Part II
Part III
The debate took place on Monday, November 24th, 2008 on the Franklin
Pierce University closed circuit television show, The Dynamic Duo and
was moderated by the show's hosts myself and Eric Jackman.
The only editing that has been done to the three segments is all
references to commercials have been removed (to make the conversation
continuous), along with the opening and closing credits. The content
of the debate has not been altered in any way.
FP-TV's The Dynamic Duo is in no way affiliated with the GCN Radio
Network show of the same name.
Pierce University closed circuit television show, The Dynamic Duo and
was moderated by the show's hosts myself and Eric Jackman.
The only editing that has been done to the three segments is all
references to commercials have been removed (to make the conversation
continuous), along with the opening and closing credits. The content
of the debate has not been altered in any way.
FP-TV's The Dynamic Duo is in no way affiliated with the GCN Radio
Network show of the same name.
www.FormYourOwn.org
Since the debate there has been plenty of back and forth between the two sides. It led Jon Gold publishing this article today which I thought was EXCELLENT:
We Might Be Wrong
Jon Gold
12/4/2008
During my recent debate with 9/11 Debunker Pat Curley, in his closing
statement, after listing a plethora of different theories from a whole
spectrum of individuals, including many I do not endorse, he asked,
"would anybody in the 9/11 Truth Movement say, “well, OK, we were
wrong?" if, in fact, a new investigation found that we were. He then
answered his own question by saying, "and the answer is “of course
not," so stop pretending that all you want is another investigation -
you want another investigation that comes to the conclusions that you
believe."
Just to show him that we're not the close-minded people he thinks we
are, here's a list of some things we might be wrong about.
We might be wrong to think that people like Dick Cheney and George
Bush should have wanted to investigate anything and everything that
led to the horrible attacks of 9/11, instead of trying to "limit the
scope" of those investigations, and fight against the families who
wanted them, and rightfully so.
We might be wrong to think that our intelligence agencies should have
known something was up because of the suspicious trading that took
place prior to 9/11. Trading that they monitor.
We might be wrong to think that ALL of the suspicious trading
should have been thoroughly investigated by the 9/11 Commission, and
that their conclusion that the trading was "innocuous" is wrong.
We might be wrong to think that the multitude of warnings our
Government received prior to 9/11 should have caused people within the
Bush Administration to warn the American public, and take precautions
to make sure the attacks didn't succeed.
We might be wrong to think that former Atty Gen. of New York, Eliot
Spitzer, should have responded to the Justice for 9/11 Citizens'
Complaint and Petition delivered to his office in 2004.
We might be wrong to think that a good friend of Dick Cheney's, Lee
Hamilton, someone known for covering up other things like the October
Surprise, and the Iran/Contra Affair, should not have been made the co-
chairman of the 9/11 Commission.
We might be wrong to think that people like Robert Mueller should have
answered all of the families' questions when they were asking him to
his face.
We might be wrong to think that someone with so many conflicts of
interest with the Bush Administration, Philip Zelikow, should not have
been put in charge of the 9/11 Commission.
We might be wrong to be concerned about a statement by former 9/11
Commissioner Max Cleland that says, "as each day goes by, we learn
that this government knew a whole lot more about these terrorists
before Sept. 11 than it has ever admitted."
We might be wrong to think that the multiple wargames taking place on
the morning of 9/11 caused confusion on the ground, and that ALL of them should have been thoroughly investigated.
We might be wrong to think that Donald Rumsfeld should have responded
in writing to former Rep. Cynthia McKinney about her question
regarding the wargames taking place that morning.
We might be wrong to think that the most defended airspace in the
world should not have been left completely undefended 34 minutes after
the second tower was hit, when everyone in the world knew America was
under attack.
We might be wrong to think that either Dick Cheney, Richard Myers,
Ralph Eberhart or Donald Rumsfeld somehow impeded the air response
that morning.
We might be wrong to think that members of our Government should not
meet with an alleged financier of the attacks without being brought
forward publicly to testify about those meetings.
We might be wrong to think that elements within our Government and
others collaborate with the Pakistani ISI to initiate terrorist
attacks around the world in order to create a "strategy of tension."
We might be wrong to think that someone like Shyam Sunder should have
met with people like Dr. Steven Jones to at least look at the
information he has collected.
We might be wrong to think that the Bush Administration should not
have done everything in their power to cover up possible Saudi Arabian
involvement.
We might be wrong to think that Israeli spies in this country prior to
9/11 should have been investigated thoroughly.
We might be wrong to think that someone like Khalil Bin Laden, Osama
Bin Laden's brother, a person with alleged ties to terrorism, should
not have been allowed to leave the country so soon after 9/11 without
having been thoroughly investigated.
We might be wrong to think that the 28 redacted pages of the Joint
Congressional Inquiry should be de-classified.
We might be wrong to think that whistleblowers should not be
retaliated against, or gagged because they were trying to do the right
thing.
We might be wrong to think that the Secret Service should have
immediately moved the President out of Emma E. Booker Elementary that
morning in order to protect him, the children, and the school faculty
present.
We might be wrong to think that the President should have immediately
wanted to deal with the occurring crisis instead of continuing with a
photo-op.
We might be wrong to think that 9/11 should not have been used to take
away our civil liberties, and start pre-emptive wars against countries
that had nothing to do with the attacks.
We might be wrong to think that the murder of 2,973 people should be
treated as a crime instead of as an "act of war."
We might be wrong to think that the media in this country should cover
things like family members calling for an entirely new investigation
on two separate occasions.
We might be wrong to think that everyone that was in the PEOC should
have been brought forward to testify publicly and under oath about
what happened that morning.
We might be wrong to think that Dick Cheney and George Bush should
have been made to testify publicly and under oath.
We might be wrong to think that there shouldn't be a single family
member with doubts about how their loved one was murdered, and who was
responsible for it.
We might be wrong to think that the heroes of 9/11 should be given the
health care that they need, and that those who lied about the air
quality should be held accountable.
We might be wrong to think that if people acted either incompetently
or criminally within our Government, then they should be held
accountable, as opposed to being promoted or rewarded.
We might be wrong to think that the event that created the "Post-9/11
World" should be THOROUGHLY investigated to make sure all of
the actions taken in the name of that day are justified, responsible,
and in we, the people's best interests.
In conclusion, I'd like to say that yes, we may very well be wrong. On
the other hand, we may very well be right. If we are right, and I'm
certain that we are, at least about SOME of it, would you Pat
Curley, would you Mark Roberts, would you Ron Wieck, would you James
Bennett, would you Troy Sexton, would you Jim Miegs, would you Michael
Shermer, would you Chip Berlet, would you members of JREF... would
you... would you... hmmm... are there any more debunkers than that?
Would you admit you were wrong? Would you apologize to all of the
families you have disrespected? Would you apologize to all of the
first responders you have disrespected? Would you apologize to all of
the sincere members of the 9/11 Truth Movement you have either
slandered, harassed, and/or threatened? Either by directly taking part
in these acts, or by promoting them? Would you apologize to the 9/11
Truth Movement for trying to paint us all as crazies by focusing on
the fringiest of the fringe?
Would you? Of course not so stop pretending like you know anything
about 9/11 because you certainly do not.
We Might Be Wrong
Jon Gold
12/4/2008
During my recent debate with 9/11 Debunker Pat Curley, in his closing
statement, after listing a plethora of different theories from a whole
spectrum of individuals, including many I do not endorse, he asked,
"would anybody in the 9/11 Truth Movement say, “well, OK, we were
wrong?" if, in fact, a new investigation found that we were. He then
answered his own question by saying, "and the answer is “of course
not," so stop pretending that all you want is another investigation -
you want another investigation that comes to the conclusions that you
believe."
Just to show him that we're not the close-minded people he thinks we
are, here's a list of some things we might be wrong about.
We might be wrong to think that people like Dick Cheney and George
Bush should have wanted to investigate anything and everything that
led to the horrible attacks of 9/11, instead of trying to "limit the
scope" of those investigations, and fight against the families who
wanted them, and rightfully so.
We might be wrong to think that our intelligence agencies should have
known something was up because of the suspicious trading that took
place prior to 9/11. Trading that they monitor.
We might be wrong to think that ALL of the suspicious trading
should have been thoroughly investigated by the 9/11 Commission, and
that their conclusion that the trading was "innocuous" is wrong.
We might be wrong to think that the multitude of warnings our
Government received prior to 9/11 should have caused people within the
Bush Administration to warn the American public, and take precautions
to make sure the attacks didn't succeed.
We might be wrong to think that former Atty Gen. of New York, Eliot
Spitzer, should have responded to the Justice for 9/11 Citizens'
Complaint and Petition delivered to his office in 2004.
We might be wrong to think that a good friend of Dick Cheney's, Lee
Hamilton, someone known for covering up other things like the October
Surprise, and the Iran/Contra Affair, should not have been made the co-
chairman of the 9/11 Commission.
We might be wrong to think that people like Robert Mueller should have
answered all of the families' questions when they were asking him to
his face.
We might be wrong to think that someone with so many conflicts of
interest with the Bush Administration, Philip Zelikow, should not have
been put in charge of the 9/11 Commission.
We might be wrong to be concerned about a statement by former 9/11
Commissioner Max Cleland that says, "as each day goes by, we learn
that this government knew a whole lot more about these terrorists
before Sept. 11 than it has ever admitted."
We might be wrong to think that the multiple wargames taking place on
the morning of 9/11 caused confusion on the ground, and that ALL of them should have been thoroughly investigated.
We might be wrong to think that Donald Rumsfeld should have responded
in writing to former Rep. Cynthia McKinney about her question
regarding the wargames taking place that morning.
We might be wrong to think that the most defended airspace in the
world should not have been left completely undefended 34 minutes after
the second tower was hit, when everyone in the world knew America was
under attack.
We might be wrong to think that either Dick Cheney, Richard Myers,
Ralph Eberhart or Donald Rumsfeld somehow impeded the air response
that morning.
We might be wrong to think that members of our Government should not
meet with an alleged financier of the attacks without being brought
forward publicly to testify about those meetings.
We might be wrong to think that elements within our Government and
others collaborate with the Pakistani ISI to initiate terrorist
attacks around the world in order to create a "strategy of tension."
We might be wrong to think that someone like Shyam Sunder should have
met with people like Dr. Steven Jones to at least look at the
information he has collected.
We might be wrong to think that the Bush Administration should not
have done everything in their power to cover up possible Saudi Arabian
involvement.
We might be wrong to think that Israeli spies in this country prior to
9/11 should have been investigated thoroughly.
We might be wrong to think that someone like Khalil Bin Laden, Osama
Bin Laden's brother, a person with alleged ties to terrorism, should
not have been allowed to leave the country so soon after 9/11 without
having been thoroughly investigated.
We might be wrong to think that the 28 redacted pages of the Joint
Congressional Inquiry should be de-classified.
We might be wrong to think that whistleblowers should not be
retaliated against, or gagged because they were trying to do the right
thing.
We might be wrong to think that the Secret Service should have
immediately moved the President out of Emma E. Booker Elementary that
morning in order to protect him, the children, and the school faculty
present.
We might be wrong to think that the President should have immediately
wanted to deal with the occurring crisis instead of continuing with a
photo-op.
We might be wrong to think that 9/11 should not have been used to take
away our civil liberties, and start pre-emptive wars against countries
that had nothing to do with the attacks.
We might be wrong to think that the murder of 2,973 people should be
treated as a crime instead of as an "act of war."
We might be wrong to think that the media in this country should cover
things like family members calling for an entirely new investigation
on two separate occasions.
We might be wrong to think that everyone that was in the PEOC should
have been brought forward to testify publicly and under oath about
what happened that morning.
We might be wrong to think that Dick Cheney and George Bush should
have been made to testify publicly and under oath.
We might be wrong to think that there shouldn't be a single family
member with doubts about how their loved one was murdered, and who was
responsible for it.
We might be wrong to think that the heroes of 9/11 should be given the
health care that they need, and that those who lied about the air
quality should be held accountable.
We might be wrong to think that if people acted either incompetently
or criminally within our Government, then they should be held
accountable, as opposed to being promoted or rewarded.
We might be wrong to think that the event that created the "Post-9/11
World" should be THOROUGHLY investigated to make sure all of
the actions taken in the name of that day are justified, responsible,
and in we, the people's best interests.
In conclusion, I'd like to say that yes, we may very well be wrong. On
the other hand, we may very well be right. If we are right, and I'm
certain that we are, at least about SOME of it, would you Pat
Curley, would you Mark Roberts, would you Ron Wieck, would you James
Bennett, would you Troy Sexton, would you Jim Miegs, would you Michael
Shermer, would you Chip Berlet, would you members of JREF... would
you... would you... hmmm... are there any more debunkers than that?
Would you admit you were wrong? Would you apologize to all of the
families you have disrespected? Would you apologize to all of the
first responders you have disrespected? Would you apologize to all of
the sincere members of the 9/11 Truth Movement you have either
slandered, harassed, and/or threatened? Either by directly taking part
in these acts, or by promoting them? Would you apologize to the 9/11
Truth Movement for trying to paint us all as crazies by focusing on
the fringiest of the fringe?
Would you? Of course not so stop pretending like you know anything
about 9/11 because you certainly do not.
