David Chandler and John Bursill address the fringes of the truth movement

This text will be replaced

Broadcast of June 13, 2012. Part 1 of 1 » Download mp3: click here

14 June 2012 | Permalink | comments: 14
By Hereward Fenton

Share |

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement, Disinformation ]

Today John Bursill takes the helm as guest host.

John is joined by two excellent guests who have become known within the 9/11 Truth Movement as two of it's most wise and reasonable voices. We warmly welcome Ken Jenkins in the first hour and David Chandler in the second. Also we are very lucky be joined by film maker and expert on the Oklahoma City Bombing Chris Emery.

On today's show John takes a look a the current state of the 9/11 Movement and the evidence that conspiracy paranoia and unfounded theories are taking back ground within the alternative media circles and bloggs.

John Bursill: "Many highly dedicated and educated advocates have provided so much solid evidence that the official account of 9/11 is false, it would be a shame for that work to now be destroyed in the public by outspoken uneducated folks simply because they decide their opinion is more important to be heard than facts and the science."

I hope you enjoy the show!

Comments

So Paul thinks fibreglass and aluminium can cut through concrete and Steel like it is made of air?
Paul is peer review puppet.
Planes do not distintergrate but Paul’s plane do.
What a jip!

By Powerup on 2012 06 15 - 14:28:52

Oh and directed energy technology does not come from OUTER SPACE.
Now Paul you are a puppet by repeating your closed minded crap by pouting their sloggan the conspiracy theorist believe in little green men…What a Jip!.
Next time if Paul is on the show I will not be listening.
Truth News? Ha!
repeated close minded bullshit more like it.

By Powerup on 2012 06 15 - 14:33:46

John Bursill is the real deal. He worked very hard in helping us set up for Richard Gage when he came to Brisbane, Australia. We were having problems with the audio for 170 guests and John helped sort it out. John is the real deal but he may have different opinions to what happened as none of knows us exactly what happened, just that it didn’t happen in the way that we have been told. John has always been a hard worker when it comes to promoting 9/11 Truth. It’s better to keep spreading the word to new people than argue amongst ourselves. Peace out!

By Kevin Henriksen on 2012 06 16 - 01:05:18

Very good interview. Toronto hearings wonderful. So good all key researchers met and formalized findings. I have read all papers but learn more each time by such forum. Totally agree the hard evidence must be way forward. This is a CRIME. Mechanics did this, organized it. Covered for it. Due diligence required at all times. Thats what evidence gathering IS. The thermitic material paper still stands. More now than ever with nanotube corroboration. The work of DRG, AE Richard Gage, extremely important in compilation and referral of science and recording of anomaly. This was and is a black operation. The WARS built on back of this atrocity are getting worse. David Chandler has rare ability to remind us of the facts. A man able to refute the LIES of NIST by data - actually got Pinocchio Sunder to acknowledge FREE FALL which will go down as CRITICAL. The atrocity of 911 WAS and IS a conspiracy, a creation of global warmongering. The unthinkable.
Good stuff John.

By rogermorris.remo on 2012 06 16 - 15:02:37

Good point Adam Syed (Thursday at 2:14pm) I have listened to the debates between John Bursill and Rob Balismo (of Pilots for 9/11 truth), and Rob made it quite clear that they were not arguing for “no planes” at the WTC. Why does John continue to misrepresent the pilots arguments? John, if you think people are mistaking you for an Agent then you need to have a serious look at your own behaviour and the signals you are sending out about yourself - Don’t just blame other people for jumping to the wrong conclusions!

By Mike on 2012 06 16 - 18:21:36

This topic is being discussed on the excellent website Truth & Shadows where John Bursill was recently told:

“You’re contribution here is as welcome as a fart in a spacesuit.”

http://truthandshadows.wordpress.com/2012/06/14/pushing-the-boundaries-of-truth-911-vancouver-hearings-embrace-controversy/

By Naomi on 2012 06 17 - 09:44:06

The host is supposed to interview the guests about topics the guest want, er, the Oklahoma bombing video. Not everyone in Oz knows about it.

Ear bashing international guests with local infighting dribble was really bad radio. Whats with that retard voice during the ad breaks?

TNR claims they want to be taken serious with that rolling? Ow please.

Try to get former ITN and BBC Middle East reporter and or Wayne Madsen on the show sometime. They know who did 9/11.

By Dancing Israeli on 2012 06 17 - 21:31:48

Whoops, missed his name; former ITN and BBC Middle East reporter Alan Hart.

By Document the event on 2012 06 17 - 21:35:43

No disrespect to the 911 subject spoken of, this is just an opportunity to present the REAL issue of Chemtrails or Geoegineering below..

http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/

Chemtrailing is the publics term for the CLASSIFIED ONGOING artificial modification of Earths climate systems using reflective nano-materials (aerosols) to reflect sunlight. The aerosols are dispersed via jet aircraft trails that expand into reflective artificial clouds.

Meet the Scientists, the Geo-engineers/ Royal Society,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lw3eGPFrRkA&feature=g-all-c&context=G22b5bbdFAAAAAAAATAA

What The Council on Foreign Relations has publicly posted on the topic of Geoengineering:

The Geoengineering Optionhttp://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/64829/david-g-victor-m-granger-morgan-jay-apt-john-steinbruner-and-kat/the-geoengineering-option

Unilateral Geoengineering
http://geoengineeringwatch.org/documents/GeoEng_041209.pdf

Geoengineering- The last resort against global warming?
http://www.cfr.org/climate-change/geoengineering-option/p18635

Geoengineering Workshop on Unilateral Planetary Scale Geoengineering
http://www.cfr.org/projects/world/geoengineering-workshop-on-unilateral-planetary-scale-geoengineering/pr1364

By Jonathan Volkwein on 2012 06 17 - 22:04:44

I like this theory

06 - What Planes?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJU55FzcM2A&list=PLEA05F393EC843D80&index=6&feature=plcp

By Jonathan Volkwein on 2012 06 17 - 22:59:02

Ah what the hell - here’s the site detail - night

http://acebaker.blogspot.com.au/2012/06/911-great-american-psy-opera.html

9/11 - The Great American Psy-Opera

A scientific, historical, and musical exploration of 9/11 by Ace Baker.
Chapters 1-8 are now free on YouTube.

http://www.youtube.com/user/CollinAlexander?feature=mhee

If you think planes crashed into the twin towers, see chapter 6 “What Planes?” and chapter 7 “The Key”. Carefully considered, real plane crashes are impossible, and the evidence for video compositing is irrefutable.

If you think the towers were brought down by thermite and/or directed energy weapons, please see Chapter 4 “Phenomena”. The evidence for nuclear reactions is overwhelming.

If you think there was a gravity collapse, or are inclined to believe any part of the ridiculous official story, please see chapter 2 “The Official Story vs. The Truth Movement”.

If you’re interested in the psychological aspects of false flag terror, please see chapter 8 “The Psy-Opera”.

If you think the leaders of the “truth” movement are seeking the truth, please wait for chapter 9 “The Controlled Opposition”.

If you want to know what actually occurred on 9/11, please wait for chapter 10 “Conclusion”.

By Jonathan Volkwein on 2012 06 17 - 23:38:53

So what was the point of that 2hr babble?

John wants to set up a governmental body?

If you have alternative .... 9/11 information that doest meet the “official” version, you have to run it past President John and his congress for approval?

Sounds good to me. Silence those anti-semites, John!

Me and my boys are safely out of the US and are having a nice time in Israel. Good luck with our, whoops, your mission.

Shalom from, Dominik Suter.

By Dominik Suter on 2012 06 18 - 10:30:19

Jonathan Volkwein, you claim CGI was used?

OK, suppose we believe that.

* With control over the CGI process, the WTC fakers used a plane with a pod on it? That makes no sense!

* It’s been over 10 years and the CGI team haven’t released a fake “discovered” video showing the the Pentagon strike? That makes no sense!

We’re lucky we have President John in control keeping the real info at bay. Don’t listen to the CIT guys. Eyewitness accounts are forbidden! That is anti-Semitism!

Jonathan Volkwein, do you know anyone that can CGI out our 9/11 moving bomb vans?

Shalom.

By Dominik Suter on 2012 06 18 - 11:01:46

Hi Dominik Suter - Respectfully please may I suggest to go to the source & ask the questions you seek answers from..

I’m only doing this as it is what I would do.

Come back to comment - which ever you feel.

Trust me its better that way - all the best - Jon

http://acebaker.blogspot.com.au/2012/06/911-great-american-psy-opera.html

By Jonathan Volkwein on 2012 06 18 - 12:06:30

In order to leave a comment you may need to register and sign in.

Recent Comments

http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/dane-wigington-on-infowars-4-4-13/#comment-33658

By Leonard Clampett on 2013 04 11 - 09:31:03
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

By Leonard Clampett on 2013 04 11 - 09:28:20
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

http://www.soldierhugs.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Geoengineering.pdf

By Leonard Clampett on 2013 04 11 - 09:19:23
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Leonard Clampett,

the video you linked is a really old conglomerate of all sorts of claims that have been debunked ad nauseam.

What do you think is the ultimate proof for the existence of chemtrails?

Why should we have to assume there is such a thing like chemtrails? How are they different from contrails?

By Josh on 2013 04 10 - 06:59:34
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

http://realnewsworldwide.com/2008/09/10/chemtrails-ultimate-proof/

By Leonard Clampett on 2013 04 09 - 16:31:36
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

If you open the link you will see the reference to chemtrail area forecasts. The other link I wish to post is refused by the “Truth news” which claims it may be SPAM and “will be moderated”, probably because it mentions chemtrails in the link. However, I will try again by separating the words. http://www.chemtrail forecast.com/main.html

By Leonard Clampett on 2013 03 13 - 09:02:16
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

about the link you posted - where is the relevance in the discussion about persistent contrails?

By Josh on 2013 03 13 - 08:50:08
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

http://www.haarpstatus.com/status.html

By Leonard Clampett on 2013 03 13 - 08:44:15
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

after you consistently refused to accept the fact that fuel combustion generates more water than the equivalent of fuel burnt - even when a Qantas pilot confirmed this - I am highly skeptical of your “aviation life experience”. I hope you understand that.

So there are more explanations needed before your claims can be taken seriously.

1. How did you determine that the ambient conditions at the upper troposphere were not conducive to the formation of contrails this summer?

2. How did you determine the causal connection between trails and lack of rain?

3. How did you determine the altitude of the low trail that you saw? How can you be sure it was below the cumulus? Why not above (remember: 3D viewing up to 160m max)? Any pictures maybe?

If you want to do REAL research on the Internet, I strongly suggest to repeat every search query that you issue with the word “debunked” appended. That is the way to do proper research because you see both sides and their arguments. Don’t just fall for sensational claims.

Unfortunately, the Internet is loaded with bunk.

By Josh on 2013 03 02 - 18:06:10
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Josh Anonymous,

You apparently do not do much research. Notice how, over the Eastern Australian summer, there have been many chemtrails coincident with usual weather patterns where obvious rain should have been the outcome had the chemtrails not been laid, and it was not, and this during the season when ambient conditions are not conducive to the formation of contrails. Chemtrails are entirely different to what you term “persistent contrails” as you would know if you had sufficient aviation life experience. You may try to explain how there was recently, and I have observed the same many times before, a chemtrail below a layer of fair weather Cu at 8,000 ft and how this could possibly occur without the laws of physics and thermodynamics being turned on their head. I suggest that you do an Internet search for the activities of Bill Gates and geoengineering.

By Leonard Clampett on 2013 03 02 - 13:51:00
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.