911blogger.com seeks to cover a broad spectrum of news, posts in the blogs section are the responsibility of the poster, readers are encouraged to check the facts and form their own conclusions.
Longtime 9/11 activist and 9/11 Truth News contributor Jon Gold joins us to discuss his recently released autobiographical book 9/11 Truther: The Fight for Peace, Justice and Accountability. Mr. Gold shares with us the catalyst that put him on the path to 9/11 activism and truth seeking, the common obstacles and challenges encountered by devoted 9/11 truth-seekers, the many still-unanswered questions involving the terrorist attacks on September 11, and the importance of continuing the quest for truth and justice. His book is currently available at Amazon .
Listen to the preview Here
The full interview is available to members only. Here's a great way to become a member:
A Limited Time Exclusive BFP Package
Doesn't it seem like we could get that number out of the single digits and into, say, the triple digits?
This is Part II of our three-part one-of-a-kind interview series with author and researcher Paul Thompson. For additional background information please visit the complete 9/11 Timeline Investigative Project at HistoryCommons.Org and Richard Clarke’s interview by John Duffy and Ray Nowosielski at SecrecyKills.Com.
I'm interested in developing a database that could serve as the back end for a site dedicated to documenting and organizing facts, questions, and arguments related to the science of the destruction of WTC7. I am not a scientist, but I'm interested in doing this so that I can nail down the main points of contention about the destruction in context and in an organized fashion. I find this to be the most problematic thing about discussions which many times just jump from one topic to the next, with participants only hoping they've made a point, without any real idea if they have. I'd like to be able to clearly point to a node in the argument and say "here's where we disagree. are there any related (parent/child) arguments? can this argument be verified? what other information do we need to verify this argument?"