Results 1 to 6 of 6
Aug 16th, 2006, 8:16 PM #1
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
National 9/11 Debate: Press Release
National 9/11 Debate
Ed Haas, Muckraker Report and teamliberty.net August 15, 2006
Dr. Frank R. Greening to argue in support of government account of the events of September 11, 2001 at the National 9/11 Debate
The National 9/11 Debate is pleased to announce that Frank R. Greening Ph.D. has agreed to participate in the National 9/11 Debate on March 10, 2007 in Charleston, South Carolina. Frank R. Greening will be part of a seven-member debate team that will support the U.S. government’s official account of 9/11 events.
Frank R. Greening was born in London, England in 1947. He has a Ph.D. in physical chemistry and has carried out research in physics, chemistry, and materials science for 30 years in academic and industrial positions. He has published approximately 80 research reports and journal articles, including numerous articles supporting the government’s collapse sequence theories of World Trade Center Buildings 1 & 2.
While the 9/11 Commissioners and NIST scientists remain invited to participate in the National 9/11 Debate, the Muckraker Report has expanded the potential government debate team members to any qualified persons that are willing to publicly defend the government’s account of 9/11 against the opposing debate team already assembled. Dr. Greening is the first such expert that has agreed to debate members of Scholars for 9/11 Truth as well as other experts that oppose the government’s account of 9/11 to include Philip J. Berg, James H. Fetzer, David Ray Griffin, Steven E. Jones, George Nelson, Morgan Reynolds, and Judy D. Wood.
“Regardless of what you believe about the events of September 11, 2001, the need for a fair, public debate regarding the government’s official account of 9/11 is made apparent by the fact that nearly half of all Americans, and arguably, more than half of the world population does not accept the U.S. government’s final 9/11 reports as complete or factual. The goal of this debate has always been to give each side a safe public forum for honest debate where each side is allowed to completely express their views and debate the merits of these views,” says Ed Haas, National 9/11 Debate Coordinator. “With Dr. Greening coming on board, I am confident that others will follow and this much needed debate will occur.”
The format of the National 9/11 Debate will include a credentialed seven-member debate team that supports the government’s account of 9/11, a credentialed seven-member debate team that disputes elements of the government’s account, and a seven-member media panel that will monitor the debates and pose questions to the debate team members.
Any member of the media that would like to be on the media panel should contact Ed Haas promptly.For more truth, come to www.watchmanreport.com
I'm the news editor at the site.
Aug 16th, 2006, 9:32 PM #2
Interesting. Who's actually sponsoring this and what guarantee is there that the government side will WANT to participate?"In the last days perilous times will come, for men shall have a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof." 2 Tim 3
Aug 16th, 2006, 9:39 PM #3
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
No guarantees at all. Actually, they've been hounding the NIST people or the commissioners to do a debate for months, but were turned down.
To read an article about what the government people said when offered this before:
When faced with the challenge of a National 9/11 Debate, the Muckraker Report turned to the well-respected work of Professor Jones and Professor Fetzer at Scholars for 9/11 Truth. The Muckraker Report contacted Professor Fetzer and asked if he could assemble a highly qualified seven-member civilian debate team that would be willing to debate a seven-member government debate team regarding the government’s account of 9/11 events. Professor Fetzer had a team assembled in two weeks. With the civilian debate team in place, the Muckraker Report identified twenty-nine potential government debate team members to include the ten members of the 9/11 Commission and the thirteen NIST scientists responsible for the government’s “pancake theory” of collapse. Each of these potential government debate team members was mailed numerous invitations. Five of the 9/11 Commissioners had staffers contact the Muckraker Report via telephone to decline invitation due to “prior commitments”. However, the thirteen NIST scientists remained silent.
After three separate mailings of hard copy invitations to the NIST scientists, on June 8, 2006 the Muckraker Report received e-mail from NIST that said, “The project leaders of the NIST World Trade Center investigation team respectfully decline your invitations to participate in the National 9/11 Debate on September 16, 2006.” Not to be deterred, on June 20, 2006 the Muckraker Report e-mailed Michael E. Newman, NIST Director of Media Relations, and asked if there was a better date, time, and location for NIST to participate in the National 9/11 Debate.
On June 25, 2006, NIST Director of Media Relations, Michael E. Newman responded:
The members of the NIST WTC Investigation Team has [sic] respectfully declined your invitation to participate in the National 9/11 Debate. A change in venue or date will not alter that decision.
A change of venue or date will not alter that decision. Fascinating! What Newman is telling the world is that the public servants at NIST, the people paid by the U.S. taxpayers, will never, ever publicly debate their peers regarding the “pancake theory” of collapse of WTC-1, WTC-2, and WTC-7. Taxpayers should be outraged! The public needs to demand accountability. Apparently, the Gang of 13 at NIST does not believe they are accountability to the people. That needs to change, pronto! Newman has repeatedly told the Muckraker Report that NIST “stands solidly behind the collapse mechanisms for each tower and the sequences of events (from aircraft impact to collapse) as described in the report.” The truth is that NIST is hiding behind its unsustainable theory and dares not publicly debate the merits of its report.
[...]For more truth, come to www.watchmanreport.com
I'm the news editor at the site.
Aug 17th, 2006, 5:29 AM #4
think about it !Originally Posted by Raptor Witness
Question is what do you do
My guess is you would love to get into a fight with the opposing side and teach them a lesson in front of the world wouldn’t you !
Now imagine for one moment that big brothers knocks your door and tells you not to fight for what ever reason, don’t you think this would make you suspicious or make you dam right angry.
Do you think the debate will be aired live on TV so that the media don’t get the chance to selectively edit the story. I bet it will be live all over the internet.
Aug 17th, 2006, 2:24 PM #5
I wouldn't show up, but then again, I don't think I would enjoy putting myself in a position where I will be hounded by "news" hungry media and slandered by "scholars" for "truth". Maybe I have issues..:if knowledge is power, know this is tyranny:.
Aug 18th, 2006, 4:12 AM #6
Yes you do have issuesOriginally Posted by donniedarko
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
By prezhorusin04 in forum Politics and Current EventsReplies: 6Last Post: Sep 5th, 2004, 2:14 AM