Site Outage, Grab Bag, and Open Thread

Sorry for the site outage, I wrote something to explain it here:

Roughly our viewership today was many times higher than just last month, which is in turn 25x higher than this time last year. I have been saying it is time for a server change, and we will be moving to a VPS host instead of a shared host as soon as we can. Unfortunately this will mean some downtime as well, and the current site may have more outages until the readership stabilizes. If you are interested in helping fund the new server setup please let me know. Check out the link above for more info about the outage, sorry for the down time. (On a side note, I must say I am glad that the site lasted as long as it did given the traffic.)

Grab Bag:
Alex Jones reports from Ground Zero (mirror) - 1.4MB MP3
London 9/11 Truth Protest Photos -
Keith Olbermann Lectures Bush Administration for 9/11 and everything after -
Erik sends in freeway blogging activities: img1, img2
Washington Post discusses 9/11 press conferences
The Columbus dispatch references Ground Zero protests
BBC references Ground Zero protests
Pittsburg station examines Flight 93 conspiracies
U.S. News and World Report discusses Steven Jones conflict with BYU
MSNBC discusses 9/11 conspiracies common in the black community
CBS news and NRO attack 9/11 'crackpots'
Counterpunch publishes article on how 9/11 skeptics benefit Bush and Cheney
(plus a lot more attack peices out now, do a google news search)

Post stuff as you come across it either in the comments here or in your blog, and sorry again. We will be having some downtime undoubtedly over the next week or so, but I will do whatever I can to keep it minimal.

geeze what happened dz

you've been having a 403 for almost 4 hours

Everybody check out Keith

Everybody check out Keith Olberrman's comments. Powerful stuff, and shocking to be heard on mainstream TV.

thanks, just added it.

thanks, just added it.

msnbc is the only mainstream news channel i dont get.. unless i bump up my cable another $10.. i think keith might actually be worth it.

hes the only MSM talking

hes the only MSM talking head that ever makes any sense. i suspect G.E. will have him fired before the coming war with Iran, just like they did with the anti-war Donohue(highest rated show on MSNBC at the time) before Iraq. Olbermann just continues to make too much sense. Calling the right on their bullshit comparisons to WW2 and Fascists,exposing fake terror alerts, regularly keeping many of the rightwing puppets in check, you wont see anybody else in the MSM do this. im surprised he hasnt dug deeper into 9/11 because he seems so rational, certaintly ratioanl enough to see there is a major problem with the official story. even without 9/11 truth though, Olbermann is amajor thorn it a lot of powerful peoples sides, i suspect he will be fired soon enough for being too realistic.

ya, i know.. i'm not

ya, i know.. i'm not perfect..

we've gone from an average readership of 500~ viewers an hour just 4 months ago to 2,500+ an hour today.. sooner or later a server gives, unless you have a dedicated server or VPS solution - typically reserved for corporations that make money to support them.

doin the best i can, thats what happens when you out grow a hosting solution..

have you considered talking to alex?

I told the same thing to the guy who runs

they were hacked again the other day, and I mentioned to him it might be prudent for him to move his server with hosters who wouldn't compromise him, as I thought his may be. but the parallel is I'm sure they'd give you a great deal also considering what you do, as they would the guys.

ill see if i can get in

ill see if i can get in touch with someone there.. not a bad idea..

if anyone has any rack space, or knows a thing or two about VPS solutions let me know via email plz.

listen to coast to coast am right now

9/11 truthers as guests. it's on right now!

22% of Canadian believe 9/11 Orchestrated by Americans

Recent poll show 22% of Canadians believe in a conspiracy theory in which the terrorist attacks were orchestrated by a ''group of highly influential Americans and others'' rather than by supporters of Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaida terrorist network:

This seems a little low but it could have been the nature of the question.

REALLY LOW. I don't buy it.

REALLY LOW. I don't buy it. There was a poll done shortly after 911 indicating that about 65% of Canadians already believed LIHOP. As a Canadian, I hardly meet anyone who buys the official story. The poll is bullshit.

It might be an accurate

It might be an accurate count of MIHOP, certainly not LIHOP; it's impossibe that the number of Canadians who believe government complicity has dropped 50% since 911. MIHOP is probably higher too. The poll must have been skewed in some way. It's all about how you ask the question and who your sample is.

Dedicated sever, yes! And WTC debris...

Definitely need a dedicated server, this site is so popular now. I'm sure many people will contribute to the running costs.

Just a bit off topic and this may have been mentioned here already, but in the UK on ITV 1 about an hour and a half ago there was a section from NBC which seemed to be from this famous hanger with all the WTC debris in it. I had the sound turned down for nearly all of it before I realised what I was looking at and only really caught the end of it anyway but they said they were preparing this for a memorial.

As well as the columns, there was some long shots of enormous lumps of red rusty slag metal that had obviously been previously molten, these looked like the pictures from Steve Jones' paper.

They said they only had 1% of the material from the WTC there.

I don't know if anyone recorded it but looked very interesting.

I think I saw some of that WTC "debris" hanger on tv too...

I caught a glimpse of some hanger or warehouse full of WTC debris on tv tonight also. I hadn't heard of this before. Also, by the time I realized what they were talking about, the tv segment was finished, so I missed most of it too.

this hangar has been

this hangar has been mentioned by william rodriguez and by steven jones recently in one of his papers.. there is a hangar up in NYC that houses all of the things you guys described, I got some pictures once from a student who got to tour it.

I hope people are trying to access this evidence!

I hope people are trying to access this evidence!

Yes, I saw some Canadian

Yes, I saw some Canadian made "Path to 9/11¨ or some shit, here on TV last night. Heavy on the incompetence theory short on fact.

It was an Immigration failure, an FBI failure, a NORAD failure.

I'd like to add the LC guys actually did really good

I was reading the thread over in that node, and people were pretty pessimistic, they rebutted every thing PM said.

Why did "hijackers" make it harder for themselves...

I've yet to see anyone offer a reasonable explanation as to why the "hijackers" who had dubious flying skills, would fly AA-11 & UA-175 out of Boston to hit targets all the way in NYC; and also why they would try to bring AA-77 & UA-93 all the way back from Ohio to hit targets in DC???

There is far too much additional risk involved in flying all those hundreds & hundreds of unnecessary miles!!!

flying skills

I've wondered the same thing. Also, how could they possibly hit their targets accurately when they were so inexperienced? Were the planes remote controlled? Also, I have heard rumors that some very privileged people had their own private viewing in Giuliani's bunker in WTC7 on that morning. Can anyone come up with answers/theories on these questions?

The new Counterpunch article

The new Counterpunch article is spelling out the new (actually old) argument that "conspiracy theories" actually help people in power because they distract us from issues which we can affect. That's been Chomsky's argument from day one. I hope Chussodovsky or Griffin or Nimmo responds to this argument at length, because this seems to be the dominant meme. Personally, I think It's a lame attempt to evade responsibility for pursuing the truth. Surely people are smart enough to puruse "conspiracy theories" whie simultaneously engaging in other forms of activism.

More from the

Left Gatekeeperism

CounterPunch does have a lot of good content, but on 9/11 it has been a left gatekeeper from the beginning. Cockburn is especially egregious in this respect. What's amazing is that many people of various political stripes can perceive the consummate evil of Bush and the neocons, but still cannot imagine that the regime would do something like 9/11. What an incredible blind spot. They are no doubt still infected by the belief in "American exceptionalism" -- other countries commit monstrously evil crimes against their own country, but not American leaders. Ha ha!

another article destroying cockburn

I think kurt nimmo or someone wrote it, after his hit piece they laid waste to him it's in my blogs on spyspace

Yes, they're not very informed, or intentionally ignorant!

The fact is, that just about every major conflict in recent history has been started on deception. Here are some examples, as well as events leading up to the modern "war on terror":

1933 Rise of the 3rd Reich
Germany bunred down their own parliment building to blame it on the commies and get public support for a "war on communism".

1939 Germany Invades Poland
Germans bombed one of their own radio stations and then blamed it on Poland by dressing up a couple of German prisoners in Polish military uniforms and documenting the event.

1942 Attack on Pearl Harbor
The 1994 McCullum memo documented an 8-stage plan to provoke Japan into attacking the U.S. This way, Rosevelt could reneg on his promise not to enter the war.

1961 Gulf of Tonkin Attacks - Vietnam War
At least part of these attacks were a hoax - staged as pretext to get support for entering the conflict in Vietnam.

1962 Operation Northwoods
A plan to blow up American airliners and use other terror attacks within the U.S. was approved all the way up to the presidental level. Fortunately for us Kennedy rejected the plan - not too fortunate for him.

1967 6-Day War - Israel, Egypt, Syria, Jordon
The Pentagon and IDF struck a backend deal to have Israeli forces attack the USS Liberty so that the staged event could be used to blame on Egypt. This would give the U.S. their pretext to enter the war. Sound familiar? Recall the recent 34 day Israel/Lebanon conflict. It was reported by Sy Hersh, among others, that U.S. officials had met with Israeli officials in the days leading up the the conflict. The U.S. gave the planned attack their blessing in the hopes that it would be a "curtain raiser for a conflict with Iran". Iran and Syria could not be provoked into retaliating, so the war ended - at least for now.

1997 The Grand Chessboard
In this book, neocon Zbignew Brezinski (national security advisor to the Carter administration) discusses his strategy for anglo-American imperialism in the middle East. He suggests that the American public would not support such a bold and agressive military campaign absent a "perceived direct external threat".

2000 The Plan for a New American Century - Rebuilding America's Defenses
Strikingly similar to the strategy put forth in "The Grand Chessboard", this thinktank discusses the need for a "catalyzing and catastrophic event - like a new Pearl Harbor" on the top of pg. 51. A new Pearl Harbor type event is felt to be a pre-requisite for implementing the Bush/PNAC/Neocon doctrine. Plans for invading Afganistan and Iraq most likely already in place.

2000 - Presidential Election
Obviously these Neocon/PNAC boys needed very much Bush to be president. And they were even willing to rig the elections to make it happen.

September 11th, 2001 - The War on Terror
Need I say more? Not unlike the "war on communism", a war has been waged against "islamo-facism". In other words, an excuse to invade any middle Eastern country this Aministration chooses.

Now, do you still think these evil PNAC folks would not orchestrate 9/11 so that their plan can be implemented? Of course they would! Money corrupts, and when you're talking about an opportunity for potentially trillions, yes trillions, of dollars that can be fleeced from the American people and the treasury directly benefiting the supporters and backers of the war on terror, do you not think they'd be more than capable of murdering thousands of their own citizens to accomplish this?

We can never underestimate the power of money and the evil it creates.

I don't advocate false-flag attacks, but if you're a nut job...

I certainly don't advocate false-flag attacks, but if you're nut jobs like Bush/Cheney & must do one, couldn't you do fake ones??? Why involve real people??? Use your imagination a little.

For example, couldn't you crash some airliner-looking drones into ocean liners or military ships with manikins on deck??? Why the hell must you use real buildings with real people like the WTC???

'9/11 conspiracy theories are way too far-fetched'

latest mainstream hackjob article on the Movement, with comment thread. hammer 'em...

The Plus Side of Being Down, and the ABC Movie

The plus side of this web site being down is knowing, even without being told, that it was a problem of radically increased usage. This warms me considerably, after having been angered by that ABC stuff tonight. (Yes, I promised someone I would sit through it to take notes about "errors", difficult to do in some ways because, in the movie, there was no there there. Trying to find any really relevant detail in that movie was like trying to grab a handful of cloud.

The other plus side is coming back to find many, many new stories about 9/11 truth coverage and events. Thank you, folks.... all of you.

In addition to the ABC propaganda, I also caught the new "9/11: Press for Turth". Wonderful, wonderful... Thanks, Kyle. Thanks to all involved. Thanks to the Jersey Moms. Say what you will about all of them, but they opened the door a long time ago. The rest of us have been following on...

A friend of mine could tell you how angry I was when I finished the evening of watching the ABC movie with the Presidential advertisement. I took 15 minutes afterwards to finish the dishes and start the laundry before I could calm down enough to bring myself to speak. Charles Gibson pointed out that the White House said the Presidential address wasn’t a political speech (perhaps one of the few moments of humor in the evening). How can it not be political just weeks ahead of an election, the President’s approval ratings in the dumps, and some polls reporting that now, for the first time, over 50% of the population has severe doubts about the official story? How can the event be anything but propaganda when there are 12-15 books and movies in circulation which poke enough holes in the “official story” to fly a plane through… or whatever it was.

The man in the oval room said “we saw courage…” but failed to note his own lack of it that morning.

He noted that just last month “we” had foiled a plot in the UK, with no acknowledgement that this false terror alert was shown to be another hunk of fiction within days.

He arrogantly threw it all in our face yet again by speaking of freedom as “an old man” voting in an election, yet ignored multiple reports and incontrovertible evidence that the last two Presidential elections were scams.

He used some flourishes of language …”the desert of despotism”… “the fertile gardens of liberty”, but failed to explain why we have to give up our liberties in order to create them for others, or why it was necessary to give up our freedoms so that we could line the pockets of war profiteers.

The film itself was nothing but more of the “shock and awe” psy-ops, a repetitive renewal of our stress and fear, a repetition of the terror and the pain. I am not surprised that most Americans chose not to watch it. I hope and trust that America is wiser now, and that they will act on their new wisdom.

It bears repeating again that the expertise of the Commission’s executive director is in the realm of myth-making, and this unprecedented television event is simply a modern-day exemplar of the work of Sergei Eisenstein and Leni Riefenstahl, two film-makers who “wrote the book” on how to use film as propaganda. Some of the video shots were designed very specifically to lend credibility and to intimate the power of source, yet there is no mention of how significant doubt has been cast on the credibility of these same sources.

I had a range of comments, questions and observations when the evening was done:

We were told that four boxcutters were purchased for $10.86, but we were not told the pricetag of our response, the Iraq war, now measured somewhere above $400,000,000,000. Nor were we told how much we’ve budgeted in the years prior to 9/11 for intelligence budgets, military budgets, etc., or how those budgets have been increased, nor where that money has gone. Nobody mentioned the millions of dollars that mysteriously changed hands that morning.

Did you see the movie? Who played the part of Jerome Hauer?

We were shown a scene of one of the hijackers in the bathtub, but we weren’t told what was going on there. We were only left to assume or presume, but I’d like to hear from someone who speaks the language and comes from the culture and practices that faith as to whether what we saw was consistent mindset, language and behavior. But that’s not the point, is it? We are only supposed to hate and despise that which is different from us.

We were shown the scene in which the FISA request was denied for Moussaoui, a slap in the face given the NSA issues, the recent court rulings, et al. We were not told that, at that time, such FISA requests were granted routinely.

I had to step away for a moment (there were no commercials, so no opportunity for the necessary quick breaks in a 2+-hour event served with coffee), but did they show the part where the fellow from the Pakistani ISI came to Washington, didn’t they?

Did they show the meeting of the Carlyle Group, with members of the bin Laden family and George Herbert Walker Bush, in Washington on 9/10/01? Did they show the breakfast meeting the next morning?

Did they show the announcement by Rumsfeld the night before about the missing $2.3 trillion?

They did manage to hit all the “memes” and themes in the official myth. I was surprised when they even put in the line “is this real world, or exercise?” but I didn’t expect them to cover the war games in detail. They did mention the war games when I was in the bathroom, didn’t they? All of them, right? How many were there?

They had John O’Neill mention that “this was a crime scene” but never bothered to describe how and why it was never treated as a crime scene.

They repeated the phrasing frequently “we’re sorry, all circuits are busy now” enough that the audience surely understood that this was an unusual day for communications. I guess the same was true of NORAD and the FAA, too, huh? “We’re sorry, but all circuits are busy now”.

I know that coffee sometimes has disproportionate effect on the human body, so I must have missed the part with Bush at the Booker School. They did show that, didn’t they?

Oh, and who played Mrs. Cheney in the scene in the PEOPS?

And did you hear General Myers explain that the closest interceptors were in Detroit? That explains it. Detroit? All the way out there in Detroit? Nothing about Syracuse? Nothing about Otis AFB? Nothing about Langley? “Sir”, said the Vice President, presumably to the President (at least he said it was the President), “the fighters are up and they want to know what to do!” But of course there is no mention that even the 9/11 Commission can’t absolutely document and verify that such a conversation ever took place between the White House and Air Force One. (“We’re sorry, but all circuits are busy now”.) Oh, that must be why the President and the Vice President had to testify together, without swearing an oath, with no recordings save one note-taker (and those notes having to be cleared by the White House before they could be published). “Yes, we most certainly did have that discussion, Mr. Commissioner. He says so. I said so. Case closed.”

And did you catch that scene out at Shanksville, the demise of Flight 93? The entire scene lasted three seconds… the image fading off into misty, mythical nothingness… the debris scattering over an 8-mile stretch of terrain when the plane crashed… the engine bouncing away from the impact zone…. I guess that was in there in the third 60 milliseconds of the scene.

The next scene, the last scene, was the recounting of the “report cards” of the 9/11 Commission. Talk about time compression! Wow! 443 days went by before they formed the Commission, over the objections of the White House. Not a word, not an image, not a moment given over to the hearings, the testimony, the report. The Commission reviewed countless documents and held hours and hours of hearings. All of that was covered by ABC in precisely 0 seconds.

-- --

One very specific place you might place your attention is on Jamie Gorelick:

"Earlier in her career, Ms. Gorelick was Vice Chair of the Task Force on Audit, Inspection and Investigation Components of the Department of Defense.” Gorelick also played a critical role in the privatization of prisons as described in the article at .

As Deputy Attorney General, "One of her principal priorities was to help prepare the Justice Department to be able to respond effectively to the new challenges of “transnational crime and terrorism. To do this, she forged new relationships and administrative protocols with the Departments of State, Treasury and Defense, and with the intelligence community." In 1997, she received "an award from the Director of Central Intelligence." | May 25, 2004, in the article "How Chinagate Led to 9/11"
[ ] says the following:

As the 9/11 Commission tries to uncover what kept intelligence agencies from preventing September 11, it has overlooked two vital factors: Jamie Gorelick and Bill Clinton. Gorelick, who has browbeaten the current administration, helped erect the walls between the FBI, CIA and local investigators that made 9/11 inevitable. However, she was merely expanding the policy Bill Clinton established with Presidential Decision Directive 24. What has been underreported is why the policy came about: to thwart investigations into the Chinese funding of Clinton’s re-election campaign, and the favors he bestowed on them in return.

In April, staff writer Scott Wheeler reported that a senior U.S. government official and three other sources claimed that the 1995 memo written by Jamie Gorelick, who served as the Clinton Justice Department’s deputy attorney general from 1994 to 1997, created "a roadblock" to the investigation of illegal Chinese donations to the Democratic National Committee. But the picture is much bigger than that. The Gorelick memo, which blocked intelligence agents from sharing information that could have halted the September 11 hijacking plot, was only the mortar in a much larger maze of bureaucratic walls whose creation Gorelick personally oversaw.

It’s a story the 9/11 Commission may not want to hear, and one that Gorelick – now incredibly a member of that commission – has so far refused to tell. But it is perhaps the most crucial one to understanding the intentional breakdown of intelligence that led to the September 11 disaster.

Nearly from the moment Gorelick took office in the Clinton Justice Department, she began acting as the point woman for a large-scale bureaucratic reorganization of intelligence agencies that ultimately placed the gathering of intelligence, and decisions about what – if anything – would be done with it under near-direct control of the White House. In the process, more than a dozen CIA and FBI investigations underway at the time got caught beneath the heel of the presidential boot, investigations that would ultimately reveal massive Chinese espionage as millions in illegal Chinese donations filled Democratic Party campaign coffers.

When Gorelick took office in 1994, the CIA was reeling from the news that a Russian spy had been found in CIA ranks, and Congress was hungry for a quick fix. A month after Gorelick was sworn in, Bill Clinton issued Presidential Decision Directive 24. PDD 24 put intelligence gathering under the direct control of the president’s National Security Council, and ultimately the White House, through a four-level, top-down chain of command set up to govern (that is, stifle) intelligence sharing and cooperation between intelligence agencies. From the moment the directive was implemented, intelligence sharing became a bureaucratic nightmare that required negotiating a befuddling bureaucracy that stopped directly at the President’s office.

First, the directive effectively neutered the CIA by creating a National Counterintelligence Center (NCI) to oversee the Agency. NCI was staffed by an FBI agent appointed by the Clinton administration. It also brought multiple international investigations underway at the time under direct administrative control. The job of the NCI was to “implement counterintelligence activities,” which meant that virtually everything the CIA did, from a foreign intelligence agent’s report to polygraph test results, now passed through the intelligence center that PDD 24 created.

NCI reported to an administration-appointed National Counterintelligence Operations Board (NCOB) charged with “discussing counterintelligence matters.” The NCOB in turn reported to a National Intelligence Policy Board, which coordinated activities between intelligence agencies attempting to work together. The policy board reported “directly” to the president through the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs.

The result was a massive bureaucratic roadblock for the CIA – which at the time had a vast lead on the FBI in foreign intelligence – and for the FBI itself, which was also forced to report to the NCOB. This hampered cooperation between the two entities. All this occurred at a time when both agencies were working separate ends of investigations that would eventually implicate China in technology transfers and the Democratic Party in a Chinese campaign cash grab.

And the woman charged with selling this plan to Congress, convincing the media and ultimately implementing much of it? Jamie Gorelick.

Many in Congress, including some Democrats, found the changes PDD 24 put in place baffling: they seemed to do nothing to insulate the CIA from infiltration while devastating the agency’s ability to collect information. At the time, Democrat House Intelligence Chairman Dan Glickman referred to the plan as “regulatory gobbledygook." Others questioned how FBI control of CIA intelligence would foster greater communication between the lower levels of the CIA and FBI, now that all information would have to be run through a multi-tier bureaucratic maze that only went upward.

Despite their doubts, Gorelick helped the administration sell the plan on Capitol Hill. The Directive stood.

But that wasn’t good enough for the Clinton administration, which wanted control over every criminal and intelligence investigation, domestic and foreign, for reasons that would become apparent in a few years. For the first time in Justice Department history, a political appointee, Richard Scruggs – an old crony or Attorney General Janet Reno’s from Florida – was put in charge of the Office of Intelligence and Policy Review (OIPR). OIPR is the Justice Department agency in charge of requesting wiretap and surveillance authority for criminal and intelligence investigations on behalf of investigative agencies from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court. The court’s activities are kept secret from the public.

A year after PDD 24, with the new bureaucratic structure loaded with administration appointees, Gorelick drafted the 1995 memo Attorney General John Ashcroft mentioned while testifying before the 9/11 Commission. The Gorelick memo, and other supporting memos released in recent weeks, not only created walls within the intelligence agencies that prevented information sharing among their own agents, but effectively walled these agencies off from each other and from outside contact with the U.S. prosecutors instrumental in helping them gather the evidence needed to make the case for criminal charges.

The only place left to go with intelligence information – particularly for efforts to share intelligence information or obtain search warrants – was straight up Clinton and Gorelick’s multi-tiered chain of command. Instead, information lethal to the Democratic Party languished inside the Justice Department, trapped behind Gorelick’s walls.

There’s more at the link but, as the article notes at the end, the 9/11 Commission failed to ask her to testify; she was one of the Commissioners… and one of the only two Commissioners allowed to see all of the classified documents provided to the Commission.

-- --

The President said earlier in the evening that the world will be safer when…

Tonight we experienced one of the lowest moments of a free people and a great nation.

The world will be safer when the American people stand up and say “Enough!”.

that was simply amazing

hope you don't mind if I blog that.

goddamn, thanks for that.

goddamn, thanks for that.

Alexa Traffic Details for 911blogger

The Secret of the Media Debunking Campaign

Take a look at some of these media articles in the recent intensive debunking campaign, and you can immediately see what they have in common: They bait the 9/11 truth movement using mainly the physical evidence. Bush has destroyed most the physical evidence and won't show us what's left. Therefore, despite the efforts of top academics (who have little to work with), it is easy to muddy the water and drag the movement into endless arguments that go nowhere fast.

On the other hand, note what the debunkers AVOID: They don't invite debate on aspects of 9/11 which can be analyzed with cold logic. In other words, they shy away from circumstantial-evidence analysis which applies logic to known and verifiable facts. Excellent examples of such analysis are the work of Griffin and Ruppert. Look at how Griffin deconstructs the timeline and the "9/11 Omission Report." His logic is beauty to behold. Look at how brilliantly Ruppert connects the dots running through the CIA, oil, drugs, money, PROMIS, and the war games. Ladies and Gentlemen, these people have already made our case for us. And that is why the debunkers avoid such debate and concentrate instead on the physical evidence.

So, the next time you see a media article that baits us with the physical evidence, sidestep that trap and challenge these media flacks instead with the oil-drugs-money nexus. Ask them ESPECIALLY about the war games, which allowed this operation to proceed unimpeded.

I wholeheartedly agree with you, ricefarmer

Michael Ruppert and David Ray Griffin are one of the leading researchers of 9/11 truth whose cases have been cogent, articulate, and exhaustive.


The best way you can spot one of these disinfo agents is if they smear or personally attack Ruppert, Griffin, Steven Jones, Hoffman, in other words, the BEST 9/11 researchers.

You can also tell a disinfo operative from the fact they use the disinfo site "webfairy"(a site which retouches video/photos in order to discredit 9/11 truth_ as their sources for their claims.

There are several of these disinfo agents running around on 911blogger spitting out their crap about holograms at WTC. A couple of whose names are CB_Brooklyn, ewing, shep, and the rest of their "no plane" disinformation team.


you just popped my 'disinfo' cherry!

You can also tell a disinfo operative from the fact they use the disinfo site "webfairy"

perhaps your beef with thewebfairy (or citing her work) is because some of the videos referenced are on 9/11 5th year anniversary brought a whole slew on programs on TV, including many high quality second event clips. check out the NOVA program "Building on Ground Zero" for a nice high quality clip of the zoom out between buildings footage-- my personal favorite of the suspicious second event videos. torrent it up @ thepiratebay.

and thanks for popping my cherry! there's nothing like your first time ;-) is reporting that is reporting that Stephan Jones has been suspended?

Did you download new collapse video from Drudge Report?

It's quality is quite good, and it's apparently a new vid. Hasn't been released before, according to them. It misses most of the first collapse, but does capture a lot of the second. I'm still on the fence about CD, but barely. I'm leaning that way now, and I'm almost completely convinced.

I mean, the opposition calls CD advocates "nuts", saying that it would take weeks to set up the explosives in order to demolish these structures, with covert agents needing going floor by floor placing charges. That's a large part of their reasoning behind why it would be "impossible".

In the next breath they say that jet fuel brought down the buildings. I mean, maybe they don't even know that they have a point with that line of reasoning... They do, though not the one they intend.

If they're trying to say that all it took was jet fuel to initiate collapse, then why would explosive charges need to be placed throughout the building. Why not just a few charges in each building, at the tops, with just enough to initiate the collapse? Why are CD advocates trying to defend the notion that charges were placed all over the structure, when even the jet fuel people believe it only needed enough for an initiation of the collapse, and not "jet fuel burning on every floor". If we're simply talking about a need to bring about a "point of no return" scenario in which collapse invariably results, then why would there need to be very much explosive material? I don't think there would have to be.

That said, in this new video, at quicktime counter time 19:43, if you look into the exploding building you can actually see white flashes occuring. These may be "natural" in such an event, but I don't know what would cause them. I guess they COULD be charges going off, but that would tend to negate the first argument I was making (that there wouldn't necessarily need to be a large amount of explosive material to at least INITIATE collapse). There are many of them. This video should be seen by everybody on all sides, it may hold some clues one way or another.

Paul Thompson and Kyle Hence on CSPAN1

Is there a Qtime link to Paul Thompson and Kyle Hence on CSPAN1 anywhere?

If not, what happened please?

Hey, me again. Check

Hey, me again. Check especially at 19:47, as there really seem to be flashes that wrap around what appears to me to be a single floor of the Trade tower. Also, I forgot to include a link -

Because there were

""Why are CD advocates trying to defend the notion that charges were placed all over the structure, when even the jet fuel people believe it only needed enough for an initiation of the collapse, and not "jet fuel burning on every floor". If we're simply talking about a need to bring about a "point of no return" scenario in which collapse invariably results, then why would there need to be very much explosive material? I don't think there would have to be.""

Because there were charges from top to bottom, not on every floor but many.
We can clearly SEE several of the charges going off and we know from William Rodriguez testimony that a large explosion went off in the basement BEFORE the plane even hit.
No reason to change the evidence that is plain as day just to appease idiots that refuse to accept reality.

Best to just stick to the facts.

"Because there were charges

"Because there were charges from top to bottom, not on every floor but many."
I'm sorry, but how do you know this? What real evidence do you have to make a statement so matter-of-factly?

"No reason to change the evidence that is plain as day just to appease idiots that refuse to accept reality."

Who do you think I'm trying to appease? I've never been much of an "appeaser". The only thing I'm trying to appease is my own skepticism. If this evidence is "plain as day", then where is it?

As I said, I think the Towers were probably premeditated collapses, but when you just say the evidence is so clear, yet you present nothing.... I wrote Jim Hoffman about this video earlier this morning, hopefully he'll respond.

I'm doing my best to stick to the facts that are such.


You missed much key evidence...

Including: many reports of numerous explosions, squibs, tons of fine dust & pyroclasitc clouds, symmetrical collapse at about free-fall speed, molten metal under the buildings, WTC-7, andvanced notice that WTC-7 was going to implode, Larry Silverstein "pull-it", no steel-frame building ever falling due to fire, etc.

That about sums it up...

I also like to add the pulverization and over 1000 victims have yet to be identified from tiny bone fragments.

Tiny bone fragments!? Many even found on the rooftops of nearby buildings.

Come on! Give me a break. We are talking about a phoenominal amount of energy here.

Do you have another link

To this footage?

Could you supply a link to

Could you supply a link to the Drudge Report video?

I already posted it above,

I already posted it above, but here it is again.

This rant isn't well

This rant isn't well organized; it is my opinion on how this controlled demolition could have happened, in the way that we all saw. I point out where I am making an educated assumption, and some evidence is still being debated (SJ's source of positive thermate test metal). I might post this in a couple different areas, depending on if it applies to the conversation.

If you want to try and understand how the collapse occurred, you need to understand what the goal was for the image presented.

They wanted to have the planes crash, causing a lot of damage, and then have the fires burn for almost an hour. Then, they wanted it to look like the heat from the fire caused everything to collapse (at the crash zone), and then have the top 1/4 of the building smash through the rest of the building.

In order to do this, and not have anyone know about explosives, they used an unorthodox plan. Explosives would be used on a few necessary points of the building's infrastructure, the rest of the building's infrastructure would be cut into pieces by thermate, placed and timed so that by the time the building was collapsing, each thermate charge would have done it's job in eliminating the core columns. This is why a pan caking effect did occur; it really was like the 9/11 commission said, "The interior of the building was a hollow steel shaft, with elevators and stairs." The core columns were eliminated...

The thought of most people who don’t believe in the controlled demolition is "They would need TONS of explosives, squibs out every window, thousands of workers, thousands of explosives. No one could do that without anyone noticing!"

That is where thermate + securicom come into play.

Securicom had the access, even had multiple evacuation drills, complete power downs of parts of the towers for repair. All of this had to either go through, or be allowed by securicom. The Bush-securicom connection is well known, so I wont go into that. Securicom was also in charge of security for one of the airlines used (AA I think, not sure), as well as Dulles International Airport. They quickly changed their names after 9/11, wonder why? Why isn't this company out of business? Most security company's that screw up that bad, don't get hired again, or bought out by other companies...

Thermate was more responsible for the collapse than explosives were. A thermate charge applied to a core column would be lighter and more compact (I am assuming. I've seen Thermite used, and it doesn't take a lot, it's more about the placement and surface area with the steel) than the required explosive charge needed to take out that column (depending on the explosive I'm sure). Thermate is very inconspicuous, planted on columns (away from sight), they produce smoke, heat and light, which wouldn't be detectable from outside the building.

Due to the amount of molten steel under the rubble, and for how long it was hot under there, I'm sure that a LOT of thermate was used, and few explosives.

The explosives would be only for initiating continuous collapse, maybe every 15-30 floors. They must have been very strong though, to pulverize so much concrete. They also were the kind of explosives that do not produce heat, less noticeable.

Thermate is the key for having a demolition, look more like a collapse.

If you watch a traditional demolition, there are A LOT more squibs, out of almost every window. This is not the case with WTC 1/2/7.

If at some point they try to argue that the terrorists planted bombs in the buildings, why would they use such an unorthodox methods, designed to be discreet, unnoticed, and subtle. They would have wanted explosives to be big, loud, and noticed.

CNN has a video up right now

CNN has a video up right now called 'Pentagon conspiracy theories'.. i cant watch it here at work though..

on their main page there is 'Latest News' and 'Watch Video', click the 'most popular' tab under 'Watch Video'.. it should be listed there.

New 403 Conspiracy Theory?

Forget the new dedicated server(s), let's just start a new "Page Not Found" (403 error) conspiracy theory stating that the Bush bunch are blocking the site... Then we could all have some fun listening to and laughing at the cr_p about it from Bushies, Fox, etc. Ha! Ha! Hee! Hee!
Check out

Jack Blood did a fantastic

Jack Blood did a fantastic job reporting live at the protests yesterday as well. I didn’t think he was as good as this actually, superb!! Dylan’s on the show to, it’s all live from the protests in NY City I think.

Check it out;

Protests in DC?

How did the protests in Washington DC go?
Anybody have a link?

Oliver Stone hints at conspiracy movie.

MOSCOW -- US filmmaker Oliver Stone, who surprised many with the patriotic flavor of his new film "World Trade Center," hinted here Monday that he is considering a more controversial follow-up investigating the "conspiracy" around 9-11.

"There is a great story in a movie, a conspiracy by a group of people in the American administration who have an agenda and who used 9-11 to further that agenda," he told journalists while in Moscow as part of a world tour to promote his latest movie.

There could be a "fascinating project (on) what happened after September 11," the director said at his packed press conference on the fifth anniversary of the attacks, wearing a light blue, open shirt and dark jacket.

hit AOL with some truth.

AOL has a discussion about the deleted scenes from propaganda movie "The Path to 9/11". you can leave comments. heres mine:

9/11 was an inside job. People are slowly starting to wake up. 9/11 is bigger than any puppet president, including Bush and Clinton,but make no mistake, 9/11 happened on Bushs watch for a reason. Ever hear of the Carlyle Group? Guess who sat on the board of directors and were actually meeting on 9/11/01? Former president George H.W. Bush and Bin Ladens brother, Shafeeg. Look it up, its documented fact. Dig deeper into 9/11, it was an inside job and its time you sheep stop blindly trusting the media to tell you all the facts. They, including AOL are owned by only about 6 big companies who have no interest in giving you the full story. Case in point, AOL making these deleted scenes from a blatant propaganda film available on their home page. This is shameless and i suspect AOL will delete my post because they fear the truth.

Sheep Flock

Wonderful try, I commend you, but sheep flock to AOL and sheep are sheep. AOL was built on sheep sh_t from the sheep flocking there. So about all you'll get is the stuff sticking to your feet and stinking up your life... Keep trying though, if you can stand the smell. You might "just" convince one of them, just like they were convinced that huge buildings "just" fall down on themselves...

9/11 All Over Google Video Hot 100 Chart

I have been monitoring this but never seen this before:
Today there are 13 9/11-related videos in the Goggle Video top 100.
In addition, the #1, 4, 17, 50, 56, and 62, spots are occupied by various editions and languages of Loose Change.


Emailing lists of Videos is a good way to promote 9/11 Truth. Here is a compendium of Video titles you can recommend in posts:

Videos Compendium of Excellent 9/11 Videos

WTC Building 7 Collapse (CBS) (9 seconds)

David Ray Griffin: 9/11 Commission: designed for anything but the truth (8 min.)

Why did WTC buildings 1, 2 and 7 collapse?: Were there explosives planted? (5 min.)

9/11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? (1 hr.)

David Ray Griffin – 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions & Distortions – Santa Rosa, CA Oct 3 2004 (1 hr.)

Operation Northwoods: US Generals Planned Terror in US and Fake Hijacking (3 min.)

David Ray Griffin – 9/11 and the American Empire (2005)

Terrorstorm – Film by Alex Jones about history of US-sponsored terror operations (1 hr. 52 min)

Two prominent European politicians express serious doubts about 9/11 (16 min.)

Prof Steve Jones USVC 9-11 Scientific and Ethical Questions - Feb 1 2006 (1 hr. 48 min)

American Scholars Symposium - 9/11 Truth Discussion Panel – 2006 June

9/11 L.A. Symposium - Webster Tarpley on 911 Evidence June 26 2006 (1 hr. 6 min)

Alex Jones' American Scholars Symposium (Highlights) June 2006 (1 hr. 2 min)

9/11 Controlled Demolitions of September 11, 2001 (35 min)

Loose Change 2nd Edition Recut

Lou Dobbs on CNN Wakes Up to 9/11 Lies

Unexplainable Military Failures and No Accountability on 911

CNN Jack Cafferty Questions the Story of 911 2006 Aug 02

Molten Metal At WTC Consistent With Thermite

Professor Evidence Thermite in WTC Towers

Video Unusual Evacuations in WTC Prior to 911

David Ray Griffin in DC 9-23-2005 Omissions & Distortions in The 9/11 Commission Report: A Significant Pattern: (33 min.)

Paul Thompson at Confronting the Evidence – Commission Report Glaring Omissions 2004 Sep 11 (1 min. 30 sec.)

Opening panel talks at Confronting the Evidence 9/11 (4 min.)

Kevin Barrett, University of Wisconsin-Madison lecturer TV interview 7/21/06

San Francisco International Citizens Inquiry into 9/11

David Ray Griffin - Testimony at the Congressional Black Caucus (30 min.)

The Great Conspiracy – Barrie Zwicker - 2004 Summer (1 hr. 10 min.)

Alex Jones at American Scholars Symposium June 25 2006 (1 hr. 31 min.)

Martial Law 9/11: Rise of the Police State (Alex Jones) - 2005 (2 hr. 35 min.)
Includes footage 2004 Republican Nat’l Convention.

911 The Road To Tyranny - Alex Jones – 2002 – about rising police state (2 hr. 22 min.)

Webster Tarpley - The 9/11 issue - How to stop World War III – 2005 Jan 15

Webster Tarpley: The Invisible Government & 9/11 Synthetic Terror

Barry Zwicker: NORAD on 9/11: what was the U.S. military doing that day?

9/11 Symposium: Lt. Col. Bob Bowman

Dr. Robert Bowman: the impossibility of the official government story – 2004? San Francisco - (6 min.)

Thermite Explained, Substance used to bring down WTC Towers 1, 2 and WTC 7? (4 min.)

Meria Hellers Keynote Speech in Chicago 2006 (1 hr. 8 min.)

Keith Oberman MSNBC Commentary on Rumsfeld 2006 Aug 30

William Rodriguez: 9/11 Hero – 9/11 L.A. Symposium – 2006 June

An hour long smorgasbord of content from Louder Than Words

Richard Grove talks with Webster Tarpley

The Power of Nightmares 1 of 3 (59 min.)

The Power of Nightmares 2 of 3 (59 min.)

The Power Of Nightmares 3 of 3 (59 min.)

San Francisco International Citizens Inquiry into 9-11 – 2004 (29 min.)

SEPTEMBER 11: Evidence to the Contrary REDUX 2006 (1 hr. 26 min.)

9/11: Press for Truth (1 hr. 24 min.)
This one is not for free – it is a DVD For Purchase - You can also make a donation here to the producers for their expenses. Please donate $6 if you view it online. This movie is best for those who are highly resistant to any ideas of U.S. gov’t complicity. The movie focuses mainly on the families pointing out that the government has stonewalled and lied, and has not investigate 9/11 properly.
Also currently online at Google Video . Please donate $6 to the above site to reimburse the producers for their expenses if you watch it for free online on Google Video. They made the film on loan and need to pay back their expenses.

Some interesting articles

Some interesting articles linked at FTW.

THE 9/11 SMOKING GUN - (Dedicated to Michael Ruppert, Great American) - By William Brandon Shanley


Another article

This article is in the Indiana University newspaper. It's unbiased and is on the cover of the newspaper. Also of note, I went to school at IU and virtually everyone reads the student newspaper which won an award for being the best in the country last month.

Is this guy for real?

IU India Studies Director Sumit Ganguly views conspiracy theories as a defense mechanism to help people deal with traumatic world events.

"As a general rule, I am disinclined to believe conspiracy theories which seem to abound in American political life when catastrophic events (occur), such as the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor or the assassination of President Kennedy," he said in an e-mail interview. "These events are so troubling that many individuals take refuge in conspiratorial beliefs to explain them."

What a f'ing tool. Are people this stupid!?

Wake the F_ck Up!@

"These events are so

"These events are so troubling that many individuals take refuge in conspiratorial beliefs to explain them."

Like, 19 Arab Muslims with box cutters overwhelmed us except when heroic passengers overcame them, and three skyscrapers collapsed in a fluke coincidence but we're safe because we can trade our civil liberties for an aggressive campaign of world conquest that, while creating more terrorists, makes us feel like someone is doing something with all the money we're borrowing now that Congress has raised our debt ceiling to prevent our bankruptcy as a nation. This conspiracy theory allows us all to avoid having to face the fact that among our leaders are a number of psycopaths who, having been emboldened by their coverups first of the Oklahoma City bombing and then of 9/11, are liable to take their treason to even greater heights next time around. Yes, this makes sense. I feel very comforted by my belief in the existence of conspiracies. HUH?!


"Among the 'spider-man' skeptics are those who claim that no human can shoot web and stick to walls... They conveniently ignore the fact that he was bitten by a radioactive spider."

Daily Bugle editorial debunking the claims of spider-man deniers