New 9/11 summary page

I would like to introduce a web page created for the purpose of introducing and summarizing 9/11 questions to newcomers who are not yet familiar with the topic.

News of Interest.TV is a human interest website which combines summaries of important political information along with helpful interesting and entertaining content.

News of Interest.TV's 9/11 page makes use of select audio and video clips relying heavily on the works of Alex Jones, along with reprints of information from such websites as and Alan Miller's website

You may find website here:

News of Interest.TV's 9/11 page is here:

Nice site. I like the

Nice site. I like the color palette and the diverse content and the general positive vibe. One correction: you have "steaming radio" rather than "streaming radio".


oh that's no error... you'll love 'steaming radio'...

ha! i joke i joke.

///////////////////// - $1 DVDs shipped - email for info

Alan Miller's website

Alan Miller's website, continues to promote David Shayler and Morgan Reynolds, both of whom assert that real commercial jets did not hit the WTC. The hologram theories are long long done with, but Shayler has openly told mainstream media in the UK that he thinks holograms were used in NYC to make us think real planes hit the buildings!

Why is Alan Miller continuing to promote people who say these things??

He has already been told and did not respond. Please tell him again.

The Sunday Times
September 10, 2006
Rebel MI5 agent says 9/11 planes were holograms
Roland White

"David Shayler, the former MI5 officer turned whistleblower, has joined the 9/11 deniers. “We know for certain that the official story of 9/11 isn’t true,” he tells the New Statesman. “The twin towers did not collapse because of planes and fire. They were brought down in a controlled demolition. The Pentagon was most likely hit by an American missile, not an aeroplane.” Not that he thinks planes hit the towers. “I believe no planes were involved in 9/11. The only explanation is that they were missiles surrounded by holograms made to look like planes.” Hard to believe, isn’t it? Come to think of it, are we sure this isn’t an MI5 agent posing as Shayler in an attempt to discredit him? Is there indeed such a person as Shayler, or was he — as some now think — invented by the CIA?",,2088-2350584,00.html

Shayler and Reynolds now removed..

Thank you for poiting out the issues with David Shayler and Morgan Reynolds.. Those names are now removed from the list on my page.

I give it a 2 our of 5.

I would like to share my initial response to your website. Its pretty critical, but I don't mean to undermine your positive spirit. And as I don't know you, its nothing personal.

The post at 911Blobber says, "New 9/11 summary page", but upon going to your site I found no summary of 9/11. "I would like to introduce a web page created for the purpose of introducing and summarizing 9/11 questions to newcomers who are not yet familiar with the topic." No, that's not what you are offering. Do you know how many people repost Alex Jones articles. He's got hundreds of people who just do this all the time. If that's the 9/11 section you spoke of, I find your post to Blogger to be deceptive, and your position to be relatively undeveloped.

So the first image I see is a field of sunflowers. I almost stopped right there. Too self-help, 45 and older, new agey. So I start looking at your categories. And it becomes quickly clear to me that there is no apparent theme or unifying principle. Issues of global significance sit beside popular misconception. It seems that this is just a framework set up based on someone's personal interests. Like a MySpace page.

So I go to the About page assuming that the project will all make sense, and I find a general statement that really says very little about who you are, what you care about, or why you are doing this. One reason that is important is because if you put 9/11 truth along side astrology and 'chemtrails', some very vocal people in this movement are likely to think you some kind of infiltrator or, at the very least, highly irresponsible. Knowing nothing of your past or even present commitment to the issue they will be left to speculate. I love Rob Brezney, but mentioning astrology in a conversation about 9/11 is just a bit like telling someone their clothes don't match after they ran out of a burning building.

Finally, why would people go to your site? What do you offer that is unique? What can you do that isn't being done by ten other people? And how does 9/11 truth fit into that picture?

I congratulate you on seeing the culmination of the work that you put into this project. I didn't mean to sound like an ass above, but when you say that you are creating a site for the movement, and specifically an introductory site, you've got to be operating at a certain level, or you are going to hear about it. I wish you luck in the further development of the site, and hope that you have an adaptive attitude toward growth.

By the way, I have chosen to remain anonymous, as I have no time to help. Your project will certainly be judged based on its merit. At present I summarize your effort as very "student". But as such I should end by wishing you the best of luck in your development.

re: I give it 2 out of 5

Hello, thank you for your input. I feel criticism is always helpful.

Please note that the header of my post here says "New 911 summary page", not "911 summary site." I would certainly call the 911 page on my site a "summary page," It contains much relevant information on the topic, including what I feel is the best of Alex Jones' films and audio interviews, a list of commonly known facts about the attacks, and a comprehensive list of government officials who have spoken out. Also I don't understand why reposting Alex Jones articles would somehow detract from the page as being a summary.

"Too self-help, 45 and older, new agey." <-- Thats exactly the idea, although I don't think it's audience needs to be 45 and older. The theme of the site is "quality links to solution oriented content." I am trying to package the content in a way which reaches people who normally turn away from sites speaking of government conspiracies. I feel that many 911 activists are so accustomed to the information they are communicating that they fail to realize the shock it creates in the people being communicated to, thus they are tuned out before they have an opportunity to effectively communicate their ideas.

Remember the site as a whole is not a 9/11 site, it's a human interest site. Many websites contain content such as astrology columns, such as the Village Voice and New York Press.. would you criticize them for containing that content?

Also, Chemtrails most certainly do exist, as I have personally documented using timelapse photography which I have posted on that page . The content on the chemtrail page is a good summary of that topic. If nothing else, listen to the "Alex Jones Audio Introduction," and you will see what I mean.

People come to my site because of the diversity of information.. some come because of the entertaining content, others because of the political information. The entertaining content helps draw people who otherwise are not exposed to suppressed political information.

Also, why would you suggest that I shouldn't do it because it's being done by others?

I do agree with your criticism of the 'about' page, I will be expanding that tomorrow as well as adding more sections to the 9/11 summary page.

Thank you for your input,

Edward Ulrich
Creator and Editor, News of Interest.TV

Your response is encouraging.

Many people who post here regularly would not have responded in such a constructive manner. I'm a bit punchy. Someone posted below accusing me of being elitist. That would be a misconception.

So you are saying its not a 9/11 site, but it was set up to promote 9/11 truth. So its a 9/11 site. And as such it will be judged, as is every other 9/11 site, based on how it presents the information. As I suggested, I'm not that comfortable with 9/11 being simply another area of human interest, although it is comforting to hear that your strategy is intentional and fairly reasonable. We need sites that sit on the fringe of the mainstream and entice the curious to learn about important facts.

But....your site will NOT be considered reputable or at the fringe on the mainstream if you include information that is either highly speculative, or socially irrelevant. "Chemtrails" are a good example. This is not in the general public interest. Reporting on past and present testing of drugs on U.S. citizens is a little more like it. I'll look further into the research, but its telling to me that none of my non-mainstream sources ever address this issue. Doesn't mean its not happening. But with so many important topics requiring people's attention, some things are less of a priority, and potentially distracting.

Now if your strategy is to lure people to the site with general interest shit, and then catch their eye with 9/11 stuff, I think you underestimate the general public awareness and bias toward Alex Jones. Basically the present design of your site sets up an instant trigger for acceptance or rejection based on one's prior opinion of Alex Jones. That will make many people immediately turn away. Other will immediately count you a part of the team. But basically, making Alex Jones the biggest face of your 9/11 approach, doesn't do the movement justice, and doesn't serve your stated intent.

I think he's fantastic, and wish him all the best. But he is at the more non-mainstream end of the 9/11 truth spectrum. A vocal revolutionary. In your face. If you truly want your site to have more general appeal, at the fringe of the mainstream, do yourself and the movement a favor. Showcase our more relaxed and journalistic contributers. Paul Thompson, Barrie Zwicker, David Ray Griffin.

So I've pointed out a contradiction or two in your approach that I hope you will consider. Think about the definitions of journalism and history. That always keeps me focused. Good luck.

Re: Your response is encouraging

Thank you for your response.. Yes, the site does have 9/11 information, but on the whole it is human interest site with a section for summarizing suppressed news, 911 being the most important.

I would recommend looking into the Chemtrail issue more, your comments are the first I've had suggesting that the issue is less than reputable. The Chemtrail issue is of great importance to me, the skies above my house are heavily sprayed almost on a daily basis, as I have been documenting. Soon I will be posting the rest of of my time lapse videos.

I feel that the majority of the mainstream is still relatively unaware of Alex Jones, and packaging him in the manner that I am helps to gain him acceptance with an audience which otherwise would be initially put off. ( His site being called "PrisionPlanet," rather than "The Alex Jones Show," for example. )

I feel that Alex is the most powerful communicator in the movement, and he has greatest ability to reach the conservative people who are unaware of the crimes of the Bush Administration who they support. Please note that I am not suggesting that he needs to change anything about himself, but I feel that his message would have a greater reach with his content being packaged in a more neutral manner.

The site is undergoing a lot of expansion and enhancement. Over the next few days I will be adding more summary pages on a variety of issues.



I Looked at it Too

I looked at the home page and just below the fold is a section "In Summary". The first one was " Many Questions Remain Long After the 9/11 Attacks". This is a pretty good summary of a lot of 911 stuff. The title doesn'd do it justice. I should say something like "Newbie 9/11 Summary".

This site is not a 911 site and the 911 link just looks like a link to another article. But any link to 911 stuff is okay with me.

Thanks for the effort.


The good Christian should beware of mathematicians and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and confine man in the bonds of Hell. ~ Saint Augustine

As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality. ~ Albert Einstein

The multitude of books is a great evil. There is no limit to this fever for writing. ~ Martin Luther

If the doctor told me I had only six minutes to live, I'd type a little faster. ~ Isaac Asimov

Re: I looked at it Too

Thank you for your suggestion, I have changed the title of the article to be "An Introduction and Summary of Important Questions About the 9/11 Attacks."

Also, some nice enhancements in the works ... Please check the page this evening. (Thursday, October 26)


what a horrible and

what a horrible and unappealing website

Good thing.

Promoting the chemtrails issue, 9/11 and Alex Jones can only be a good thing. Astrology and spirtuality is OK with me, I just don´t spend much time on it. But I don´t think it detracts from other issues.

Good luck with the site,



9/11 elitism

Unfortunately, a few posters here appear to have missed the point of Edward's website.

The website is not meant to target 9/11 researchers or young internet surfers. It is meant to introduce hidden truths to the mainstream and older people, who would otherwise dismiss such stories as conspiracy theories or be overwhelmed and close up to such radical changes in reality.

The first time I saw an Alex Jones video two years ago, I found the things he exposed shocking beyond belief. I had trouble assimilating what he said and even believing that some of the things could possibly be true (save for 9/11, which I had long suspected to be a fraud).

The problem is that as you gain knowledge, you lose perspective of what it is like to be a beginner. This is exactly the same pattern as seen in the OSS community, where elitism prevents alternative software from gaining more exposure.

Fortunately, elitism isn't a problem nearly as much in the 9/11 Truth Movement as it is in the Linux community. But we must be cautious to prevent it.