Kevin Bracken and 9/11 conspiracy theories


Kevin Bracken — Maritime Union of Australia Victorian Branch Secretary and Victorian Trades Hall President — has been claiming that 9/11 is a conspiracy for years. Last year, he helped to organise the Melbourne leg of ‘The Hard Evidence Tour Down Under’, dedicated to exposing the troof about 9/11. The conference was held at Trades Hall, and featured US troofer and founding member of ‘Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth’ Richard Gage; the event’s MC was John Bursill, who just two months earlier addressed the fascist gathering known as the Sydney Forum on the subject of troof.

Perhaps it’s time Brian Boyd imposed some S11 style “working class discipline” on his 9/11 President?


About @ndy

I live in Melbourne, Australia. I like anarchy. I don't like nazis. I enjoy eating pizza and drinking beer. I barrack for the greatest football team on Earth: Collingwood Magpies. The 2023 premiership's a cakewalk for the good old Collingwood.
This entry was posted in !nataS, Broken Windows, Death, History, State / Politics, War on Terror and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to Kevin Bracken and 9/11 conspiracy theories

  1. Polizei und Bundeswehr bedrohen uns mit unsichtbaren Folterstrahlen! ;-(

  2. Piltown says:

    The man obviously has friends in the secret services.

  3. Anon says:

    “the event’s MC was John Bursill, who just two months earlier addressed the fascist gathering known as the Sydney Forum on the subject of troof.”

    Just wondering if Bracken actually knew that? It might be worth pointing out next time and seeing what his response is.

  4. @ndy says:

    No idea. I doubt it would make much difference.

  5. doesnt matter says:

    all you can do is call names huh?

    be nice if you people actually had some proof to back up your lunacy theory.
    there is unrefuted evidence as to why events could not have possibly happened the way the govt says, the official conspiracy theory can not stand up to even the slightest basic scrutiny, so no one will have a rational civil debate.

    obviously scared of the truth.

    keep up with the insults and name calling, thats all youve got.

  6. @ndy says:

    Call names? I haven’t called anyone names. Well, apart from Richard Gage: Troofer. It’s a fairly innocuous term I think. Beyond that…

  7. doesnt matter says:

    stating that the official version does not stand up to scrutiny, which it doesnt, does not automatically mean that person also believes in any and all other theories people like to mention.

    i didnt watch all that vid with chomsky, ive seen it before i think, and while hes entitled to his own opinions, and i think at the beginning he even suggests that the gov may have had some prior warning, and did nothing – well that fact alone should be further investigated, regardless of how much i may or may not respect his opinion, which i usually do.

    regardless of anything anyone says though… there are simply some things that still need further scrutiny. such as…

    evidence of explosive materials found in the dust. ok im no scientist, but ill believe the ones that wrote the report until proven beyond reasonable doubt by other scientists, that they are wrong. so far, noone has refuted their report.

    and the fact that nist have admitted free fall – for a time – of building 7 through the path of most resistance to collapse neatly into its own footprint… exactly as a controlled demolition would… not how it would due to structural damage and a few small fires…

    im also relying on my eyes, just watching those buildings explode… not collapse… and my, perhaps limited, common sense, but its got me this far… that tells me i saw buildings exploding.

    pics like this eg

    i may have indeed accused you of calling people names, when you havent. my apologies. personally, i dont mind being labelled a twoofer, although yo call it innocuous… the term is meant to ridicule and demean, but i dont find a search for answers and truth ridiculous.

    but the radio host, and the prime minister… i guess before i stumbled upon this blog, id read nothing else but insults from people opposing brackens views, no substance, no proof he is wrong in what he is saying, noone willing to debate him, rather a quick one liner, throw in a nutjob, or a goose here and there… and back to business as usual.

    my view is, i dont know what happened, how could i? but im doubtful sept 11 happened the way we are being told, and the government has not proven their case, and is not interested in alternative evidence, so… what are they hiding?

    theres many more things that dont mesh with the official story either… and i dont think you necessarily have to subscribe to any other theories to feel that the official theory has yet to be explained satisfactorily.

    there are thousands of respectable people all over the world with concerns, and the number is growing every day. even the members of the 9/11 commission themselves now state that their report was limited in scope, based on lies, and they were told not to dig too deep.

    the poll at the link to that story

    shows he has over 70% support, so, for the radio host to be so rude and dismissive, is really a bit off.

    anyway, thanks for the opportunity to express my pov.

  8. Anon says:

    Actually I’m studying building engineering and have looked at your site. It’s full of articles referencing other articles on the site. Lots of theories and theoretical discussion. Lots of blurry photos with arrows and circles drawn on them. Lots of simplistic or outright lying claims such as the no steel framed building has ever collapsed due to fire (just google it), or that airplane fuel doesn’t burn hot enough to melt steel (it doesn’t -but the fire it caused could easily have reached such temperatures over time). But no coherent analysis with facts and figures. Maybe I’m missing something but if you do have real proof you sure are good at hiding it.

  9. doesnt matter says:

    theres plenty of evidence, its not my fault if you cannot comprehend any of it.
    the main stream media are the ones hiding… hiding a proper debate.

    theres published unrefuted proof of explosive evidence in the dust. google it.

    heres how a debate might go if only they werent so scared

    id give up your engineering studies if i were you. i doubt its your forte.

  10. Anon says:

    Actually I’m pretty fucking good at it. So what do YOU do for a living?

  11. Ringer 74 says:

    You, mate, can’t be good at anything from the way you express yourself. I’d class you as an A1 simpleton!

  12. Big (A)//Little (a) says:

    Personally I don’t have any issue with reinvestigating the matter. If the US govt has nothing to hide then they should feel no issue with doing the same.

    This view isn’t rare amongst the American population either and it has received a wide range of media coverage but we seem not to hear about it here.

    I mean call me an Anarchist but I tend not to swallow up everything the media and state tells me to do.

    I am not pointing fingers at any group or individual in relation to focus the blame on but I believe that in a truly democratic society there should and would be an open debate on the matter.

    Finally, I would not be shocked if there were other elements to this incident that have been kept from us.

  13. christophe says:

    Hey this is great!!! I was on an astronomy blog 3 days after 911, and out of the blue someone posted that 911 was a “psyops” and rigged. It sort of threw me, as I had seen the live coverage and even shed a tear and was TOTALLY SHOCKED by what happened. This post made me think and suddenly I found out that the US was invading Afghanistan on the first week of October, based on what??? …BIN LADEN. Even the FBI admit he was not involved… also as a “supply officer” I knew it was almost impossible to launch a full scale attack on a country with only 3 weeks or less notification. The logistics is overwhelming.

    The smell of BS or a rat was also overwhelming… that smell is even stronger today.

  14. Political Scientist says:

    Kevin Bracken is becoming an international hero for his cool, calm demeanour and persistent focus on the facts of 9/11 in his radio conversations with Jon Faine.

    I listened just moments ago to an mp3 of his first call into Faine’s show, and was immediately struck by Faine’s ignorant, rude and evasive comments and non-sequiturs, all delivered in a smug, condescending tone, while Bracken calmly returned to the facts of 9/11.

    Faine came across as intellectually dishonest, and a paid shill for the “official conspiracy theory” as presented by the 9/11 Commission Report, even as the MAJORITY (6 of 10) of the 9/11 Commissioners, including BOTH Co-Chairmen, and the Commission’s General Counsel, have stated publicly that the 9/11 Report is NOT THE TRUTH.


    So, why should anyone believe a shill like Jon Faine?

    And, when commenting on Bracken’s statements, Ms. Gillard called the MAJORITY of the 9/11 Commissioners “stupid and dumb”. Not very lady-like, eh?

    It was also enlightening to note that 77% (!!!) of the respondents (almost 4 out of 5, and constantly increasing before the poll and the comments were stopped) to the Herald Sun poll AGREED with Mr. Bracken’s comments, while only 23% (less than 1 in 4) did not find his comments “reasonable”.

    That means that Gillard and the 9/11 Truth Deniers are a “fringe minority”. They are either paid shills, slow learners or just asleep. For the latter two, it’s time for them to catch up or wake up. As for the shills… I’ll abstain from classifying them with professional ladies who actually provide wanted services for the moneys they receive.

    Good on you, Mr. Kevin Bracken! Keep up the good fight. The truth will prevail.

    Regards from the Great White North,
    Political Scientist

  15. Dave says:

    I guess jon faine simply doesnt understand the primary school physics of the upward force a steel frame building has 🙂 , either he is a fool, or he believes his listeners to be.

  16. Paul Mason says:

    To Anon (strange name, or have you got something to hide?)
    Studying engineering doesn’t make you an engineer mate; you need some innovative runs on the board to earn that tag. If you really understood engineering (or were capable of logical thought for that matter) you would immediately realise that 9/11 was a complete fraud. Have you ever watched any of David Chandler’s videos like this one:
    Oh, and what do I do? Structural Engineer for more than 35 years!

  17. Piltdown says:

    Not sure you should argue with Anon. When you google Paul Mason and Anon, the later always comes out as the smarty pants.

    As for conspiracies, maybe you should examine the background of this fellow called Slackbastard.

    I recently came across the lyrics: “Andy sang, Andy watched, Andy waited ’till his Billy boiled.

    Could Andy have been alive when Banjo wrote these lyrics?


    Slackbastard is a GOLEM.

    Unless we kill Andy and burn all Banjo Paterson books we will not be safe.


Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.