Blogs

Thursday night Site Notes

Switched over the website tonight from being in the /v2 folder to just being in the root as it should be. Unfortunately I am getting a bunch of errors in my logs from people still trying to hit the old site - at least the error message explains the switch and links to the homepage. One of the other issues is that some browsers have the index.html cached, which redirects to the /v2 folder. I deleted that index.html, but if it is cached it still might try to reroute you to the /v2 folder I suppose. So, if your having issues with things still referencing the /v2 folder be sure to click here to learn how to clear out your cache.

With that out of the way, here is the list for today:

  • Switched site from /v2 subfolder to the root of 911blogger.com
  • Added social networking images/links (digg, de.licio.us, etc.) to full page post view
  • Implemented throttle module to try to keep the 'CPU Quota' error from occurring
  • Reduced default # of comments to show from 300 back to 30 due to load issue, logged in users can still modify default

I tested the site out on Safari finally as well thanks to a website for webmasters wanting to test for Safari but without a Mac. Apparently the new site loads fine in Safari, but it was with version 2.0.4, so if you are using something older please be sure to update. If there are Safari issues for the latest version let me know, otherwise that means the new site should work fine now in Firefox, IE 6 and 7, Opera, and Safari 2.0+.

ImplosionWorld debunks demolision theory

Anyone read the article in ImplosionWorld of August 8 by Brent Blanchard? It is http://www.implosionworld.com/WTC%20COLLAPSE%20STUDY%20BBlanchard%208-8-06.pdf.

He goes through 9 dubiously concocted assertions in favor of demolition, and attempts to refute them. He doesn't address any of the hard issues, such as the complete pulverization of the concrete, or the near freefall collapse times.

We'll all bow down and praise you no-planers once we win

How about this to settle this dispute, and its most recent formulation with the Morgan Reynolds/Judy Wood hit piece today.

All of us who don't believe in "No Plane Theory" (NPT) will promise to give you guys all the respect and deference once 9/11 truth gets out. I'll even give you money for being right if you are, I mean that.

For now, the no planers at the WTC need to shut up and stop attacking their own, like Steven Jones, etc. This debate won't be settled until we win and 9/11 truth is out and then we can actually look at the evidence, have a complete investigation, etc. Until that time, 'No-planers' have to realize that they are hurting the movement. They are hindering the truth from being delivered to millions of more people in America and around the world. They are preventing the truth from breaking through the wall of mainstream media and left gate-keepers we are working so hard to crack. They are hurting the chances that others who know and have credibility will come out.

We all know that the government's explanation of how World Trade Center 1, 2, and 7 came down doesn't stand up to evidence.

NTSB Data Dissected : Flight 93 was shot down!

Hi,

If you look at the graphs provided by the NTSB from Flight 93s FDR, you will notice that at the purported crash time, the altitude is a MINIMUM of 2000ft.

Next thing we need to do is figure out what happened in the next 3 minutes? All bets are on it being shot down.

ALSO, can someone look at the graph and confirm I am reading it correctly?

Thanks!
Blogger Joe

References:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB196/doc04.pdf

Check page 20
Altitude graph goes from 0 to 40000 feet
Its ends a few millimeters above the x-axis.
This turns out to correspond to 2000 ft when you check the legend.

Modify claims about WTC7 fires: Some were "raging"

In The New Pearl Harbor, David Ray Griffin says, regarding WTC7, "there is no evidence of any raging fire" (p.21). This claim, often repeated, must be modified. Debunking sites use images from Steve Spak's film Day of Disaster to counter the argument for controlled demolition. This evidence cannot be ignored. Here I would like to suggest a refined argument for WTC7, and I recommend downgrading its importance in the 911 Truth movement.

Hopefully, the screen captures I uploaded appear below. These images are from Spak's film and show the west side and the south side. Typically, Truthers show video of the north side collapsing. The west face shows at least one floor where the windows are broken and a "raging" fire is belching from the building. The south side shows a wall of smoke and some structural damage (we know the SW corner had a gash about 15-20 floors high).

Two points should be made about these pictures:

1. There is definitely an intense fire in WTC7, but we do not know how widespread it is.

2. The wall of smoke suggests but does not confirm a widespread fire. There is definitely structural damage to the south side of WTC7, and all of the smoke is being vented out that side. The north side, for example, shows little evidence of smoke or fire.

NORAD's Response On 9/11

I sent a letter.

Hi NORAD,

I was hoping you can help me out. It's hard to find any information on this particular subject. In the event of an air emergency, what is the average response time of an intercept?

Any help you could give would be greatly appreciated.

Sincerely,

Jon Gold

The response...

Sir: Unfortunately there are too many variables to give you an accurate answer. The bottom-line is we have alert aircraft at various locations throughout the U.S. (and Canada with NORAD) and it would just be a matter of minutes from the time they are notified until they where airborne. So then it depends on where our aircraft took off from and where is the "target" aircraft--you can look at our Air Force aircraft fact sheets on the F-15 and F-16 fighters (Canada uses mainly CFA-18 aircraft) to determine their speed and look up the speed of the target aircraft with a web search to roughly calculate the time and place the intercept would occur depending on the location of the aircraft. The fact sheets are located at this web site: http://www.af.mil/factsheets/

Here's a very rough example from a non-pilot (me): An F-15, with a top speed of 1,800 mph could intercept an aircraft 600 miles away flying parallel to where the fighter took off in 20+ minutes or so, now if the "target" aircraft is flying at 600 mph and heading toward the place where the fighter took off then the intercept would be at the 400 mile mark and would likely take only 13 minutes or so--theoretically, depending on winds and weather, etc...

Buzzflash goes LIHOP?

Did anybody catch this Buzzflash editorial?

http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/node/381/print

It looks like they are close to the tipping point. Not many comments posted, but it looks like the momentum is in our favor.

The Mexican People: Heroes of Democracy

The Mexican People: Heroes of Democracy

The Mexican peoples’ democracy movement and their leader Andrés Manuel López Obrador are modern heroes of democracy and to all who demand clean elections. They recall the heroics of the Ukrainians with one important difference. There are no “great powers” supporting them. In fact, the American regime is hostile to a victory by Obrador and the Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD). The increasingly unpopular and isolated White House cadre may have done its best to obstruct such an eventuality in ways which by now are predictably familiar. The Mexican people are alone, on the street, fighting the brave fight for people everywhere who believe in the inherently inalienable and natural right of men and women to determine their own destiny through free, fair, and transparent elections.

Supporters of democracy in Mexico are making a stand in the nation’s capitol. They just had their third major demonstration with more than a million participants. The American press tried a theme of demonstrators growing weary recently, just before the latest seven figure gathering. The demonstrations tell Mexicans and the world that the election was so questionable, an investigation is mandated through a thorough review of the most direct evidence: the ballots. The PRD’s demand for a “ballot by ballot, precinct by precinct” recount is fully warranted.

911, Terrorism, Illuminati etc etc etc

"will go a long way to removing their direct influence into the affairs of the sovereign country of Iraq." said Brigadier General Michael Barbero of the 'supposed' Iran involvment in training Shiite militants to destabilize Iraq (extract taken from www.infowars.com site). Wow I thought. What a hypocrite! How rich and ironic that a General would say something like that when the US has just invaded Afghanistan (once a sovereign nation), Iraq (once a sovereign nation) and Vietnam. And now they want to invade yet another sovreign nation called Iran. Hahaha what a joker!. He must have been rehearsing for a comedy show because I dont think anyone outside of the US is buying that BS story. Sorry mate when you and your fellow war mongers start praticising what you preach to the rest of the world then maybe we might start to take you all seriously, but until then may I suggest you come up with a new punch line cause the jokes on you the military leaders and your puppet president along with his CFR cronies and the Illuminati puppet makers.
It is interesting to note that the line 'terrorists are under every bed' being touted by some seems familiar to the catch-cry of the 50's & 60's when there was supposedly a 'communist under every bed'.

Looking into what gets little attention

I have been turned into a 9/11 truther only 6 months ago,but I learned a few things..ok lots..about deceptions of this current government. Needless to say,I am still getting an education on the meaning of psy-ops,because the deceptions that can be put out there is incredible. So as this goes along with the more info I come cross,there is also more info that is useless in getting to the WHAT REALLY HAPPENED. The useless info is meant to mislead,deceive, make us argue so that We may not see if one or the other's point is meant to do just that. There are people out there who have infiltrated these movements,since 9/11 was a well executed plan,then there also has to be the complete coup on the net.The MSM is complicit.That leaves the net to infiltrate and mislead as many as possible.Hell,when you live in an empire and the empire has a large security agency,a large intelligence agency,and been doing deceptions for many years,then there is no reason to be surprised. I believe Nico Haupt is on the right track. The NSA has been relatively passed over,and that is where Hayden came from. I think looking here is worth doing and won't be a waste of time.

Site notes for Wednesday Night

I actually took a break for the first time in a few days tonight. Managed to grab a quick nap to catch up from all the late nights lately and even go out to dinner, w00t!

Did a couple things though:

  • Fixed issue with Opera browser missing 3rd column on homepage
  • Fixed issue with shoutbox displaying first XX entries instead of most recent XX entries
  • Added google Adsense advertising to raise money for future ads

I am in dire need to hear from any users that are still having any formatting issues. If you are having any such issues please let me know so I can get some details and knock out any such issues that still remain.

I am weighing whether or not to disable the WYSIWYG editor.. it tends to cause some issues when it doesnt properly close its span tags.. does anyone use the WYSIWYG editor's features anyway?

Pull "pull it" from our talking points

The purpose of this blog is to suggest rhetorical strategies for refining the 9/11 Truth talking points. As more so-called debunking sites appear, we cannot ignore them and proceed in an echo chamber of self-congratulation. We must adjust our message to reflect a wider selection of evidence.

In this first entry, I would like to suggest dropping references to Larry Silverstein's famous "pull it" comment in the 2002 PBS documentary. Most Truthers believe Silverstein means "demolish building 7". Critics charge he really means "pull the personnel from building 7".

I recommend avoiding Silverstein's remark not because I think WTC7 fell via a gravitational collapse, but for the following reasons:

  • both interpretations are plausible, so an audience is forced to accept one on the basis of predisposition alone
  • it does not change the physical evidence one way or another
  • for some, this charge reinforces the unfair accusation that 9/11 Truth is about "blaming the Jews"; notice, for example, how this reasonable argument devolves quickly into a discussion of "Zionist circles"; later, Killtown makes excellent points about Silverstein coincidentally having a doctor's appointment the morning of 9/11, but this information will be overshadowed in a debate by ad hominem attacks

Liquid Bombers Prove: "They Hate Our Freedoms!"

Liquid Bombers Prove: "They Hate Our Freedoms!"
by Edgar J. Steele
August 19, 2006

"You can fool some of the people all of the time
And you can fool all of the people some of the time,
But you can't fool all of the people all of the time."

--- Abraham Lincoln, 16th US President (1809-1865)

"Fool me once, shame on — shame on you.
Fool me ... unnnhhh ... you can't get fooled again."
(sound clip, click here)
--- George W. Bush, 43rd US President (Nashville, Tenn., 9/17/02)

My name is Edgar J. Steele. This is a Nickel Rant.

Muslims were planning to blow up a bunch of jetliners enroute from London to America - or so say George Bush and Tony Blair.

Muslims without tickets.

Muslims without passports.

Muslims without bombs.

Muslims without a clue ... and they aren't the only ones, it turns out. Without a clue, that is.

What kind of bombs? TATP bombs, short for triacetone triperoxide. What's more, Bush and Blair told us that Muslims favor the TATP bomb, mixed on the spot with separate liquids. With that lie, both Bush and Blair foreclosed any possibility that the Muslims involved actually were guilty. With that lie, both Bush and Blair disclosed themselves for the treasonous, lying criminals that they are. Why? Glad you asked.

www.911faq.org is live!

So this is my first blog entry and it's only fitting that I advertise my first web site: www.911faq.org

I've spent a long time researching and putting together the site. I learnt a lot about information and how the one piece of evidence can be argued both for and against a particular theory. I think my factual evidence is generally correct, but I'm not so sure about the calculations I did. I've tried getting some people to read through it from various 9/11 sites, without luck. It's also failing to show up in search engines, even though I've had a "page holder" on the domain for a few weeks.

Really I'd like some people to have a look and perhaps leave a comment or two. I'm interested in any mistakes or disagreements people have and hope that we can work together to get to the truth, whatever it is.

The main focus of the site is to avoid long drawn out rants, as other places are more suitable, like here! It's generally a site to get the quick facts from official sources, with some analysis thrown in for good measure. I try to leave it up to the reader to make his/her mind up also, so the bulk of the site avoids trying to prove conspiracy theories.

So what's my official stance on 9/11, I hear you ask. Well it's probably somewhere inbetween "It was all the U.S Government's fault" and "It was all the terrorist's fault". I can only hope that more evidence is released to prove or disprove theories, because at the moment there is a surprising lack of evidence to support any theory, let alone the official one.