threads lickity split like...

Ah the MSM what can you say that hasn't already been said, the man's man talkin' down to da rabble. It's a beautiful sight indeed, when you pee down and water a weed!

I ususally like Tucker but he was looking too uncomfortable in this hatchet job, like he didn't even want to do this. Guess you have to do what da boss tells ya.

"You mean you actually have evidence for this ? (add surprised look)"


In the words of mr. Burns, hi-larious.

2 Primetime Shows are Covering these stories... this could get huge

You would think something this huge and important wouldn't get rushed off the air in a few minutes.

Guest: Tucker, I have absolute proof the world is going to end tomorrow and the only thing that can save us is you playing the video I sent you.

Tucker: I'm sorry, we are running out of time, we have to move on to more important things, thank you for appearing on our show and good luck to you....now onto junk food, is it really bad for you?

Im sorry but Tucker is very very rude.

That whole interview was embarassing and shamefull to watch.

I consider it to be one of the most un-professional interviews that i have ever witnessed.

The way the professor was rushed was most annoying of all. almost right out of the gate they were rushing him.

as a viewer i found that to be most irritating since i genuinly wanted to hear the professors hypothesis.

and the interviewie was requesting that a piece of his evidence be shown and they denied him that. HOW RUDE.....blame it on techincal difficulties all you want...

I think *ucker......should lose that bowtie and "untuck" a couple of things and actually stand up for the truth.....or AT LEAST the search for it....u kno...being a "reporter and all "

Did you notice the whole lower fourth of the screen was occupied by a disinformation junk-piece which listed the upcoming topics? The bolded topic, "Twin Towers" indicates that's what's currently being discussed.

Notice the upcoming list which the host sees as credible subjects (right up there with treason):



...give me a break. The Second thing is how obviously rushed and stupid the whole thing is. AS IF THEY ARE LACKING AIRTIME. Do you realize how long it takes to prep lights, camera, makeup, uplink, etc to do a remote link-up? And then to have it be 50% of the airtime spent on the idiot host jabbering on about nothing, and the prof. being given no time, and no in-feed comments to help him. What a disgrace to journalism this clown Carlson is. Shows that TV is in the hands of tha' elite when they will only show you garbage like this.

The prof. was quite nimble and he did manage to mention physical evidence for molten steel in the basements of all three buildings. Hmm...

[smallpeeps brainstorm...]

All we have to do is rebuild five floors of the WTC building. Then, using hydraulics and rigging, etc, we can pressurize the structure such that the five floors of our construction are experiencing the same weight on their supports as they would be in the actual tower.

Then, we splash jet fuel all over, and maybe set off an appropriate conventional bomb (to simulate plane impact), and then after the big fireball, we watch and see how the thing burns.

We would also need giant fans to generate similar blowing fast winds (100mph?) and updrafts. Difficult, but not impossible. Somehow cold winds can fuel a fire? I thought they helped put fires out. In any case, we'd find out what happens.

Our flaming chairs, desks, mannequins, and what have you, will not turn steel to puddled form. At least I don't think so. But really now, is it worth building a five-to-ten story structure and some hydraulics if it prevents WW3 and gives our grandchildren some kind of life? I say let's build the replica and see what happens.

As to how much it would cost to build these five floors? Well, the site below, dedicated to rebuilding the towers, says the following:

www.teamtwintowers.org...

The estimated $15 billion it would take to rebuild, restore and reopen the World Trade Center is just one-sixth of what the U.S. government will spend in one year trying to fix Iraq.

So, 15 billion for two whole towers means we could easily build a pressurized-five floor structure (as described above) with wind simulators for around one billion dollars.

Can't we call up the IRS and demand that tax money be used for just such a cause? Americans vote massive credit-bonuses to the money system of the federal gov't, like just recently, so why can't we spend some of that money to find out the actual truth of how hot jet fuel and office furniture get, in relation to steel?

Put me on Tucker Carlson for twenty seconds and I'd show you some effective use of airtime, for sure.


[edit on 26-3-2006 by smallpeeps]