Blender Head
Muse
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2007
- Messages
- 679
I had intended to do a full write-up of the AE911Truth presentation in my city but lost the first third after attempting to preview it on these forums. Due to those circumstances I'll do bulleted points on the night and what I think Gage mislead on, or got wrong and the post-slideshow fun.
Before the Presentation:
-I had canvassed for Obama prior to arriving at the convention center, so I was wearing a shirt supporting him.
-I arrived just as Gage was starting.
The Presentation:
WTC 7:
-Gage claims the fires were out by 4:00 PM
-Shows one view of the south face, obscured by smoke (Source of smoke is not discussed by either Gage or the attendees).
-Uses Craig Bartmer's interview to purport explosive demolition. Bartmer claims he heard "boom boom boom" during the collapse of the building, and says he couldn't think of a reason why it'd fall. What Gage omits is that when Bartmer arrived on scene the following had already happened:
-Bartmer's account is then contradicted by two witnesses. One witness describes a "clap of thunder" before the building collapses, which doesn't jive with Bartmer's recollection. Another witness shown is Kevin McPadden, who also describes hearing a lone "KAHHH-Boom" after he sees a Red Cross worker giving a demolition countdown, telling everyone to get away from the building (seriously). Kevin's story changes wildly depending on his audience, suggesting why he didn't tell it in front of a crowd of Truthers at One Police Plaza on 9/11/06. Indeed, he waited roughly eight months after the phony "Mike the EMT" e-mail was sent to Dylan Avery to tell it.
-Gage shows a clip of a lone explosion somewhere in the WTC complex. There is not context for the footage other than what Gage tells the audience: That it's a shot of (presumably, since I'm not sure which building he claimed was collapsing but since he was discussing the Third Tower I'll keep with it) WTC 7 falling. However, no buildings are collapsing and it is not evident where the footage was shot.
-Claims there was foreknowledge using Indira Sighn's interview from 2005, the aforementioned McPadden story, and a clip of firefighters warning that WTC 7 was "about to come down soon", and about to "blow up". However, the use of the phrase 'blow up' may actually help the so-called "official story". Here's why:
Source
Which fits in with what firefighters and others had remembered about WTC 7:
-Gage launches into the 9/11 Mysteries clip of "pyroclastic dust-clouds" but does not explain that debris will be pushed outward by a building's collapse.
-Gage then dives into molten metal, reprinting a "quote" from Les Robertson that says molten steel was "flowing" but Les does not remember saying this.
-Gage quickly runs through quotes both attributed and not. No discussion on the variations of what witnesses saw is provided. Astaneh-Asl's "melting girders" quote is given without explaining what he thinks about the collapses.
-Gage shows the infamous "meteorite" but only the poor-resolution picture, where the pieces of unburnt paper embedded in the object are visible.
-Gage claims FEMA found "rapid oxidation" and evidence of high temperatures. The actual report disagrees.
-Says WTC 7 was omited from the 9/11 Report but the commission was not an engineering body.
-Uses Danny Jovenko's comments about the WTC 7 collapse but not on the fire-induced collapses of the Two Towers.
At the end of WTC 7's section, the audience is asked who still believes fire brought down the building.
I'm one of two people to raise their hand, so I'm given the "first question" (Which WACColorado accidentally ruined, more on that later).
WTC 1, 2:
-Gage claims the buildings were "airliner-proof" (seriously) and proceeds to show an interview with Les where nothing of the sort is stated.
-States that there was no evidence of columns being pulled inward from the sagging trusses, which contradicts the facts.
-Uses the "118 first responders heard bombs!" hullabaloo
-Blames ACE Elevator crews for rigging the Towers.
-Gage then brings out the cardboard boxes. I promptly bury my face in my palms as people clap after he drops the two "15 story" boxes.
And at this point I couldn't take anymore, so I got up and began consolidating any questions I would like to ask if given a chance while Gage finished up. Before I could step up to the mic, I was approached by the local WAC group for an interview, as they were glad to see a 9/11 skeptic, an Obama supporter no less, at one of these gatherings. Obliging, I answer a question until we're asked to leave so that the people asking questions can be heard. Figuring Gage'll stay for a while we step outside the room.
I'm asked what I think of the "official story" and I reply that I think the tenants (for the lack of a better word) of the 9/11 is true: 19 hijackers, four planes, four crashes, three NYC building collapses, etc. etc. but that I support investigations into specific issues. I pander a bit and comend them on what they're doing. We then spar on Barry Jennings, Willy Rodriquez and others. I explain that Willy spoke with NIST in 2004 and didn't mention explosives.
He was surprised.
I then go back inside with WAC to ask my question. Waiting behind a woman, thinking of which question is pertinent, she talks about the "missing" $2.3 trillion and implies it was only reported by Rumsfeld on 9/10 so the attacks would cover it up. As I step up to the mic I state that the accounting problems has been observed as far back as 1999, and that using 9/11 to hide something that's been reported two years prior made no sense. Disgressing, I ask why he only uses Danny's comments about WTC 7 but not about WTC 1, and 2. His answer? That the demolitions of WTC 1, and 2 were so outside what he is familiar with, while WTC 7's demolition was more up his alley, that the "Deceptive demolitions" fooled him but not the other "experts" listed in his presentation (seriously).
I then mingle with other attendees outside the room, but it becomes apparent 4/5ths of them are piss-faced drunk. Even the WAC guy who interviewed me was so drunk he would put John Daly on the Dishonors List. I then walk back inside, hoping to ask more questions.
I enter the room and the crowd has dwindled to the point I thought I'd get more in-depth answers from Gage. Waiting in line again I think of what to ask. I look at the accompanying Key Map to the slideshow and decided which two would be the most hard-hitting. Before I could get to the mic it's suggested that everyone move to the bar area for drinks. Thankfully the WAC guys want me to ask Rich a few questions, and I walk up to the edge of the stage.
WACcers ask Gage to take a few taped questions from me and he obliges. I shake his hand and introduce myself. He kneels on the stage for a better position and I ask my first question: Can you provide an example of controlled demolition induced by thermite?
After launching into the differences between thermite and explosives he forgets the question, so I remind him. He admits he can't think of any and pleads with the audience for examples when a WACcer named "Joby" pipes up that his "friend in the military" would destroy bridges with thermite. I quietly scoff at the comparison and feeling unsatisfied I ask my other question: Why does your "Explosive feature" list not link to actual SEs, architects, or CD experts save for Danny Jovenko? He then repeatedly refers to the "technical articles" on his website, trying to distract me. Not giving up I press him on linking to software engineers and fusion professors and mention that even his organization admit that controlled demolition was "clearly outside the scope of our training and experience.". He relents and states to the camera the necessity for more experts to agree with them.
The organizers clear up the room and we walk to the bar. I'm asked various questions from the hallway to the drinking area, ranging from:
-Thermite-cut beams
-9/11 Commission and WTC 7
-The NWO, PNAC, etc.
-The Pentagon, and Shankesville
Doing my best to answer them we enter the bar and link tables together waiting for Gage to arrive. But upon waiting "Joby" decides to bash, obfuscate, and insult me and what I have to say. The others keep asking questions from the "85 tapes" to Larry's "pull it" comment. Even if I didn't answer their questions to their satisfaction, they were glad someone could disagree with them while also being informed.
Gage arrives, shakes my hand again and sits at the opposing table. That was the last I'd speak directly to him. However, I was also able to direct Joby and what I believe was his dad (Both were drunk and slurring their words a bit but one was obviously older and had some sort of relationship to the other, though the older gentleman was way more polite and courteous to me and my viewpoint), as well as anyone else who cared to listen, to Mark's information clearinghouse website, www.flight77.info amongst others (inlcuding my YT site). I tell the WAC guys that their "confrontations" of Bill Maher and the like only make them look egotistical. Joby mockingly implies that he doesn't do it for the money, apparently not having seen The Dark Knight.
Suddenly the lights shut off. Closing time. The workers begin to shoo us out, and in the slight chaos I get bombarded with more questions (BBC's early report, 67 intercepts, Payne Stewart) until I get to the exit where the crowd thins and we're able to leave. With Gage exiting behind me he shouts out "Good questions!" in my direction.
Even if I didn't convince any of them they were being mislead I was able to see a side of Truthers that the Internet does not convey. Save for Joby and a couple of random people sneering at my support for the "puppet" Obama the ones I argued with were nice, and couteous.
You read that correctly, Truthers can be respectful and courteous even if you disagree with them.
Before the Presentation:
-I had canvassed for Obama prior to arriving at the convention center, so I was wearing a shirt supporting him.
-I arrived just as Gage was starting.
The Presentation:
WTC 7:
-Gage claims the fires were out by 4:00 PM
-Shows one view of the south face, obscured by smoke (Source of smoke is not discussed by either Gage or the attendees).
-Uses Craig Bartmer's interview to purport explosive demolition. Bartmer claims he heard "boom boom boom" during the collapse of the building, and says he couldn't think of a reason why it'd fall. What Gage omits is that when Bartmer arrived on scene the following had already happened:
-Bartmer's account is then contradicted by two witnesses. One witness describes a "clap of thunder" before the building collapses, which doesn't jive with Bartmer's recollection. Another witness shown is Kevin McPadden, who also describes hearing a lone "KAHHH-Boom" after he sees a Red Cross worker giving a demolition countdown, telling everyone to get away from the building (seriously). Kevin's story changes wildly depending on his audience, suggesting why he didn't tell it in front of a crowd of Truthers at One Police Plaza on 9/11/06. Indeed, he waited roughly eight months after the phony "Mike the EMT" e-mail was sent to Dylan Avery to tell it.
-Gage shows a clip of a lone explosion somewhere in the WTC complex. There is not context for the footage other than what Gage tells the audience: That it's a shot of (presumably, since I'm not sure which building he claimed was collapsing but since he was discussing the Third Tower I'll keep with it) WTC 7 falling. However, no buildings are collapsing and it is not evident where the footage was shot.
-Claims there was foreknowledge using Indira Sighn's interview from 2005, the aforementioned McPadden story, and a clip of firefighters warning that WTC 7 was "about to come down soon", and about to "blow up". However, the use of the phrase 'blow up' may actually help the so-called "official story". Here's why:
Definition of 'blow up' is said:
Source
Which fits in with what firefighters and others had remembered about WTC 7:
-Gage launches into the 9/11 Mysteries clip of "pyroclastic dust-clouds" but does not explain that debris will be pushed outward by a building's collapse.
-Gage then dives into molten metal, reprinting a "quote" from Les Robertson that says molten steel was "flowing" but Les does not remember saying this.
-Gage quickly runs through quotes both attributed and not. No discussion on the variations of what witnesses saw is provided. Astaneh-Asl's "melting girders" quote is given without explaining what he thinks about the collapses.
-Gage shows the infamous "meteorite" but only the poor-resolution picture, where the pieces of unburnt paper embedded in the object are visible.
-Gage claims FEMA found "rapid oxidation" and evidence of high temperatures. The actual report disagrees.
-Says WTC 7 was omited from the 9/11 Report but the commission was not an engineering body.
-Uses Danny Jovenko's comments about the WTC 7 collapse but not on the fire-induced collapses of the Two Towers.
At the end of WTC 7's section, the audience is asked who still believes fire brought down the building.
I'm one of two people to raise their hand, so I'm given the "first question" (Which WACColorado accidentally ruined, more on that later).
WTC 1, 2:
-Gage claims the buildings were "airliner-proof" (seriously) and proceeds to show an interview with Les where nothing of the sort is stated.
-States that there was no evidence of columns being pulled inward from the sagging trusses, which contradicts the facts.
-Uses the "118 first responders heard bombs!" hullabaloo
-Blames ACE Elevator crews for rigging the Towers.
-Gage then brings out the cardboard boxes. I promptly bury my face in my palms as people clap after he drops the two "15 story" boxes.
And at this point I couldn't take anymore, so I got up and began consolidating any questions I would like to ask if given a chance while Gage finished up. Before I could step up to the mic, I was approached by the local WAC group for an interview, as they were glad to see a 9/11 skeptic, an Obama supporter no less, at one of these gatherings. Obliging, I answer a question until we're asked to leave so that the people asking questions can be heard. Figuring Gage'll stay for a while we step outside the room.
I'm asked what I think of the "official story" and I reply that I think the tenants (for the lack of a better word) of the 9/11 is true: 19 hijackers, four planes, four crashes, three NYC building collapses, etc. etc. but that I support investigations into specific issues. I pander a bit and comend them on what they're doing. We then spar on Barry Jennings, Willy Rodriquez and others. I explain that Willy spoke with NIST in 2004 and didn't mention explosives.
He was surprised.
I then go back inside with WAC to ask my question. Waiting behind a woman, thinking of which question is pertinent, she talks about the "missing" $2.3 trillion and implies it was only reported by Rumsfeld on 9/10 so the attacks would cover it up. As I step up to the mic I state that the accounting problems has been observed as far back as 1999, and that using 9/11 to hide something that's been reported two years prior made no sense. Disgressing, I ask why he only uses Danny's comments about WTC 7 but not about WTC 1, and 2. His answer? That the demolitions of WTC 1, and 2 were so outside what he is familiar with, while WTC 7's demolition was more up his alley, that the "Deceptive demolitions" fooled him but not the other "experts" listed in his presentation (seriously).
I then mingle with other attendees outside the room, but it becomes apparent 4/5ths of them are piss-faced drunk. Even the WAC guy who interviewed me was so drunk he would put John Daly on the Dishonors List. I then walk back inside, hoping to ask more questions.
I enter the room and the crowd has dwindled to the point I thought I'd get more in-depth answers from Gage. Waiting in line again I think of what to ask. I look at the accompanying Key Map to the slideshow and decided which two would be the most hard-hitting. Before I could get to the mic it's suggested that everyone move to the bar area for drinks. Thankfully the WAC guys want me to ask Rich a few questions, and I walk up to the edge of the stage.
WACcers ask Gage to take a few taped questions from me and he obliges. I shake his hand and introduce myself. He kneels on the stage for a better position and I ask my first question: Can you provide an example of controlled demolition induced by thermite?
After launching into the differences between thermite and explosives he forgets the question, so I remind him. He admits he can't think of any and pleads with the audience for examples when a WACcer named "Joby" pipes up that his "friend in the military" would destroy bridges with thermite. I quietly scoff at the comparison and feeling unsatisfied I ask my other question: Why does your "Explosive feature" list not link to actual SEs, architects, or CD experts save for Danny Jovenko? He then repeatedly refers to the "technical articles" on his website, trying to distract me. Not giving up I press him on linking to software engineers and fusion professors and mention that even his organization admit that controlled demolition was "clearly outside the scope of our training and experience.". He relents and states to the camera the necessity for more experts to agree with them.
The organizers clear up the room and we walk to the bar. I'm asked various questions from the hallway to the drinking area, ranging from:
-Thermite-cut beams
-9/11 Commission and WTC 7
-The NWO, PNAC, etc.
-The Pentagon, and Shankesville
Doing my best to answer them we enter the bar and link tables together waiting for Gage to arrive. But upon waiting "Joby" decides to bash, obfuscate, and insult me and what I have to say. The others keep asking questions from the "85 tapes" to Larry's "pull it" comment. Even if I didn't answer their questions to their satisfaction, they were glad someone could disagree with them while also being informed.
Gage arrives, shakes my hand again and sits at the opposing table. That was the last I'd speak directly to him. However, I was also able to direct Joby and what I believe was his dad (Both were drunk and slurring their words a bit but one was obviously older and had some sort of relationship to the other, though the older gentleman was way more polite and courteous to me and my viewpoint), as well as anyone else who cared to listen, to Mark's information clearinghouse website, www.flight77.info amongst others (inlcuding my YT site). I tell the WAC guys that their "confrontations" of Bill Maher and the like only make them look egotistical. Joby mockingly implies that he doesn't do it for the money, apparently not having seen The Dark Knight.
Suddenly the lights shut off. Closing time. The workers begin to shoo us out, and in the slight chaos I get bombarded with more questions (BBC's early report, 67 intercepts, Payne Stewart) until I get to the exit where the crowd thins and we're able to leave. With Gage exiting behind me he shouts out "Good questions!" in my direction.
Even if I didn't convince any of them they were being mislead I was able to see a side of Truthers that the Internet does not convey. Save for Joby and a couple of random people sneering at my support for the "puppet" Obama the ones I argued with were nice, and couteous.
You read that correctly, Truthers can be respectful and courteous even if you disagree with them.
