::::::::
Cross-posted at 911Reports.com:
The Debate Over 9/11 Truth - Jon Gold & ScrewLooseChange
By Erik Larson
This is a documentary commentary on 9/11 Truth and the 9/11 Debate: Jon Gold Vs. Pat Curley, which took place November 24, 2008 on the Franklin Pierce University closed circuit television show, “The Dynamic Duo”, was moderated the show's hosts Justin Martell and Eric Jackman, and is now on youtube.
The topics of the debate were:
1. Are there unanswered questions?
2. Was the 9/11 Commission a legitimate investigation?
Closing arguments of Pat Curley and Jon Gold:
PAT CURLEY: “If there is another 9/11 investigation, and let’s say it comes down a little harder on the Bush Administration, saying that Bush was not paying sufficient enough attention to the Al Qaeda threat, and that several of the NORAD generals lied to the original Commission about when they knew about the hijacking of Flights 93 and 77, and saying that Tenet should’ve been fired for not notifying the FBI about the presence of Almhidhar and Alhazmi in the United States- if all that happens, but the new investigation also concludes nobody in the US government knew any sorts of details about the terrorist attack and let it happen intentionally, that there was no demolition at the World Trade Center, that what hit the Pentagon was Flight 77, and that Flight 93 was not shot down, would anybody in the 9/11 Truth Movement say, “Well, OK, we we’re wrong”? Would Richard Gage shut down Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth? Would Patty Casazza accept that her informant along the highway in Maryland was lying to her? Would David Ray Griffin stop talking about Voice Morph-Morphed phone calls? Would Nico Haupt give up on TV Fakery? Would Killtown stop claiming that Val McAck-McClatchy’s photo was phony? 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. Thank you for your time.”
JON GOLD: “Well, my response is that I really don’t endorse about 99% of everything [Pat Curley] just said and I never have. As I was saying, we are living in the “Post 9/11 World”. This is a world where our civil liberties disappear- where people are murdered in other countries because we decided to fight preemptive wars- this is a world where executive power is multiplied by a thousand with absolutely no accountability whatsoever. And if the event that created the “Post 9/11 World” wasn’t what we were led to believe, then we need to know about it. And I’d like to say that this debate is dedicated to Patty Casazza and Bob McIlvaine.”
In the post-debate comment thread at 911Blogger, Jon Gold says,
“Pat was told specifically not to play the "guilt by association" game. He asked Justin for time for a closing argument, and that's exactly what he used it for. I have always thought 77 hit the Pentagon. I have never endorsed voice morphing. I have never endorsed Nico Haupt. I have never endorsed Killtown (except for his 200 Smoking Gun list, but his antics since then made me steer clear). I have been one of the biggest advocates against promoting bad information, or what is considered bad information. Also, to think that we never correct ourselves, or admit mistakes after I JUST corrected something in my Facts article because he pointed it out, is absurd.”
and
“I think it's funny that Pat agrees 1) there are unanswered questions 2) the 9/11 Commission wasn't a real investigation.”
The debate included the following subjects, and more:
9/11 Family Steering Committee unanswered questions
NORAD’s failure to intercept any planes on 9/11
Philip Shenon, author of “The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation”
The August 6 PDB: Excerpt: “Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York.
The FBI is conducting approximately 70 full field investigations throughout the US that it considers Bin ladin-related. CIA and the FBI are investigating a call to our Embassy in the UAE in May saying that a group of Bin Ladin supporters was in the US planning attacks with explosives.”
The testimony of FBI whistle blower Sibel Edmonds that the US government had been informed that Bin Laden was planning attacks on US cities with planes.
The July 10 emergency meeting with National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, CIA Director George Tenet and Cofer Black, which was left out of the 9/11 Commission Report: CIA Director Gives Urgent Warning to White House of Imminent, Multiple, Simultaneous Al-Qaeda Attacks, Possibly Within US
My view:
Pat Curley’s closing argument was an attempt to frame the 9/11 Truth Movement and “unanswered questions” in a way that fits the “conclusions [he] believe[s]”. Unless he has inside information, Curley has no way of knowing what answers do or don’t exist among the photos, video, documents, witness testimony and other 9/11 evidence still being suppressed by the Bush Administration.
Further, Curley’s attempt to discredit the 9/11 Truth Movement by associating the calls of 9/11 victims family members and 51% of American adults for a new investigation by associating us with people like Nico Haupt and ideas like TV Fakery, instead of addressing our own words and actions, which we are responsible for- is disingenuous and shameful. As Jon Gold noted, researchers and activists in the 9/11 Truth Movement have made mistakes, including himself; and cleaned them up- because of the commitment to establishing truth and justice.
In my opinion, the above list of debate points made by Jon Gold justify the calls of 9/11 victims family members and 51% of Americans for a full investigation of 9/11- and there are many more issues with what we’ve been told about 9/11. The families deserve to know why and how their loved ones were murdered, and all Americans deserve to know the truth about how and why America was attacked on 9/11- whatever the truth may be.
