9/11 debate on C2C I consulted on for Richard Gage

[Edx]

[Edx]

[really?]

Did the debate take place ?

[Chemist]

[Edx]

[Edx]

[Edx]

[Chemist]

[Edx]

[Chemist]

[Scepcop]

Hi all,
If you missed it, here is the 9/11 debate on Coast to Coast on August 21 between Richard Gage of AE911Truth and Dave Thomas, posted on YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzdSbjTEFcs

I listened to it and was really disgusted and annoyed by Ian Punnett's performance. It was highly obstructive, ignorant and crossed the line several times. Therefore, I've sent this letter of complaint to Coast to Coast management, including to Ian himself. Please read it and forward it to them if you agree, to their public emails below.

I strongly believe these complaints are legitimate and Ian's negative obstructive behavior should be called attention to. He was NOT a good host during this debate at all, and showed a lot of ignorance which he falsely pinned onto Richard. I gave some examples below in the letter.

Here it is. If you agree with it, copy and paste it and send it to their emails below. Or send them your own complaint letter. If enough people complain, they might listen and do something about their host's bad behavior. I will also be posting this letter on various forums to ask others to write to them as well.

To:
george@coasttocoastam.com, artbell@mindspring.com, ian@coasttocoastam.com, georgeknapp@coasttocoastam.com, lisa@coasttocoastam.com, tom@coasttocoastam.com, lex@coasttocoastam.com, shawn@coasttocoastam.com, feedback@coasttocoastam.com, CoastProducer@aol.com

Re: Complaints from many re: Ian's behavior in the 9/11 debate Aug 2010

Dear Coast to Coast management,

On behalf of many 9/11 debate fans, I believe I speak for most of them in this letter below:

I would like to bring some legitimate complaints to you regarding the behavior of host Ian Punnett during the 9/11 debate on August 21.

If you look at all the comments in the 11 parts on YouTube of that debate, you will see that virtually everyone complained about Ian Punnett's performance as host. Here is the link to see them:

Part 1 of 11:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzdSbjTEFcs

If you read the comments on all 11 parts on YouTube, you will notice that everyone complained about Ian and the comments about his performance are all negative. And if you listen to the whole debate, you will understand why. Ian was obstructive in many ways, as well as very UNfair and UNreasonable toward Richard Gage. He was making very UNrealistic demands and putting Gage on the defensive for no valid reason. This became very annoying after a while and was highly obstructive and disruptive to the flow of the debate.

I eventually felt a headache and stomach ache coming on while listening to him. His voice became a disruptive presence to the debate that did not really even belong in it. It did not add anything to the debate, but was obstructive to the flow of it. Ian does not carry the flow of it well like George Noory does. Moreover, his behavior crossed the line numerous times in several ways (see examples below).

Therefore, it was a very poor choice and blunder on the part of Coast to Coast to have him moderate this debate.

Here are some key examples of Ian's obstructive behavior during this debate:

For instance, Ian kept insinuating that Gage was copping out because he would not name exactly WHO planned the 9/11 attacks and planted the thermite in the WTC. Yet any listener could tell that it was IAN who didn't know what he was talking about. Use common sense here.

Richard Gage does not claim to be an omnipotent mind reader with all the answers. He never claimed that. His position all along, which is clear from ALL his interviews and lectures, is that the hypothesis of the official story does NOT FIT the data, facts and evidence. He has made that very very clear and unambiguous.

Therefore, for Ian to demand that Gage name all the names of those guilty and responsible is unreasonable, unrealistic and ignorant as well.

Now, if Ian had asked Gage to do this just once, it would have been a normal thing. But where he crossed the line is when he constantly hounded Gage about it over and over again throughout the debate, after Gage made his position very CLEAR and explained why he could not name names. That was definitely CROSSING THE LINE! For sure.

If you listen to the whole debate at the link above or through your own site, you'll see exactly what I mean. Ian lacked simple common sense and courtesy. He did not make sense and was pushing his opinions onto it which obstructed it, becoming a bad influence himself. People could see that Ian didn't know what he was talking about (which is evident from all the YouTube comments) yet Ian wouldn't go away and kept meddling, thus becoming a hindrance to the debate. No host should be like that.

If you want someone to name names and speculate on who did it, you should bring Alex Jones on the show instead. He is the type of person who would do that. But not Gage.

Another example was when Ian demanded that Gage declare whether Larry Silverstein was guilty and "in on it" or not. When Gage refused to speculate on reasonable grounds, Ian acted like there was something wrong with Gage, and insinuated that he was being evasive, when in fact it was IAN who had the problem and was in the wrong, not Gage. That was so obvious to everyone. (except to Ian of course) Gage was making sense but Ian failed to understand this for some reason, and thus falsely accused Gage in the wrong way.

Overall, Ian's performance was an embarassment to Coast to Coast, and an obstruction to the debate. I don't know why you even hired him. There are plenty of people out there who would have done a better job. Ian's behavior was ignorant, annoying and lacking in common sense. He does NOT add to the show like Noory does. Noory, on the other hand, ADDS energy to the FLOW of his interviews and contributes to them. That makes him a great interviewer. But Ian OBSTRUCTS the interviews and the flow of them. That's a big difference.

Look, we all know that a good host is able to connect with others and bring out the best in them (like George Noory does). He can put himself on the same wavelength as his guests. But Ian was clearly in his own wavelength that was disconnected from others. It's a big mistake to hire a host who is on another wavelength that cannot relate or understand to others. BIG mistake. Ian is simply a bad fit, even he means well.

Think about it. Listen to the debate yourself and you will see what I mean. His presence was highly obstructive to the flow of the interview.

Thanks for your attention.

Sincerely,
A concerned fan

[Chemist]

Actually, Ian did an excellent job moderating the debate. I was suprised considering the venue. You should be thankful to him, otherwise Gage would have hung himself. Ian had to try and make Gage look like a normal skeptic which is difficult to do. Nobody can say that Gage didn't get and fair shake on that program.

I know it bothers you when a moderator expects a participant to answer questions (which doesn't suprise me that Gage couldn't) but this is how debates are suppose to be conducted. And what Gage presented was what we've all heard before so it wasn't like Ian was trying to supress any new information that Gage might have wanted to present. And when Gage keep replying, "check my website" or "that why we need a new investigation", we can be pretty sure that he has nothing else to say.

Were you expecting Ian to keep letting Gage plug his website for the entire 3-4 hours???

[Chemist]

[Edx]

I dont expect Gage to come up with a complete list of suspects but I, and apparently the host, expect him to have the balls to not just insinuate and tip toe around straight out accusing Larry Silverstein of participating in the murder of thousands of people. If he is worried about libel and slander I dont see how much he has to worry about seeing as how Alex Jones and his Alex idiotic followers haven't been sued even though they go so far as to bullhorn "murderer" outside his offices. If Gage wants to say Silverstein is "in on it" just bloody say it you coward.

[really?]

I don't know if scepcop lives in the USA, but if he does today would have been the day to watch the History Channel. Today aired documentaries and firsthand accounts all about 9/11