Mike Rivero is a ............

[AlexStratus]

...a phony? a fake? disinfo?   HE SUPPORTS THE OFFICIAL PENTAGON STORY !!

I tried to get on the phone while Mike was on the show on April fools Day 2008, but I got disconnected.  This guy seems pretty reasonable and Alex says "he's honored to have him on the show" BUT I saw this page a long time ago and it is still on Mike's site.  Does Alex know he thinks the Pentagon was hit by a plane?  He BELIEVES THE OFFICIAL STORY?  This bewilders me because you have got to be an idiot to buy into THAT and he seems alright otherwise.

Here is the page title

THE CLAIM THAT THE PENTAGON WAS NOT STRUCK BY A PLANE IS DELIBERATE DISINFORMATION

here it is
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/hunthoax.html

I mean WTF is this about?

[Jesus Murphy]

...judging from the quote found at the bottom of the WRH article, it dates back to 2002.

I'm sure Mike Rivero has learned quite a bit in the last six years, as we all have.

Personally I think he's quite on the level (I doubt Alex would have him on as a regular guest/practical co-host once a month if he wasn't) and is definitely one of the guests I most look forward to hearing.


After all, with all the info that has come to light in the last six and half years, you'd have to be either hopelessly stupid or naive to think a PLANE hit the Pentagon...I doubt Rivero is either.

[DCUBED]

I listen to his show and he still believes that a plane hit the Pentagon. He believes it's a honey pot used to keep people arguing about it.  By keeping the Pentagon such a mystery, many conspiracy theories will be created. I may disagree with him, but he's no disinfo agent. Many people in the movement agree with Mike that a plane hit the Pentagon.

[David Rothscum]

Alex is neutral on the Pentagon issue, that's why you never hear him about it. I share his stance on this, but I lean towards Mike Rivero's opinion. Even if a plane hit the Pentagon, it doesn't mean there aren't any problems with the official Pentagon story though: http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/analysis/location.html

[Mr Grinch]

Check this out and consider all the possibilities.....

This photograph shows the crash site of a DC-8, a jetliner of about the same size as a B-757


This photograph shows what fire can do to an aircraft. This was all that was left of a Boeing 747 after it caught fire while landing.


excerpt from long article.. many pics and evidences..

High-Speed Crashes Reduce Aircraft to Small Pieces

http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/index.html

Few people have direct experience with the results of high-speed collisions of aircraft into strong barriers. Most aircraft accidents occur shortly after takeoff or during attempted landings, and do not completely destroy the aircraft. In contrast, uncontrolled crashes into terrain usually reduce aircraft into fine debris, leaving little if any parts identifiable by casual visual inspection. The debris fields of several jetliner crashes pictured here show the surprising paucity of apparent debris many crashes produce. Crashes of aircraft into buildings also typically leave little in the way of large debris, as the December 5, 2005 crash of a C-130 into an apartment building in Iran illustrates.

http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/analysis/compare/c130crash.html

It is noteworthy that many crashes that left very little to no large recognizable pieces involved much lower impact speeds than the Pentagon attack. Since the Iranian C-130 was attempting to land, its airspeed was probably less than 150 mph.

[gEEk squad]

Even if the Pentagon were hit by a plane, the government would be smart to not release any video showing what really happened. It leaves us, the truth movement divided over a detail, while large, it is not crucial to showing government complicity.

It is much more important to focus on the cover up of the evidence because it easily proves our point. There is NO reason why those tapes should be withheld. What they MIGHT show won't help us any.

[ringo78]

I am not trying to claim anything with this video just thought it might be relevant to the discussion. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4q35xHzjxB0

[dystopia]

I don't think you can make a judgment on the man's intentions because hs opinion on one matter differs from yours, sometimes people just have different opinions.

His site has been one of the best sources of accurate information out there.

[pac522]

Even if the Pentagon were hit by a plane, the government would be smart to not release any video showing what really happened. It leaves us, the truth movement divided over a detail, while large, it is not crucial to showing government complicity.

This is absolutely correct and without stating my position, I would like to say that until they release more video we should all refrain from arguing about it. And instead demand they release all video footage, that would mean all unaltered video footage. 

[AlexStratus]

I don't think you can make a judgment on the man's intentions because hs opinion on one matter differs from yours, sometimes people just have different opinions.

His site has been one of the best sources of accurate information out there.

This is why I was sort of freakin out when I saw that page.  I have heard him on the show before and thought he was very good.  I had not realized at that time there was such a long running controversy.  I am still confused by people that see evidence of a 757 at the crash site.  To me it is almost as obvious as the tower collapses.  e.g. a pancake collapse will have a stack of flattened floors remaining.  If the solid chunks are pulverized the energy needed for the domino action to continue would be dissipated and the collapse will slow to a stop.  Similarly,  an object solid enough to penetrate multiple layers of concrete walls would be somewhat intact.   If the object is disintegrating as it goes thru a wall it will quickly lose the energy required to continue penetrating.  It's like the difference between a hollow point and an armor piercing round.  The armor piercing will get bent and battered but it will won't evaporate.

I totally agree with the reasoning regarding debating this issue:  it matters not exactly what happened as much as who did it.  And we can spend our time on better things than debating about exactly how this event was done.

A stand-up comic, Louis C.K., said regarding the outcome of arguments, "how often do you "win" an argument...?  where the other person just goes, ' oh yes..you are right...I was wrong...thank you"...never. But we still argue....sometimes for hours, days, weeks.  So after arguing for that long, does anyone ever just suddenly agree?  No. In fact if you really wanna screw with someone, just agree with everything they say.  " 

(paraphrased, not verbatim)

[dystopia]

This is why I was sort of freakin out when I saw that page.  I have heard him on the show before and thought he was very good.  I had not realized at that time there was such a long running controversy.  I am still confused by people that see evidence of a 757 at the crash site.  To me it is almost as obvious as the tower collapses.  e.g. a pancake collapse will have a stack of flattened floors remaining.  If the solid chunks are pulverized the energy needed for the domino action to continue would be dissipated and the collapse will slow to a stop.  Similarly,  an object solid enough to penetrate multiple layers of concrete walls would be somewhat intact.   If the object is disintegrating as it goes thru a wall it will quickly lose the energy required to continue penetrating.  It's like the difference between a hollow point and an armor piercing round.  The armor piercing will get bent and battered but it will won't evaporate.

I totally agree with the reasoning regarding debating this issue:  it matters not exactly what happened as much as who did it.  And we can spend our time on better things than debating about exactly how this event was done.

A stand-up comic, Louis C.K., said regarding the outcome of arguments, "how often do you "win" an argument...?  where the other person just goes, ' oh yes..you are right...I was wrong...thank you"...never. But we still argue....sometimes for hours, days, weeks.  So after arguing for that long, does anyone ever just suddenly agree?  No. In fact if you really wanna screw with someone, just agree with everything they say.  " 

(paraphrased, not verbatim)

Right, uh huh, ok, you win pal. No 757, got it. Yeah, I really believe that...

[dreager]

...a phony? a fake? disinfo?   HE SUPPORTS THE OFFICIAL PENTAGON STORY !!

I tried to get on the phone while Mike was on the show on April fools Day 2008, but I got disconnected.  This guy seems pretty reasonable and Alex says "he's honored to have him on the show" BUT I saw this page a long time ago and it is still on Mike's site.  Does Alex know he thinks the Pentagon was hit by a plane?  He BELIEVES THE OFFICIAL STORY?  This bewilders me because you have got to be an idiot to buy into THAT and he seems alright otherwise.

Here is the page title


THE CLAIM THAT THE PENTAGON WAS NOT STRUCK BY A PLANE IS DELIBERATE DISINFORMATION

here it is
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/hunthoax.html

I mean WTF is this about?

Rivero also stated on another show recently that he thought Chemtrials were Contrails even after Alex spelled it out to him. I find this appalling ignorant (wilful) and leads me to question his credibility. In one fell swoop he undid ALL the efforts on Alex part to expose this issue. Tests taken of the aftermath of spraying in California show 4 times the FDA acceptable levels of Barium,Aluminium and blood platelets in the water.

If it walks like a duck....."He has eyes but he cannot see".

[superfender]

I KNOW the Pentagon was hit by a plane, does that make me phony?  You people need to stop believing EVERY conspiracy theory out there......

[dogmadestroyer]

Rivero also stated on another show recently that he thought Chemtrials were Contrails even after Alex spelled it out to him. I find this appalling ignorant (wilful) and leads me to question his credibility. In one fell swoop he undid ALL the efforts on Alex part to expose this issue. Tests taken of the aftermath of spraying in California show 4 times the FDA acceptable levels of Barium,Aluminium and blood platelets in the water.

If it walks like a duck....."He has eyes but he cannot see".

So Rivero is more conservative in his analysis and chooses not to talk about things that create speculation and doubt. I find Alex to be quite conservative in his analysis as well quite often but that doesn't discount when he talks about very relevent, truthful info.

[DCUBED]

I KNOW the Pentagon was hit by a plane, does that make me phony?  You people need to stop believing EVERY conspiracy theory out there......

I'm not saying your right or wrong. But how do you KNOW?

[superfender]

well your right, but I think despite Popular Mechanics faux debunking on every other issue on 911, they did explain how the plane would appear to leave a hole made by a missle, the when the plane hits, the aluminum wings are pushed off, and the fusilage becomes a "missle" and the video pretty much looks like a plane to me....

[mtngirl1013]

For what its worth, he also stated on Alex's show that there was nothing to the whole "chemtrails" thing. He must not be looking at the same sky I am.

[froginapot]

.........Absolutely.........
(drink)

............Yeah, absolutely.............
(drink)

[AlexStratus]

An important point has been clarified for me and I want to share it with anyone debating the "what hit the pentagon" issue.  I have been assuming that whenever someone says it was "a plane", that it was a 757.  I believe that some kind of explosive penetrating weapon is needed to go thru so many think walls and a 757 cannot do that.  HOWEVER, a smaller twin engine military jet firing a some type of penetrating missile shortly before impact could do that damage,  Now when these witnesses say it was a American Airlines 757... how could they have identified it when it was going over 500 mph?   That is over 700 feet per second.  Flying as low as it was and going that fast would make identification very difficult.  If you say that they heard it coming so they turned to look and had more time....not likely.  700 feet per second is just slightly below the speed of sound so you would not hear anything  until it was right overhead and longer the farther you are from the flight path.  Another flaw in the official story is the speed.  I am not absolutely positive about this but, a 757 could not fly that close to the speed of sound especially at such a low altitude.  I believe the engines cannot produce enough thrust for the resistance of the high air density and even if the engines could produce enough thrust, they would overheat very quickly.

 Other smaller jet aircraft could: 1) resemble a 757 enough that people already expecting a 757 would be easily convinced that it was. 2) fly at very high speed much closer to the ground than the 757 because a shorter wingspan would mean ground effect would happen lower.  3) leave much less debris than a 757.  4) be able to sustain the high speed at low altitude

So in conclusion I will concede that a plane could have hit the Pentagon but it could not have been a 757.

Now...Rivero can't tell a chemtrail from a contrail?  Well if that is true, that is unfortunate.  He is otherwise well informed.  The chemtrail phenomena is easily proven if not easily explained.  Whenever I encounter a chemtrail doubter,  someone insisting those long persistent streams are normal, I defy them to show me a picture taken prior to late 1990's that show similar formations.  I see chemtrails in the background of TV shows, magazine cover pictures, youtube videos, etc.  but only if taken since 2000.  There are tons of old pictures available, all I ask is a verifiable date and the picture can come from 1955 to 1995.  That's alot of pictures to choose from.

[darsie]

AJ comes over better on the radio - but even so - Mike Rivero is still pretty hard-hitting with what he has to say.

He explains matters in a plain, straight-talking sort of way and doesn't mince his words.

The Alex Jones - Jack Blood - and Mike Rivero daily shows should be required listening for all PP forum members IMHO!

BUT that would require 7++ hours of listening a day!

[dogmadestroyer]

AJ comes over better on the radio - but even so - Mike Rivero is still pretty hard-hitting with what he has to say.

He explains matters in a plain, straight-talking sort of way and doesn't mince his words.

The Alex Jones - Jack Blood - and Mike Rivero daily shows should be required listening for all PP forum members IMHO!

BUT that would require 7++ hours of listening a day!

Yeah, I never really liked Mike Rivero on the radio and all fairness to Jack Blood but he comes off as some 'hip' Alex and it often comes out of his mouth sounding more paranoid due to a lack of explaination for new listeners. I honestly think the Jeff Rense show should be required listening in addition to Alex because they often disagree on large issues and its usually a 50/50 split between Alex and Jeff as to who is right. For instance, he was talking about the split of Russia from the NWO long before Alex and covering Obama with Webster Tarpley on constantly as the possible frontrunner for quite some time.

[iks83]

I found that rather convincing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVDdjLQkUV8

Michael Rivero also had a link on his site where they debunk some of the no plane at the pentagon "proof." Some cropped pictures in a way that piles of plane debris are cut out and then say BRAND NEW FOOTAGE APPEARED THAT SHOWS NO DEBRIS!!!!! I stick with Rivero on that issue, we need more video to be sure but also the one that was released seems to fit like the link above is demonstrating.

[darsie]

Yeah, I never really liked Mike Rivero on the radio and all fairness to Jack Blood but he comes off as some 'hip' Alex and it often comes out of his mouth sounding more paranoid due to a lack of explaination for new listeners. I honestly think the Jeff Rense show should be required listening in addition to Alex because they often disagree on large issues and its usually a 50/50 split between Alex and Jeff as to who is right. For instance, he was talking about the split of Russia from the NWO long before Alex and covering Obama with Webster Tarpley on constantly as the possible frontrunner for quite some time.

That's true. Jeff Rense needs to be a bit more selective with regard to his guests. All these frings subjects he covers tend to dilute the really important stuff - NWO - 9/11 - pending attack on Iran etc.

[darsie]

I found that rather convincing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVDdjLQkUV8

Michael Rivero also had a link on his site where they debunk some of the no plane at the pentagon "proof." Some cropped pictures in a way that piles of plane debris are cut out and then say BRAND NEW FOOTAGE APPEARED THAT SHOWS NO DEBRIS!!!!! I stick with Rivero on that issue, we need more video to be sure but also the one that was released seems to fit like the link above is demonstrating.

We sure do. And guess who's holding onto it?

The FBI and CIA for obvious reasons.

I thought Rivero was in agreement about the 'no plane' theory.

[dogmadestroyer]

That's true. Jeff Rense needs to be a bit more selective with regard to his guests. All these frings subjects he covers tend to dilute the really important stuff - NWO - 9/11 - pending attack on Iran etc.

I suppose you could look at it that way but I frankly can't listen to Alex everyday. Hyperactivity and anger are good towards these subjects but my personality is more of the cool and analytical type. The shows with UFO's and ghosts are 9 times out of 10 on Friday night when nobody is listening. Last night he had Ralph Shoenman to get a communist's perspective of the economic collapse (actually pretty good... communists are very good at identifying problems but are bad with solutions) and tonight Jim Marrs is coming on to talk about news and such so its been the pressing issues.

[froginapot]

Absolutely....

[darsie]

I suppose you could look at it that way but I frankly can't listen to Alex everyday. Hyperactivity and anger are good towards these subjects but my personality is more of the cool and analytical type. The shows with UFO's and ghosts are 9 times out of 10 on Friday night when nobody is listening. Last night he had Ralph Shoenman to get a communist's perspective of the economic collapse (actually pretty good... communists are very good at identifying problems but are bad with solutions) and tonight Jim Marrs is coming on to talk about news and such so its been the pressing issues.

Well Alex is certainly running hard and fast these days with his daily radio show. And - yes - I should start listening to Jeff Rense more often - his three hour show airs from 9.00-12.00 am here in Thailand on Genesis which is at a time I normally can't listen. Also his show is the ONLY show not available on demand on GCN - although I was able to download his first four shows of the month a few days ago as torrents in a pretty short time.

Alex Jones - Jack Blood - Micke Rivero - Jeff Rense - and David Icke (hopefully one day) - top five.

[froginapot]

Yeah....Ahhbsssoluuuteeeeleeeey!

(drink! )