On Saturday, 12/23/2006 At 7PM EST...

Saturday evening, 12/23/2006 at 7pm EST, I will be on Kevin Barrett's RBN Live show called, "The Truth Jihad."

You can listen to it online live here, and they also have archives that are usually up within an hour here...

I hope some of you call up and say hi. That would be REALLY cool.

The number is (800) 313-9443.

Thanks...

For posting this.


The Time For Debate Is Over

Who is the ugly guy with

Who is the ugly guy with Barrett??? Money mouth

Can't you read?

It's this week's guest Jon Gold. Duh.


The Time For Debate Is Over

Show "A same sex couple" by JoMama2 (not verified)
Show "You certainly deserve each other." by Anonymous (not verified)

Make sure you listen...

You might learn something.


The Time For Debate Is Over

Show "Will there be something like..." by Anonymous (not verified)

There will be plenty...

Of information that points in that direction I'm sure. However, I prefer the phrase, "elements of our Government were complicit" as opposed to "9/11 was an inside job."


The Time For Debate Is Over

Show "Complicit = inside job. No way around it." by Anonymous (not verified)

Actually...

com·plic·it  adj.
Associated with or participating in a questionable act or a crime; having complicity: newspapers complicit with the propaganda arm of a dictatorship.

#1 You're the one that's confused.
#2 It has been 5 years, and SO MUCH information has been revealed/obtained that indicates elements of our Goverment were complicit in the attacks.

In regards to your lack of ability to process that information, I refer you to #1.


The Time For Debate Is Over

Show "Try to read carefully for once." by Anonymous (not verified)

Just to make tonight's show something EXTRA SPECIAL...

I've collected a few things I think will shed A LOT of light on the subject for a lot of people, and are a "debunkers" worst nightmare...


The Time For Debate Is Over

dont worry Jon, the shills are watching......

S. King said...
Notice from Jon Gold:

"Saturday evening, 12/23/2006 at 7pm EST, I will be on Kevin Barrett's RBN Live show called, "The Truth Jihad."

http://911blogger.com/node/5216

That should be entertaining.

(jesus man, they are obsessed with you over at that pisshole. funny to see ShillKing is still watching us.)

Hahahahahaha, those jokers

Hahahahahaha, those jokers can keep on dancing for us it's great entertainment.

Show "The light was all shed on you years ago. You are exposed." by Anonymous (not verified)

to anonymous

shut the hell up, you mossad/cia/isi/mi6 pieces of shi*! get a meaningful direction in life while you're at it, you f%^&in programmed lemming robot losers! karma is gonna get you very soon.

Show "Whadda ya smokin today?" by Anonymous (not verified)

Oops.. I crapped my pants!

That list\of\sites to end all questions about 9/11... really has me running. I've got scare\shit all over my legs.

"The truth shall make you free." Why not make the truth free? We live on a priceless blue pearl, awash in a universe of fire and ice. Cut the crap.

Show "You sure did." by Anonymous (not verified)

into the BATCAVE

checked all those links and finally the "bat cave" — http://perrylogan.org/ — Response, simply put: "Angle is next."

Nothing at any of those sites addresses the heart of the coup: Air Force One on the runway and airborne for over an hour with zero fighter cover (i.e. not one single fighter positioned in the air to protect it) while the nation was "under attack." And nothing at all discussing the "Angel is next" threat or the hot-line linkup with Putin.

Your co-operatives may spin the stuff on the fringes, pull quotes from any dubious source (FBI, 911 Commission, MSM, et al) and generate copious smoke for the benefit of their plethora of mirrors, but they can produce nothing to contradict the documented activities at the heart of the coup. It can't be covered up. 911 was a coup d'etat by a rogue network in service to a warmongering faction of the global olicarcy...probably your own handlers; that is unless your version of agitprop is designed to elicit even stronger arguments in support of 911Truth — in this climate, could be anything...maybe just your idea of "a good time," as in, "For a good time, email perryloganclone@yahoo.com!"

As for the bat cave: Threaten you?\!\?\!\who\d bother? You, if that's really you Perry-san, or whoever you really are, already have to live with yourself — what could be worse? And don't say, "living with you" — debunked by default: my wife loves it...and yours? Oh yeah, that would be genuinely incredible\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\for a good time, one more stroke and that Brittany Spears cheesecake gets you through the night.

Anonymous said: "Your

Anonymous said:

"Your beliefs, suggested anomalies, assertions, claims, and misrepresentation of factual evidence, and lies about evidence do not qualify in any way as objective standards."

You must be talking about the government's story.

Objectivity goes both ways. It is not objective to assume a priori that our government would never kill its own citizens, and to assume that the government's story is a truth that has to be rebutted.

Of course, if the government's story made any sense, I would be less suspicious. That it does not make sense, and that there has been no investigation at all, raises my suspicions greatly.

Do you have evidence that the official story is correct?

Anonymous said:
"Given Barrett\'s track record and your confusion, I am confident that neither of you will yet produce any evidence for your claims. After all, it has been 5 years and nothing remotely suggesting complicity has ever been presented."

Hey you-that-can't-come-up-with-a-name....

It's been five years and nothing remotely near a "full and complete accounting" of the official theories has been forthcoming.

You would think that the event that has been at the core of virtually everything that the current residents of the white house have done would be fully explained by now....

Oh.... I know they are TRIED to provide evidence but when we find out about all the ommissions of the 911 commission and find out that the the commissioners KNEW the pentagon was lying to them about the events of 911, it tends to give me pause....

Do YOU really believe the official story?

If you have evidence that proves the official conspiracy theories, then lets see it!

-----------------------------------------

All aspects of the truth are consistent

The event of 9/11 impacted us SO MUCH...

We've even got a period of time named after it...

"The Post-9/11 World."

And we're not supposed to question that world changing event, and those that lied to us about it?

GIVE ME A _______ BREAK!


The Time For Debate Is Over

Show "I gave you a break, in fact many breaks." by Anonymous (not verified)

Angel is next

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ no hiding \\\\\\\\\\ Angel is next \\\\\\\\\\\ keep stroking \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

Why are you here?

Since this is all baseless garbage, why are you wasting your time and energy posting here? We are all just a bunch of nutty conspiracy theorists...right? Possibly you are threatened by what is being discussed here. It seems to concern you.

P.S. Say hi to the guys at the "office".......traitor.

Show "Pay attention." by Anonymous (not verified)

Either you are threatened by what is being discussed here.....

......or you are being paid to post here. You don't even attempt to debate the issues, you only hurl chilldish insults. That is all you can do?

Show "You must be a newbie." by Anonymous (not verified)

So perhaps YOU can answer my

So perhaps YOU can answer my question anonymous-person- I -do-not-know:

Where in the NIST report does it explain the mechanism for simultaneous, systematic, total structural failure that resulted in the near free fall collapse of WTC1, 2 & 3? Please include the exact page numbers in your response and a link.

I eagerly await my awakening to the "real world of truth".

Show "Begging the Question" by Anonymous (not verified)

The question specifies

The question specifies "WHERE IN THE NIST REPORT"--not general info from bleeding Encyclopdia Britanica, et al.

WHERE IN THE NIST REPORT--please.

Thank you, "Ern-", I mean, anonymous-person-I-do-not-know.

Show "Try again. Pay attention this time." by Anonymous (not verified)

"You are begging the

"You are begging the question. Look up the definition."

It is NIST's job to provide all relevant definitions in its report as most people reading it are not experts in the relevant feilds. So are you saying NIST believes it was a progressive collapse? If so, WHERE IN THE NIST REPORT do they state this mechanism then explain this mechanism?

BTW "global collapse" is an environmental/ economic term, hence being misused in this context. Are you suggesting that NIST meant "structural collapse" when they said "global collapse"? If so, please provide a link where this is clairfied.

Show "Try to pay attention." by Anonymous (not verified)

WHERE in the NIST report do

WHERE in the NIST report do they explain the mechanism for the near free fall collapse of WTC1, 2 &3 as progressive collapse?

Because right now, you are saying the NIST report DOES NOT explain a mechanism for the collapse, progressive or otherwise--in which instance the NIST report is flawed. If the NIST report can't stand alone, then it CANNOT be used by debunkers as a Bible of the official story.

BTW--the link you gave is garbage--it just leads back to 911Blogger.

Now go back to your "totally awsome journal", 911Debunker.

No, you know perfectly well.

That NIST and everyone else says exactly the same thing. And you think you can evade it by begging the question? Are you that nuts?

Let\'s try again, bubba, shall we?

WTC 1:
Once the upper building section began to move downwards, the weakened structure in the impact and fire zone was not able to absorb the tremendous energy of the falling building section and global collapse ensued.
- NIST NCSTAR 1, WTC Investigation, p. 145

WTC 2:
The downward movement of this structural block was more than the damaged structure could resist, and the global collapse began.
- NIST NCSTAR 1, WTC Investigation, p. 152

---
\"Local failure of one structural element may result in the failure of another structural element. Failure might thus progress throughout a major part or even all of the structure.
After reviewing a couple of failure events, it is outlined why current probability based design codes are inadequate to prevent progressive collapse. It is discussed how these shortcomings might be overcome both within and outside a probabilistic framework. A pragmatic approach is suggested in which design according to current
practice is complemented by additional design measures with particular regard to collapse resistance.\"

...

\"Progressive collapse has played a role in such catastrophic events as the collapse of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building, Oklahoma City, 1995 and the World Trade
Center towers, New York, 2001, but in a large number of less dramatic failures as well. Some failures out of recent years are described in [2], ranging from Ronan Point, a multi-story building in London, 1968, to the Sampoong Superstore, a department store in Seoul, 1995. Progressive collapse as partial cause is evident throughout the described failure events.\"

...

\"In terms of tragedy and losses the above mentioned cases of failure were far exceeded by the collapse on September 11th, 2001 of the twin towers of the World Trade Center.
The impact of the airplane and the subsequent fire initiated local failures in the area of impact. The ensuing loss in vertical bearing capacity was limited to a few stories but extended over the complete cross section of the respective tower [9, 10]. The upper part of the structure started to move downwards and accumulated kinetic energy. The subsequent collision with the lower part of the structure, which was still intact, caused enormous impact forces which were far beyond the reserve capacities of the structure. This, in turn, led to the complete loss of vertical bearing capacity in the area of the impact. Failure progressed in this manner and led to a total collapse.\"

\"Eventually, the integrity of these tubes was compromised to the point where they buckled under the weight of the higher floors, causing a gravitational chain reaction that continued until all of the floors were at ground level.\"

http://www.sh.tu-harburg.de/starossek/Veroeffentlichungen/Dateien/Uwe%20...

\"Eventually, the integrity of these tubes was compromised to the point where they buckled under the weight of the higher floors, causing a gravitational chain reaction that continued until all of the floors were at ground level.\"

http://www.implosionworld.com/wtc.htm

Now, bubba Jenny, do you want to continue with your crusade or will you finally admit that you begging the question and avoiding what we all know is just making you the laughing stock in the Real World and killing your \"movement?\"

But I asked what was in the

But I asked what was in the NIST report; all this extra information may be relevant, BUT IT ISN'T IN THE NIST REPORT.(Or so it appears as there are no page numbers after the first two items which are from NIST) These links are not part of the NIST report--so they are irreleveant to my question which was clearly about the NIST report. You answers should ONLY reference the NIST report because it is the integrity of the NIST report that is in question.

So you have confirmed the NIST report DOES NOT explain the mechanism of collapse. Thank you, anonymous-person-I do-not-know.

Mission accomplished!

"Bugger this; I want a better world."

Yes, The NIST report is crystal clear. Don\'t be a fool, Jenny.

As is every other report I posted supporting NIST.

You are just making a fool of yourself pretending not to know it does and begging the question.

As I always say, one can never underestimate the intelligence of you 9/11 Truth Kiddies.

Sorry you can't read.....

Your new nickname is "Cognitive Dissonance". Do you like it?

One has to wonder

What all you bozos did during school hours.

anybody know anything about

anybody know anything about an upcoming book by Barrett called "Truth Jihad"? he told me a couple of months ago to be on the lookout for it but i havent heard anything since then.

Show "Truth Jihad" by Anonymous (not verified)

Angel is next

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ no hiding \\\\\\\\\\ Angel is next \\\\\\\\\\\ arm getting tired? \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

!

MEDIA WHORE!!!

just kidding Jon.... go kick some butt

Will...

For all your efforts

Thanks Jon,and be sure to tell Kevin thanks too from all of us here.

Will...

Jon Gold interview.

I am listening to the interview right now and Jon is doing a fine job. He just mentioned this web site and all the trolls who come here and cause trouble. I think it is a great idea to have everyone log-in. No more of this anonymous crap. If a troll wants to post, fine with me but put up your e-mail address and IP number. Stop hiding behind your mouse and keyboard. I also liked Jon mentioning the time when Gypsy blew the whistle on 9/11 commission thugs. Gypsy was born in Russia and later moved to the States. She is more of a true American than most of the natural born ones. Joe six-pack should hang his head in shame.

Thanks...

That's one of my favorite videos.


The Time For Debate Is Over

Gypsy Video

That is my favorite video also. I still watch it. Her, Carol and Janette are my favorite people in our group. It took a lot of courage to do what she did. I am not sure I could have done it myself. I would have been shaking in my boots. Those woman are true patriots. We men can learn a lot from them. I have always maintained that women like Gypsy will win this thing for us.

Good luck man!

Good luck man!

Thanks....

yo, john

don't forget the dancing israelis found with explosives residue in their van, the fake art students at the wtc, the fake moving company, the dual israel-us citizenship for many involved with pnac and homeland security, the depleted uranium constantly used by our troops and israel's, the aipac whores, the same people who control the media also own the weapons defense industry aka mic, no-bid gov't contracts to those same people, on and on and on. it's not so hard to figure out, people!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Show "Too bad that RBN is also the" by Anonymous (not verified)

Ben Hannity Chertoff is here ,again

Wow , more espousing comments on how you are the grand know all truth master? as usual?...Ho Hum..Not!
Way to go Jon, give Kevin My thanks if you could..and Chertoff you can listen in also....Oh I know, you will be...by the way why don't you check out Counterpunch March 9th article from Sam Karmilowicz. It's a good measure to read an article like this in their publication and refer to us as nutty conspirationalists.
Shows inconsistency on their part.

Angel is next

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ no hiding \\\\\\\\\\ Angel is next \\\\\\\\\\\ keep stroking \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ its getting soft \\\\\\\\\\\\\\ arms going numb \\\\\\\\\\\\\\

10 Minutes...

well i'm listening sounds

well i'm listening sounds good guys

Thank you...

I'd just like to say

that I haven't been that nervous and thus dorky-sounding since I confronted Sen. John Thune at my cousin's wedding in South Dakota. Really. I'm usually quite a smooth talker.

You did great.

Thanks.

That's nice of you to say.

Show "Japanese did 911!" by concrete man (not verified)

It is over. Alarming 9/11 claim is found baseless.

New report rips Curt Weldon and 9/11 Truth Movement

Alarming 9/11 claim is found baseless

A military analysts\' chart did not identify hijackers
beforehand, senators report.

By Greg Miller, Times Staff Writer
December 25, 2006

WASHINGTON — The Senate Intelligence Committee has rejected as untrue one of the most disturbing claims about the Sept. 11 terrorist strikes — a congressman\'s contention that a team of military analysts identified Mohamed Atta or other hijackers before the attacks — according to a summary of the panel\'s investigation obtained by The Times.

The conclusion contradicts assertions by Rep. Curt Weldon (R-Pa.) and a few military officers that U.S. national security officials ignored startling intelligence available in early 2001 that might have helped to prevent the attacks.

ADVERTISEMENT

In particular, Weldon and other officials have repeatedly claimed that the military analysts\' effort, known as Able Danger, produced a chart that included a picture of Atta and identified him as being tied to an Al Qaeda cell in Brooklyn, N.Y. Weldon has also said that the chart was shared with White House officials, including Stephen J. Hadley, then deputy national security advisor.

But after a 16-month investigation, the Intelligence Committee has concluded that those assertions are unfounded.

\"Able Danger did not identify Mohammed Atta or any other 9/11 hijacker at any time prior to Sept. 11, 2001,\" the committee determined, according to an eight-page letter sent last week to panel members by the top Republican and Democrat on the committee.

Weldon, the focus of an unrelated Justice Department corruption probe, was defeated last month in his campaign for an 11th term in a suburban Philadelphia district that has a large GOP majority in voter registration. Attempts were unsuccessful Sunday to reach a Weldon spokesman and an attorney representing Weldon in the Justice Department investigation.

The Senate panel began investigating Able Danger in August 2005, after Weldon and people close to the program went public with their claims. At the time, Weldon was the vice chairman of the House Armed Services Committee and the House Homeland Security Committee.

The recently completed probe also dismissed other assertions that have fueled conspiracy theories surrounding the Sept. 11 attacks.

The panel said it found \"no evidence\" to support claims by military officers connected to Able Danger that Defense Department lawyers prevented the team\'s analysts from sharing their findings with FBI counter-terrorism officials before the attacks.

Nor was the alleged chart or any information developed by Able Danger improperly destroyed at the direction of Pentagon lawyers, the panel concluded — a charge that had stoked claims of a cover-up.

Though the committee concluded that claims about Able Danger were unfounded, two of the hijackers were known to the U.S. intelligence community before the Sept. 11 attacks. The two had been observed by the CIA attending a meeting with Al Qaeda operatives in Malaysia, but that information was not shared with other agencies in time to locate them after they had entered the United States and moved to San Diego.

Able Danger was the unclassified name given to a program launched in 1999 by the U.S. Special Operations Command as part of an effort to develop military plans targeting the leadership ranks of Al Qaeda and other terrorist networks.

Military analysts assigned to the effort did create charts with pictures of Al Qaeda operatives whose identities were known publicly at the time, the committee found. But the committee concluded that none of those charts depicted Atta, and that the claims of Weldon and others may have been caused by confusion.

One of the charts, titled \"The Al Qaeda Network: Snapshots of Typical Operational Cells Associated With UBL [Usama bin Laden],\" was attached to the letter sent to committee members last week by Sens. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) and John D. \"Jay\" Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), the panel\'s leaders.

\"One of these individuals depicted on the chart arguably looked like Mohammed Atta,\" the committee concluded. \"In addition, the chart contained names of Al Qaeda associates that sound like Atta, as well as numerous variations of the common Arab name Mohammed.\"

The committee also suggested that officials\' memories may have been clouded by the flurry of charts and photographs of Atta that surfaced after the attacks. The panel noted that a defense contractor that produced the chart at the center of the controversy subsequently created a follow-up chart, after the attacks, that did include Atta.

Atta, an Egyptian-born Islamic radical, was the ringleader of the Sept. 11 attacks and pilot of one of the planes that struck the World Trade Center.

In June 2005, Weldon generated controversy when he declared in a speech on the House floor and in a book released that month that he had met with Hadley at the White House shortly after the attacks and had given the national security official a copy of a chart showing that Atta had been identified by Able Danger.

But the committee concluded that the chart \"was not a pre-9/11 chart\" and that \"at no time did Mr. Hadley ever see a chart with pre-9/11 data bearing Atta\'s picture or name as described by Congressman Weldon.\"

The Senate Intelligence Committee noted in its report that its findings were consistent with those of a similar investigation of Able Danger by the Defense Department inspector general\'s office, released in September.

Weldon has relished the role of calling attention to national security threats he believes are being ignored by others in government. At times he has carried around a replica of a suitcase-size nuclear bomb to highlight terrorist nuclear dangers. He has also accused Iran of hiding Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.

Weldon\'s rising legal troubles played a role in his reelection loss last month. It was disclosed last week that a federal grand jury had subpoenaed congressional records from Weldon\'s office as part of an FBI probe aimed at determining whether he traded his influence to get lobbying business for his daughter Karen and others.

The House seat was won by Democrat Joe Sestak, a retired Navy vice admiral.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-intel25dec25,0,3149...

Why...

Is there no mention of the 2.5 terabytes of information that was destroyed, or the fact that Dietrich Schnell was prohibited from testifying at Weldon's hearings, or the treatment that Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer received, and can we please see the chart in question?


The Time For Debate Is Over

Never any answers from you.

You were funny on Barrett\'s Sick and Demented Hour, Jon. Not a single piece of evidence from either one of you.

Lot\'s of cover-ups, you claim, but you still refuse to demonstrate anything that would remotely lead one to conclude that elements of the government were complicit in pulling off 9/11.

One has to wonder when you will come out from hiding and provide some answers. Given your historical performance, all you can do is argue from innuendo.

If you only had a clue........

Too bad you bought into the nonsense of 9/11 Truthies.

It is unfortunate that you never learned how to think rationally and critically.

what?!?!?! first, why was

what?!?!?! first, why was Sen. Thune at your cousins wedding? second, what exactly did you confront him about? third, good for you! Sen. Thune is a jackass.

Cause she's a big S. Dakota mucketymuck

as is her new husband. But believe me, I was completely shocked when I realized he was there. Anyway, I angled for a little face time with him, introduced him to my daughter who is extremely cute (playing the cute daughter card), and then told him that more and more Americans aren't satisfied with the Commission Report and that that kind of doubt about our great government is bad for our great nation. He did a great job of simulating concerned attention, sustained eye contact, and so forth, and thanked me for bringing the matter to his attention. Then I went in the bathroom and barfed up my piece of cake. (Not really.)

haha, great job. did he have

haha, great job. did he have anything at all of substance to say about your concerns with the Commission? or just the usual canned answers? personally i would have barfed, ive seen Thune speak on C-Span and stuff and hes the epitome of "politician". glad to see his white house hopes have dried up.

Thanks...

To everyone that participated, and to everyone that listened.

Sorry I forgot to say hi from 911Blogger.com...


The Time For Debate Is Over

do you still think flight 77

do you still think flight 77 flew into the pentagon, master truther?

Why do you refer to me as...

"master truther?"


The Time For Debate Is Over

Show "because your good Jon, now" by Anonymous (not verified)

Answer this!

Screw you, you evil bastard!

btw way to go Jon.

NICE JOB

Excellent show!

Kevin does a really impressive job of keeping the show rolling... very easy to listen to.

Jon... You gave us at blogger plenty of props!

The fact that you reccomend this site as a place for people to go to seek information from intelligent and informed people is very telling of your respect for us all..... well not all of us... "Anony"

Nice work.

Going to try and make it to Phoenix..... Would give me some inspiration to finish many of research papers on the subject.

Thank you...

The time flew by.


The Time For Debate Is Over

Show "The Tale of Two Holocaust Tales" by Concrete man (not verified)

Show's Up...

Good to speak with you and Kevin,

time flies when you're truthing!

LOL

I look forward to seeing you in AZ in February.

I hope that you and yours are well.

Thanks for calling up!

And thanks for the signs you make.


The Time For Debate Is Over

Jon, thank you for the

Jon, thank you for the links.

Show "Jon, do you support these statements by Barrett?" by Mark Roberts

Mark Roberts,

obviously i can't answer your question, but, whilest youre 'in reach', i was wondering if you did some work (yet) on 'debunking' '911 press for truth'. I'd be interested to read your take on that...

Good angle! Noticed how

Good angle! Noticed how he's ignored you...

Show "That is the $64,000 question." by Anonymous (not verified)

Well Mark...

I'd be interested to see the emails. For 3 reasons.

#1. I don't trust you.
#2. I don't trust you.
#3. I don't trust you.

And please answer this question.

Is the United States Government perpetrating a cover-up in regards to the attacks of 9/11?


The Time For Debate Is Over

And Mark...

If elements of our Government were complicit in the attacks of 9/11, and you're actively helping them get away with that crime... what does that make you?


The Time For Debate Is Over

Show "Jon, you can read my emails" by Mark Roberts

Wow...

It doesn't matter if it's a lowly anonymous minion, or the leader himself. None of you "debunkers" have the ability to recognize a yes or no question if it jumped up and bit you in the ass.

I didn't ask you if they let it happen on purpose. I didn't ask you if they made it happen on purpose. Finally, I didn't ask you if the U.S. Government is covering up the cause of the 9/11 attacks.

I'll ask again.

Is the United States Government perpetrating a cover-up in regards to the attacks of 9/11? Period. Yes or no.

It's amazing how you have to frame everything according to the "talking points" you're most comfortable talking about.

As for evidence that you're a traitor. You actively oppose the 9/11 Truth Movement. The one "organization" that has always actively tried to help the first responders of 9/11. The heroes of 9/11. The people that are sick and dying as a result of the 9/11 environmental disaster.

I don't need much more than that.


The Time For Debate Is Over

From John Feal, First Responder...

First I like to wish everyone a Merry Christmas. I believe today of all days we should be praying for those lost and those still suffering from 9/11 and its after math. I want to thank Jon Gold, and others for their continued and dedicated efforts on 9/11 issues. And to all individuals, organizations, groups, media, elected officials, etc... I have been advocating, and a prominent member in the 9/11 circle long enough to know that if you oppose the 9/11 truth movement, then you oppose the truth, and you oppose the answers we deserve, and you oppose how government is suppose to work for us. Responders, survivors, family members embrace the fact that this movement simply wants the truth, hence the name, "9/11 truth movement". 9/11 and it's aftermath have created so many issues, from government corruption, betrayal, denial, human suffering, financial hard ship, and believe me I can go on, but what is important is that everyone involved in any 9/11 group or organization is entitled to the truth of that day or the days leading up to it. How many more people have to still die, and how many more Christmas's must be spent in pain for us when all these people are trying to do is ask questions that many of you are afraid of. Shame on anyone who opposes the "TRUTH", and Merry Christmas to everyone that embraces the fact that 9/11 will be apart of every Christmas for us, the 9/11 responders, forever, or until we die from 9/11 exposure. God bless you all that are trying to make a difference.

John Feal
9/11 responder/advocate
FealGood Foundation


The Time For Debate Is Over

Show "Jon, you said you didn't trust me" by Mark Roberts

Mark...

I didn't say I thought they didn't exist. I said I'd like to see them because I don't trust you.

I didn't say you "harmed first responders."

I said , "You actively oppose the 9/11 Truth Movement. The one "organization" that has always actively tried to help the first responders of 9/11. The heroes of 9/11. The people that are sick and dying as a result of the 9/11 environmental disaster."

Then I posted something from first responder John Feal that said.

"Shame on anyone who opposes the "TRUTH"

You ask if I'm interested in truth. You aggressively attempt to disrupt the movement I am apart of that tries to get a real investigation into the attacks of 9/11. That, and justice. For the murders of 2,973+ people.

I should be the one asking you. Are you interested in the truth?

If there are so many organizations helping first responders, then why aren't these organizations helping to hold those responsible for their sickness, accountable, and why are so many first responders living week to week, barely managing to get by, and why aren't the media outlets outside of New York covering their dilemma, and so on?

I'm glad you say that you've given first responders a lot of money.

As for Kevin Barrett... Originally I said I don't trust you. I still don't. The link you posted does not show Kevin Barrett's "side of the story", and I have no desire to correspond with you through email.

That being said, I also have no desire to sit here, and debate with you the idea that Controlled Demolition took place.

I would like, however, for you to act as an adult, and answer this one question I left for you.

Is the United States Government perpetrating a cover-up in regards to the attacks of 9/11?

That requires a simple yes or no please.


The Time For Debate Is Over

Jon, what seems to be the trouble?

You don't trust that I'm telling the truth about Kevin Barrett's bizarre lies and violent fantasies. You said you wanted to see his emails.

I offered to send them to you and publicly printed my email address.

Now you say you don't want to correspond with me. And you're asking ME to act like an adult?

Interesting take you have on the truth, Jon.

As for my interfering with "the truth" in some way, what I do is present verifiable facts to counter the demonstrable lies of the "Truth Movement." I have refuted dozens upon dozens of these lies,and cleared up many more misperceptions. If you think that deliberate lies like Kevin Barrett's somehow serve the victims of 9/11, I will always strongly disagree. I examine specific statements and put my replies in writing for all to read. Somehow to you that's a traitorous act.

At Ground Zero I oppose people who think the FDNY was "in on it." I'm going to continue doing that. I will gladly change my position and apologize when they present evidence to back their claims. But they are unable to provide a single shred of evidence to counter my facts. They can go for hours and not say a single true thing to the public. When I ask them, not a single one of them has been able to tell me anything I've gotten wrong since I began going there in June.

Anyone is free to point out what I have gotten wrong. I welcome correction. No one has done so. No one. What sort of truth is it that can only be supported by lies?

I directly answered your question about a USG coverup in my reply of the 24th.

No...

You didn't. You said you have found no evidence that the Government let it happen on purpose. You said you have found no evidence that they made it happen on purpose, and you said you have found no evidence they are covering up the cause of the attacks.

I'll ask you again.

It requires a yes or a no.

Is the United States Government perpetrating a cover-up in regards to the attacks of 9/11?


The Time For Debate Is Over

HUH?

HUH?
Jon, I answered your question. Since I have seen no evidence of those things, obviously I don't have any reason to believe they are true. If I were "the United States Government," I could say, "Yes, I did that' or "No, I didn't." I'm not the United States Government, Jon. I judge by the available evidence.

When do you plan to present your evidence of a LIHOP or MIHOP scenario? I'll be more than glad to look at it.

And to stay on topic, should I assume that you do in fact support Kevin Barrett saying that Larry Silverstein is a mass murderer, a traitor, and an insurance fraudster?

Please respond. The reason I posted here was to bring to your attention Barrett's hideous lies and violent fantasies of his critics' execution.

You proudly participated in Barrett's "Truth Jihad." Do you support his statements or not?

Are you really this stupid?

The events of 9/11 cover a WIDE RANGE of topics. Some even go outside the realm of your "talking points."

Tell me about the 28 redacted pages of the Joint Congressional Inquiry, and tell me why that is not considered a "cover-up?"

Tell me about transcripts and documents relating to the July 10, 2001 meeting that took place between former CIA Director George Tenet and then National Security Advisor, Condoleezza Rice, and why withholding that information from the public is not considered a "cover-up."

Tell me about the CIA Inspector General’s report entitled, “CIA Accountability With Respect To The 9/11 Attacks”, and why withholding that information from the public is not considered a "cover-up?"

That's just to name a few of the OBVIOUS cover-ups Mark.

Why is ANY cover-up acceptable Mark?

As for presenting "my" evidence... I have blogs as far as the eye can see on this site, and a 9/11 Truther Forum to boot.

As for Kevin Barrett's statements regarding "Larry Silverstein is a mass murderer, a traitor, and an insurance fraudster...", I'd say we'd need a new investigation to find out.

A new investigation into the events of September 11th, and this time, a truly bipartisan, global, with families invested from the beginning, middle, and throughout the end.

Where is your evidence that creating a "stacked deck" commission that refused to investigate 70% of the questions put forward by the families is acceptable?


The Time For Debate Is Over

The very fact....

That you couldn't answer yes to my question, shows EXACTLY how "honest" you are in your efforts against the 9/11 Truth Movement. It also shows that you have an obvious agenda.


The Time For Debate Is Over

So if I call Kevin Barrett a

So if I call Kevin Barrett a mass murderer, a traitor, and an insurance fraudster, but do not produce a shred of evidence to back my claims against him, those claims should be investigated by the authorities, using our tax dollars? And he should have to spend his money defending his reputation? Throw the libel laws out the window?

Is that the world you live in, Jon? Where baseless accusations are equivalent to facts in the presumption that a crime has been committed?

Honestly, now, Is that how you'd like to see the District Attorney's office operate? The most absurd accusations should be investigated, without any reason to believe they are true?

Let me ask you this: do you have any reason to believe that Larry Silverstein is a mass murderer? That he has committed treason? That he has committed insurance fraud? Have you seen the slightest shred of evidence of that? If so, present just one shred here and now. 

If you don't have any evidence, then why would you encourage official harrassment of this man?

I'd really like to get this nailed down. I don't mean to pick on you. This came up when it was pointed out to me that folks were praising Barrett, and I had just had a very unpleasant exchange with him in which he said that I'd be standing on the gallows too.

What concerns me, Jon, is just what kind of world you would like to live in. I've asked many conspiracy theorists the same question: why is it acceptable for you to presume guilt, but not acceptable for others?

You said you didn't trust my statement about Barrett, and said you'd like to see those emails. But when I offered to send them to you, you declined.

Why do you publlcly cast doubt on my statement, then refuse to look at the evidence? Does that strike you, or others reading this, as bizarre? I see this behavior a lot with conspiracy theorists, particularly at Ground Zero: a physical inablility to confront evidence that would disturb their fantasies. It is very, very disturbing.

Please don't forget to post your evidence of any crime that Silverstein has committed. That's what rational adults do: back their claims with evidence. 

I'm sorry...

Weren't you just owned, and exposed for being a dishonest individual with an agenda?

Tell me Mark, what color is the sky in this fantasy world that you live in where the 9/11 Commission fulfilled its' mandate to give a "full and complete accounting" of the attacks of 9/11, and everyone in the Commission had nothing but the best of intentions, no conflicts of interest, and wanted nothing more than to give the families seeking closure what they rightfully deserved?

In America, one is innocent until proven guilty. However, when information exists that would lead one to believe that someone is guilty of a crime, usually, an investigation takes place. If that someone is found to be guilty, then they are held to account for their crime.

The investigation you cling to was performed by a commission that was "derelict in its' duties", and as a result, their report was a "hollow failure", and now anyone with a brain questions the "entire veracity of the 9/11 Commission's Report."

I'm done "conversing" with you. You have refused to answer a single question of mine. Why on Earth would you think I would take the time to answer any of yours?

Good day to you sir.


The Time For Debate Is Over

Jon Gold has just go owned - again.

We have just had another display by Jon Gold of Argument by Innuendo, that which Jon has always engaged in and for which he has been called on the carpet for months.

Argument by Innuendo is defined as directing one\\\\\\\'s listeners to a particular, usually derogatory, conclusion, by a skillful choice of words or the careful arrangement of sentences, which implicitly suggests but does not assert that conclusion. The force of the fallacy lies in the impression created that some veiled claim is true, although no relevant evidence is presented to support such a view.

http://www.esgs.org/uk/logic.htm

Jon Gold has persistently argued this way and has been repeatedly chastised and exposed for doing so. Jon refuses to present actual evidence to ever support his claims that elements of the U.S. Government were complicit in the attacks of 9/11.

Just look at the examples of his evasions in this thread where Mark Roberts has flushed Jon out. Jon, realizing he has just been owned by Mark Roberts, has not chickened out and is running away from the thread and the truth.

How Jon Gold argues by innuendo

Examples from Jon Gold in this thread:

And please answer this question. Is the United States Government perpetrating a cover-up in regards to the attacks of 9/11?

If elements of our Government were complicit in the attacks of 9/11, and you\\\\\\\'re actively helping them get away with that crime... what does that make you?

It doesn\\\\\\\'t matter if it\\\\\\\'s a lowly anonymous minion, or the leader himself. None of you \\\\\\\"debunkers\\\\\\\" have the ability to recognize a yes or no question if it jumped up and bit you in the ass.

It\\\\\\\'s amazing how you have to frame everything according to the \\\\\\\"talking points\\\\\\\" you\\\\\\\'re most comfortable talking about.

As for evidence that you\\\\\\\'re a traitor. You actively oppose the 9/11 Truth Movement. The one \\\\\\\"organization\\\\\\\" that has always actively tried to help the first responders of 9/11. The heroes of 9/11. The people that are sick and dying as a result of the 9/11 environmental disaster. I don\\\\\\\'t need much more than that.

I said , \\\\\\\"You actively oppose the 9/11 Truth Movement. The one \\\\\\\"organization\\\\\\\" that has always actively tried to help the first responders of 9/11. The heroes of 9/11.

Then I posted something from first responder John Feal that said.\\\\\\\"Shame on anyone who opposes the \\\\\\\"TRUTH\\\\\\\". You ask if I\\\\\\\'m interested in truth. You aggressively attempt to disrupt the movement I am apart of that tries to get a real investigation into the attacks of 9/11. That, and justice. For the murders of 2,973+ people.

You said you have found no evidence that the Government let it happen on purpose. You said you have found no evidence that they made it happen on purpose, and you said you have found no evidence they are covering up the cause of the attacks. I\\\\\\\'ll ask you again.It requires a yes or a no. Is the United States Government perpetrating a cover-up in regards to the attacks of 9/11?

The events of 9/11 cover a WIDE RANGE of topics. Some even go outside the realm of your \\\\\\\"talking points.\\\\\\\"

Tell me about the 28 redacted pages of the Joint Congressional Inquiry, and tell me why that is not considered a \\\\\\\"cover-up?\\\\\\\"

Tell me about transcripts and documents relating to the July 10, 2001 meeting that took place between former CIA Director George Tenet and then National Security Advisor, Condoleezza Rice, and why withholding that information from the public is not considered a \\\\\\\"cover-up.\\\\\\\" Tell me about the CIA Inspector General’s report entitled, “CIA Accountability With Respect To The 9/11 Attacks”, and why withholding that information from the public is not considered a \\\\\\\"cover-up?\\\\\\\" That\\\\\\\'s just to name a few of the OBVIOUS cover-ups Mark. Why is ANY cover-up acceptable Mark?

As for presenting \\\\\\\"my\\\\\\\" evidence... I have blogs as far as the eye can see on this site, and a 9/11 Truther Forum to boot.

Where is your evidence that creating a \\\\\\\"stacked deck\\\\\\\" commission that refused to investigate 70% of the questions put forward by the families is acceptable?

That you couldn\\\\\\\'t answer yes to my question, shows EXACTLY how \\\\\\\"honest\\\\\\\" you are in your efforts against the 9/11 Truth Movement. It also shows that you have an obvious agenda. I\\\\\\\'m done \\\\\\\"conversing\\\\\\\" with you. You have refused to answer a single question of mine. Why on Earth would you think I would take the time to answer any of yours?

-----

This is classic Jon Gold evasion. As bad as it comes.

Note that Jon does not bring anything to the table other than innuendo. Note that he demands that everyone else answer his questions. Note that his questions always imply through innuendo that something nefarious must have occurred that one should conclude the government must have been complicit in 9/11. But Jon Gold NEVER provides any evidence to support his claims

Mark Roberts answered the question Jon Gold DEMANDED the only way anybody can: show us the evidence, Jon Gold.

Congratulations to Mark Roberts for showing once again that Jon Gold has nothing to offer as evidence to support his own claims.

Jon Gold has just go owned again.

No no no...

My question required a yes or a no. Any idiot could see that. "My" evidence is plastered all over this site, and my site. I can't help it if you refuse to read it, and always have.

I'll tell you what. You provide a court that comes equipped with a judge, and a jury, and I will be more than happy to present every piece of evidence I have.

By the way. Roberts was the one that was owned. He was bitch slapped, and owned, and it felt GOOD.


The Time For Debate Is Over

It is too late to run, Jon Gold. I own you.

You have no evidence. You\\\'ve demonstrated since day one. I just listed above how you intentionally use innuendo to hide the fact that you know you do not have any evidence.

We have asked you for months for you to provide evidence to back up your claims. Every time, you refuse.

You have yet to bring any evidence here or to point to any evidence on any other site. And you just admitted it again!

Roberts, I, and others have owned Jon Gold for months. It is too late for you.

And today, I own Jon Gold big time. And it all came from Jon Gold outing himself.

Lucky for me...

99% of the individuals that post here know you're full of shit.


The Time For Debate Is Over

They really know I have the truth.

You do not fool anyone, Jon Gold. You displayed the cowardice again that has always marked your refusal to provide any evidence to back up your claims.

We know you cannot back up your claims. You cannot even con 9/11 Truthers anymore.

You are a fraud and a charlatan, Jon Gold.

Jim?

Jim Fetzer is that you?


The Time For Debate Is Over

Jon Gold, Coward

You have no place to hide, Jon Gold. Everyone here knows you cannot back up your claims.

Who's hiding?

Everyone here knows that when I do present evidence, you say it isn't evidence (even though "circumstantial evidence" IS evidence). Usually, I point out that you're the one that doesn't understand what evidence is. Then you go away and hide for a little while, only to return with the same accusations of the past. It's a sad, sorry little game you like to play.

And you stink of fear.


The Time For Debate Is Over

Too bad you still refuse to present any evidence.

You have not presented evidence. You have not presented circumstantial evidence. You do not know what evidence constitutes, Jon Gold, as I have repeatedly demonstrated.

Assertions and claims are not evidence.

Argument by Innuendo is not evidence.

Claiming to have presented evidence when none is presented is not evidence.

As Mark Roberts responded to you directly:

To answer your question, I have seen no evidence of LIHOP, MIHOP, or of a US government coverup of the cause of the 9/11 attacks.

...

Jon, I answered your question. Since I have seen no evidence of those things, obviously I don\'t have any reason to believe they are true. If I were \"the United States Government,\" I could say, \"Yes, I did that\' or \"No, I didn\'t.\" I\'m not the United States Government, Jon. I judge by the available evidence.

When do you plan to present your evidence of a LIHOP or MIHOP scenario? I\'ll be more than glad to look at it.

But we know that you refuse> to present any credible evidence whatsoever, Jon Gold. Nothing.

Nothing but more assertions and innuendo.

Keep showing your cowardice, Jon, so more people can see how bad it is what you truly represent.

Thanks...

For proving me right. ;)


The Time For Debate Is Over

You proved you do not know what evidence is

Once again, you demonstrate that you cannot provide any evidence to support your claims.

It is on the record.

Too bad you still refuse to present any evidence.

You have not presented evidence. You have not presented circumstantial evidence. You do not know what evidence constitutes, Jon Gold, as I have repeatedly demonstrated.

Assertions and claims are not evidence.

Argument by Innuendo is not evidence.

Claiming to have presented evidence when none is presented is not evidence.

As Mark Roberts responded to you directly:

To answer your question, I have seen no evidence of LIHOP, MIHOP, or of a US government coverup of the cause of the 9/11 attacks.

...

Jon, I answered your question. Since I have seen no evidence of those things, obviously I don\\\'t have any reason to believe they are true. If I were \\\"the United States Government,\\\" I could say, \\\"Yes, I did that\\\' or \\\"No, I didn\\\'t.\\\" I\\\'m not the United States Government, Jon. I judge by the available evidence.

When do you plan to present your evidence of a LIHOP or MIHOP scenario? I\\\'ll be more than glad to look at it.

But we know that you refuse> to present any credible evidence whatsoever, Jon Gold. Nothing.

Nothing but more assertions and innuendo.

Keep showing your cowardice, Jon, so more people can see how bad it is what you truly represent.

By the way Mark...

I'm sure if you look hard enough on this site, you'll find someone willing to debate "Controlled Demolition", and whether or not Larry Silverstein is guilty of any crime with you. As I said, I have no desire.


The Time For Debate Is Over

Jon Gold: I don't trust you!

Jon Gold: I don't trust you! Show me the evidence!

Mark Roberts: Sure, I'll send it right over.

Jon Gold: Gah! You actually have evidence? Never mind. 

You still haven't answered the question, Jon. Why do you ask to see evidence, then refuse to look at it?

And once again: do you want to live in a world in which accusations suffice as evidence of a crime?

Will you speak out against Kevin Barrett's despicable behavior, or will you continue to support it? You have the power to take your "movement" in a positive direction by condemning the people who blatantly lie, who falsely accuse, and who promise violent death for people who ask that that behavior be corrected.

Will you be an upright man and do so? Or does Kevin Barrett's apocalyptic revenge fantasy turn you on?

Just asking questions and demanding answers, Jon.

Who are you again?

you just got owned Mark.

you just got owned Mark.

Show "No, Jon Gold did himself in. We own him and you." by Anonymous (not verified)

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Too funny.

You stink of fear.


The Time For Debate Is Over

Such a nervous laugh, Jon.

You should be nervous. You revealed yourself for all to see and now you are trying to run away from the truth.

In this one thread you demonstrated to everyone here what we have said for months: you cannot produce any evidence to back up your claims, Jon Gold.

Everyone here can see why you have always refused to answer our questions about 9/11.Everyone here can see why you refuse to provide any evidence.

You have shown yourself to be a coward and a fraud, Jon Gold.

Check two posts below...

Dipshit.

It does not work that way in the real world. YOU provide evidence for YOUR claims.

Quit your incessant evasions, little one.

I'm assuming that's you? I provided evidence, and you were no where to be found. Why is that?

Wow, and I even got 6 points for my posting of evidence.


The Time For Debate Is Over

Go ahead, try. Squirm, Jon, squirm

Jon, try to show what you quoted is evidence of anything that demonstrates that the US Government was complicit in the 9/11 attacks.

You know that you only made an assertion: That is a BLATANT cover-up, and one I would like uncovered.

You already know that assertions are not evidence.

Show "No." by Anonymous (not verified)

Ok...

Sibel Edmonds, an FBI "whistle-blower" the families fought for to be heard, testified before the 9/11 Commission for 3 hours, and received a footnote in the back of the 9/11 Report. This is a woman who has been quoted as saying:

"once this issue [9/11] gets to be...investigated, you will be seeing certain [American] people that we know from this country standing trial; and they will be prosecuted criminally"

She is now the "most gagged person in American History."

That is a BLATANT cover-up, and one I would like uncovered. One of MANY.

So why don't you, and your little friend Mark, go back to thinking of ways to disrupt the 9/11 Truth Movement's efforts.


The Time For Debate Is Over

You are doing a bang-up job yourself.

If anyone should be held up as an example of disrupting and discrediting any effort at the truth, it is Jon Gold himself.

Your example today in this thread clinched it, Jon.

Translation:

The evidence you provided is too damning. I'd better ignore it, and instead, insult you.


The Time For Debate Is Over

Asserttions are not evidence.

You are really squirming, Jon.

Just because you claim there is a cover up, you are still required to provide real evidence.

But we know you won\'t.

Angel is next

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ no hiding \\\\\\\\\\ Angel is next \\\\\\\\\\\ keep stroking \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ that coronary is laying in wait \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

Mark Roberts--member of

Mark Roberts--member of 911Blogger for 1day, and 22hours, as of the time of this post. I wonder--yes, I wonder- why the King of Debunkers would waste his time at our blog? I mean, I'm not a member of any debunker sites--no point, see. I have to work for a living and my time's too bleeding valuable.

So Mr. Roberts, what ARE you doing here? Found out you won't be able to post anonymously soon?

But it's all gravy--I'm sure I can work with this.

Be seeing you...

"Bugger this; I want a better world."

Show "I stated the reason for my" by Mark Roberts

well,

i for one dont support Barretts reaction. But, what is your point?
See, i don't ask you if you support Bushs actions, do i? After all, you defend him on the 911 issue - as we do defend Barrett- so you agree on everythin?
See.. its pointless.
Now, let me ask again, where is your debunking of "911 press for truth" ?
Please answer this question. I'd be interested to know if youre working on it...

I told one of your mates

I told one of your mates that you were now a member of 911blogger, but I don't think he believes me. Well, maybe he's not really a mate and he's a little star-struck.

As for your questions, assuming it is really you, I'll pass on the first two until I've got your angle. As for your last one, I have no reason to believe you should be executed, but I do have a reason to believe you should be arrested for stalking and harrasment.

Word to the wise, sunbeam: when someone walks away from you, clearly willing to let an argument go because it serves no purpose AND YOU CONTINUE TO FOLLOW THEM TRYING TO START A FIGHT, you, sir, are behaving like a cowardly, bullying bitch. That makes you a threat to public safety, and no, I don't have to be nice to people who use their size to intimidate people. See him in action at:

http://www.911blogger.com/node/4688

You are very lucky that wasn't me you were following around, prat. But then, it is easier to get away with bullying boys than girls these days, innit? Its supposed to be "okay, cause he a guy". Well, it's not okay and I'm not bloody well amused.

But thank you for this lovely opportunity to sort you out. Now shape up, sunshine. And HOPE you never meet me face to face--I'll just call the coppers and have you carted off in cuffs; I've done it. I do not bluff.

Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.

Show "Come down to Ground Zero, Colonel Sparks" by Mark Roberts

So you're saying you have no

So you're saying you have no problem with being a cowardly bullying bitch? At least refreshingly honest for a sociopath.

>>Come down to Ground Zero, Colonel Sparks<<

Don't be daft. You know from viewing my profile I'm no where near New York, so that's a safe challenge for you, innit? Or do you really believe I'm a 106 year old woman made of electricity who can zap herself there in a tic? Because of you do you really ought to behave.

And as for these odd quotes:

"And tell your lies"
"Then tell me that you're proud of what you're doing."
"When I ask you what you think of NIST's conclusions about the tower collapses, tell me you've never heard of NIST, although you know the "official version" is all wrong."

...let me be the first to say, Huh? What ARE you on about? I've never had any conversations like this with you--or anyone for that matter. At least not using THOSE words. Only thing I've told you is don't be a threat to public safety...OH! I get it! You've been posting as Anonymous! Good Lord--I bet you're 911debunker... and THAT means you've been a bad boy! You're a TROLL! LOL! AND I bet you're getting real tetchy we're about to give all your anonymous sock-puppets the heave to! Well, you brought it on yourself. As for this invitation:

"Come down to Ground Zero and lie to the public, Jenny."

..I'm going to have to decline. Not too inerested in lying to anyone, much less the public. Why you would want me to will, no doubt, remain a mystery.

Last point of order: looming over people and preventing them from walking away from you IS NOT free speech--it's stalking. Git.

Now BEHAVE.

You outed yourself already, Bubba Jenny.

You are one of the more confused imbeciles of the 9/11 Truth Kiddy Movement, bubba Jenny.

Pathetic for a man of your age

Really, trolling is for kids, Mark. Haven't you noticed we've moved on? This thread is cold--you're obsessed. Well, why else would you waste time with people you obviously don't like?

See, we have jobs, lives--WE don't waste hours of our time posting on sites we don't like. Wonder why you do?

Hold that thought--cause I'm pissing off.

Cheery bye.

PS: following someone after they have made it clear they just want to leave is STALKING and/or harrassment--depending on the details. STALKING is illegal. Learn to practice free speech without STALKING.

Good God! How old is this

Good God!

How old is this guy? He reminds me of the rubber sheets bully from 6th grade. I'd love to meet him at GZ, but he'd call the playground monitor as soon as I started kicking his ass.

If he isn't concripted to disrupt things here, he is so mired in an authoritarian world view that he is incapable of processing new information. John Dean wrote about these cretins in "Conservatives Without Conscience," which I highly recommend for understanding their box-o-hammers mindset.

Let's stop feeding this pathetic creature -- maybe he'll go drop turds in some other sandbox. Jenny, can you do your TROLL ALERT! message whenever you catch him posting? He offers nothing.

>Jenny, can you do your

>Jenny, can you do your TROLL ALERT! message whenever you catch him posting? He offers nothing.<

Your wish is my command!

But feel free to sound the alarm if you catch him first.

You should know part of his "challenge" might be a response to two challenges I've given trolls in the past--who are possibly his sock-puppets. Except in my case it was a response to "courage.com"; throwing foul shite around you'd never say face-to-face without provication.

So I guess he missed the message about unprovoked shite but thinks he's got a reason "take it outside" anyway. Go figure. It would match with that authoritarian world view thing, tho.

"Conservatives Without Conscience"; good book that--though he missed Condi in the line-up.

LEH, your paranoia is sadly

LEH, your paranoia is sadly typical of 9/11 deniers. Why are you people so afraid of a few facts? And LEH, I'm a liberal and have never voted for a Republican in my life. Paranoia is not conducive to getting things right.

And no, Jenny, I didn't know where you live. In my invitation to you I gave an example of the hideous ignorance that I actually confront at Ground Zero. Get it?

Where's this fear coming from, Jenny? Why the obsession with me?

TROLL ALERT! TROLL ALERT!

Have you helped a first responder lately?

Col. Sparks, what say a few of us leftcoasters fly out to NYC

and pay GZ a visit sometime this spring, maybe Mr. Roberts will even deign to show up and have a chat. I'm sure with enough warning we could even get Jon Gold to come up from Philly for the occasion. We should be able to work it in with some other 9/11 Truth meetings as well. I've been wanting to go there and meet the locals for some time, I also have a brother in NY I'd love to visit.

What do you think? I know I'll have my video camera with me.

LOL

I doubt he will show though, even on a Saturday, and I hear he rarely misses a Saturday at GZ.

BTW -I don't believe in the death penalty, but I'm certain that there will be a whole new wing built at Leavenworth for all the 9/11 traitors.

The truth shall set us free. (Well, those that aren't lying criminals, anyway)

Love is the only way forward.

I might be interested--need

I might be interested--need time to save up the cash ---super-heros don't get paid much! I'd want to liason with the local PD, amoung other things.

It's a good idea--let's give it a think over the winter, eh mates?

Oh, and don't tell him when--he's down there every Saturday, let him get surprised like he surprises other people!

On a simular note, I've thought it might be good to get in contact with other members of 911Blogger where ever we live. Give the site a bit of grounding in the real world.

Just a thought.

Col. Sparks, I'm sure we here at NorCal9/11Truth Alliance

can find some money to help with the airfare.

Are you going to AZ for the conference, by chance?

Yes, we need to kick alot of things around during the next month or so and then move into high gear, we've got them running now, it's time to close this out and move on.

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

Be well.

No, not going to AZ. Email

No, not going to AZ. Email me if you like--I've updated my contact info and have an account just for public contact--good or bad.

No, Mark, this isn't an invite--unless you want your emails posted here.

Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.

LeftWright, I'll gladly meet

LeftWright, I'll gladly meet with you or anyone else who comes to New York to discuss the events of 9/11. My email is nyctours@gmail.com.

And you heard wrong. I do not go to Ground Zero on most Saturdays.

>And you heard wrong. I do

>And you heard wrong. I do not go to Ground Zero on most Saturdays.<

Don't take his word on this, mates--he just wants to have warning to prepare. Anyone in NYC who could do some recon?

Your fear is almost

Your fear is almost palpable, Jenny. I feel bad for you.

*YAWN*

*YAWN*

Good to know that you will be glad to meet us and discuss the

facts and science regarding the events of 9/11/01.

I will ask that you bring a valid government id (NY state drivers license will do) with you to properly identify yourself. I will have my California state drivers license with me to reciprocate this courtesy.

Mr. Roberts, I understand from your post over at another site (rinf) that you have recently received death threats from people you identify as being members of the UK Truth movement. I'm very sorry to hear this. Can you either elaborate on or substantiate this claim so that we in the US Truth movement can ferret these people out should they appear on our shores? Thank you for your assistance in this matter.

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

And have him add

And have him add documentation where he's contacted the proper authorities, prefereably with a contact number of the officer on the case in the police bureau or relevant office so we can liase with law enforcement.

Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.

so Mark Roberts asks: "Do

so Mark Roberts asks: "Do you agree with him that I should be executed?"

gee, I wonder what Mark Roberts is doing here? dont fall for this traitorous douchebags ploy, its obvious(at least to me) why he is here.

You are really scared, Chris

That is what the Truth does when 9/11 Deniers like you are confronted with it.

Things that speak volumes...

You will need realplayer...

Here is the press conference given by Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, chair and vice-chair of the 9/11 Commission, on 9/11/2006 at the National Press Club.

Here is the press conference given by Kyle Hence, Paul Thompson, Donna Marsh O'Connor, Cristina Kminek, and Michelle Little at the very same National Press Club, on the very same date.

Do you notice a difference in the amount of press, and individuals attending the first instead of the latter? Why is that? Is that acceptable to you? Did you even know the latter took place? What would you do if you were aware of the latter?


The Time For Debate Is Over

Another pyschic response

With Jon Gold\'s inability to provide evidence of anything, he has to resort to psychic readings to try to figure out what is going on.

Such is the nature of loony 9/11 Truth Kiddies.

Merry Christmas

I hope everyone has a happy and a healthy.


The Time For Debate Is Over

Awwwwwww... thanks

Awwwwwww... thanks Jonny!!!---and a great Yuletide season to you too!!!

Why Condemning Israel is so important: Petras

Why Condemning Israel and the Zionist Lobby is so Important
James Petras
December 22, 2006
“It’s no great secret why the Jewish agencies continue to trumpet support for the discredited policies of this failed administration. They see defense of Israel as their number-one goal, trumping all other items on the agenda. That single-mindedness binds them ever closer to a White House that has made combating Islamic terrorism its signature campaign. The campaign’s effects on the world have been catastrophic. But that is no concern of the Jewish agencies.” December 8, 2006 statement by JJ Goldberg, editor of Forward (the leading Jewish weekly in the United States)

Introduction:
Many Jewish writers, including those who are somewhat critical of Israel, have raised pointed questions about our critique of the Zionist power configuration (ZPC) in the United States and what they wrongly claim are our singular harsh critique of the state of Israel. Some of these accusers claim to see signs of ‘latent anti-Semitism’, others, of a more ‘leftist’ coloration, deny the influential role of the ZPC arguing that US foreign policy is a product of ‘geo-politics or the interests of big oil. With the recent publication of several widely circulated texts, highly critical of the power of the Zionist ‘lobby’, several liberal pro-Israel publicists generously conceded that it is a topic that should be debated (and not automatically stigmatized and dismissed) and perhaps be ‘taken into account.’
ZPC Deniers: Phony Arguments for Fake Claims
The main claims of ZPC deniers take several tacks: Some claim that the ZPC is just ‘another lobby’ like the Chamber of Commerce, the Sierra Club or the Society for the Protection of Goldfish. Others claim that by focusing mainly on Israel and by inference the ‘Lobby’, the critics of Zionism ignore the equally violent abuses of rulers, regimes and states elsewhere. This ‘exclusive focus’ on Israel, the deniers of ZPC argue, reveals a latent or overt anti-Semitism. They propose that human rights advocates condemn all human rights abusers everywhere (at the same time and with the same emphasis?). Others still argue that Israel is a democracy – at least outside of the Occupied Territories (OT) – and therefore is not as condemnable as other human rights violators and should be ‘credited’ for its civic virtues along with its human rights failings. Finally others still claim that, because of the Holocaust and ‘History-of-Two-Thousand-Years-of-Persecution’, criticism of Jewish-funded and led pro-Israel lobbies should be handled with great prudence, making it clear that one criticizes only specific abuses, investigates all charges – especially those from Arab/Palestinian/United Nations/European/Human Rights sources -- and recognizes that Israeli public opinion, the press and even the Courts or sectors of them may also be critical of regime policies.
These objections to treating the Israeli-Palestinian-Arab conflict and the activities of Zionist Lobbies as central to peace and war serve to dilute, dissipate and deflate criticism and organized political activity directed at the ZPC and its directors in Israel.
The response of the critics of Israel and the ZPC to these attacks has been weak at best and cowardly at worst. Some critics have responded that their criticism is only directed toward a specific policy or leader, or to Israeli policies in the OT and that they recognize Israel is a democracy, that it requires secure borders, and that it is in the interests of the Israeli ‘people’ to lower their security barriers. Others argue that their criticism is directed at securing Israeli interests, influencing the Zionist Lobby or to opening a debate. They claim that the views of ‘most’ Jews’ in the US are not represented by the 52 organizations that make up the Presidents of the Major Jewish Organizations of America, or the thousands of PACs, local federations, professional associations and weekly publications which speak with one voice as unconditional supporters of every twist and turn in the policy of the Zionist State.
There are numerous similar lines of criticism, which basically avoid the fundamental issues raised by the Israeli state and the ZPC, and which we are obliged to address. The reason that criticism and action directed against Israel and the ZPC is of central importance today in any discussion of US foreign policy, especially (but not exclusively) of Middle East policy and US domestic policymaking is that they play a decisive role and have a world-historic impact on the present and future of world peace and social justice. We turn now to examine the ‘big questions’ facing Americans as a result of the power of Israel in the United States.
The Big Questions Raised by the ZPC and Israeli Power in the USA:
War or Peace:
Critical study of the lead up to the US invasion of Iraq, US involvement in providing arms to Israel (cluster bombs, two-ton bunker buster bombs and satellite surveillance intelligence) prior to, during and after Israel’s abortive invasion of Lebanon, Washington’s backing of the starvation blockade of the Palestinian people and the White House and Congress’ demands for sanctions and war against Iran are directly linked to Israeli state policy and its Zionist policy-makers in the Executive branch and US Congress. One needs to look no further than the documents, testimony and reports of AIPAC and the Presidents of the Major American Jewish Organizations to observe their claims of success in authoring legislation, providing (falsified) intelligence, engaging in espionage (AIPAC) and turning documents over to Israeli intelligence (now dubbed ‘free speech’ by liberal Zionists).
If, as the overwhelming evidence indicates, the ZPC played a major role in the major wars of our time, wars capable of igniting new armed conflicts, then it ill behooves us to dilute the role of the Zionist/Jewish Lobby in promoting future US wars. Given Israel’s militarist-theocratic approach to territorial aggrandizement and its announced plans for future wars with Iran and Syria, and given the fact that the ZPC acts as an unquestioning and highly disciplined transmission belt for the Israeli state, then US citizens opposed to present and future US engagement in Middle East wars must confront the ZPC and its Israeli mentors. Moreover, given the extended links among the Islamic nations, the Israel/ZPC proposed ‘new wars’ with Iran will result in Global wars. Hence what is at stake in confronting the ZPC are questions which go beyond the Israeli-Palestine peace process, or even regional Middle East conflicts: it involves the big question of World Peace or War.
Democracy or Authoritarianism
Without the bluster and public hearings of former Senator Joseph McCarthy, the Jewish Lobby has systematically undermined the principal pillars of our fragile democracy. While the US Congress, media, academics, retired military and public figures are free to criticize the President, any criticism of Israel, much less the Jewish Lobby, is met with vicious attacks in all the op-ed pages of major newspapers by an army of pro-Israeli ‘expert’ propagandists, demands for firings, purges and expulsions of the critics from their positions or denial of promotions or new appointments. In the face of any prominent critic calling into question the Lobby’s role in shaping US policy to suit Israel’s interests, the entire apparatus (from local Jewish federations, AIPAC, the Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations etc) go into action – smearing, insulting and stigmatizing the critics as ‘anti-Semites’. By denying free speech and public debate through campaigns of calumny and real and threatened repercussions the Jewish Lobby has denied Americans one of their more basic freedoms and constitutional rights.
The massive, sustained and well-financed hate campaigns directed at any congressional candidate critical of Israel effectively eliminates free speech among the political elite. The overwhelming influence of wealthy Jewish contributors to both parties – but especially the Democrats – results in the effective screening out of any candidate who might question any part of the Lobby’s Israel agenda. The takeover of Democratic campaign finance by two ultra-Zionist zealots, Senator Charles Schumer and Israeli-American Congressman Rahm Emanuel ensured that every candidate was totally subordinated to the Lobby’s unconditional support of Israel. The result is that there is no Congressional debate, let alone investigation, over the key role of prominent Zionists in the Pentagon involved in fabricating reports on Iraq’s ‘weapons of mass destruction’, and in designing and executing the war and the disastrous occupation policy. The Lobby’s ideologues posing as Middle East ‘experts’ dominate the op-ed and editorial pages of all the major newspapers (Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Washington Post). In their pose as Middle East experts, they propagandize the Israeli line on the major television networks (CBS, NBC,ABC, Fox, and CNN) and their radio affiliates. The Lobby has played a prominent role in supporting and implementing highly repressive legislation like the Patriot Act and the Military Commission Act as well as modifying anti-corruption legislation to allow the Lobby to finance congressional ‘educational’ junkets to Israel. The head of Homeland Security with its over 150,000 functionaries and multi-billion dollar budget is none other than Zionist fanatic Michael Chertoff, head persecutor of Islamic charity organizations, Palestinian relief organizations and other ethnic Middle Eastern or Moslem constituencies in the US, which potentially might challenge the Lobby’s pro-Israel agenda.
The biggest threat to democracy in its fullest sense of the word – the right to debate, to elect, to legislate free of coercion – is found in the organized efforts of the Zionist lobby, to repress public debate, control candidate selection and campaigning, direct repressive legislation and security agencies against electoral constituencies opposing the Lobby’s agenda for Israel. No other lobby or political action group has as much sustained and direct influence over the political process – including the media, congressional debate and voting, candidate selection and financing of congressional allocation of foreign aid and Middle East agendas as the organized Zionist Power Configuration (ZPC) and its indirect spokespeople heading key Congressional positions. A first step toward reversing the erosion of our democratic freedoms is recognizing and publicly exposing the ZPC’s nefarious organizational and financial activities and moving forward toward neutralizing their efforts.
Their Foreign Policy or Ours?
Intimately and directly related to the loss of democratic freedoms and a direct consequence of the Jewish lobby’s influence over the political process is the making of US Middle East policy and who benefits from it. The entire political effort of the Lobby (its spending, ethnic baiting, censorship and travel junkets) is directed toward controlling US foreign policy and, through US power, to influence the policy of US allies, clients and adversaries in Europe, Asia and the Middle East. The Lobby’s systematic curtailment of our democratic freedoms is intimately related to our own inability to influence our nation’s foreign policy. Our majoritarian position against the Iraq War, the repudiation of the main executioner of the War (the White House) and our horror in the face of the Israeli invasion of Lebanon and destruction of Gaza are totally neutralized by Zionist influence over Congressional and White House policymakers. The recently victorious Congressional Democrats repudiate their electorate and follow the advice and dictates of the pro-Zionist leadership (Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Rahm Emmanuel, Stephan Israel and others) by backing an escalation of troops and an increase in military spending for the war in Iraq. Bush follows the war policy against Iran proposed by the zealous Zionist fanatics in the American Enterprise Institute, repudiating the diplomatic proposals of the bi-partisan Baker Commission. Congress quadruples US arms stored in Israel (supposedly for dual use) in the aftermath of Israel’s bombing of Southern Lebanon with one million anti-personnel bomblets from cluster bombs in direct defiance of US electoral opinion. While hundreds of millions of undernourished women and children suffer and die in Africa, Latin America and Asia, the Lobby ensures that over half of US foreign aid goes to Israeli Jews with per capita incomes of over $22,000 USD.
No other organized political action group or public relations firm acting on behalf of the Cuban and Venezuelan exiles or Arab, African, Chinese or European Union states comes remotely near the influence of the Zionist lobby in shaping US policy to serve the interest of Israel.
While the Lobby speaks for less than 2% of the US electorate, its influence on foreign policy far exceeds the great majority who have neither comparable organizational nor financial muscle to impose their views.
Never in the history of the US republic or empire has a powerful but tiny minority been able to wield so much influence in using out nation’s military and economic power and diplomatic arm-twisting in the service of a foreign government. Neither the Francophiles during the American Revolution, the Anglophiles in the Civil War and the German Bund in the run-up to World War Two, nor the (anti-China) Nationalist Taiwan Lobby possessed the organizational power and sustained political influence that the ZPC has on US foreign and domestic policy at the service of the State of Israel.
Confronting the Lobby Matters
The question of the power of the Lobby over US policies of war or peace, authoritarianism or democracy and over who defines the interests served by US foreign policy obviously go far beyond the politics of the Middle East, the Israeli-colonial land grabs in Palestine and even the savage occupation of Iraq. The playing out of Zionist influence over the greatest military power in the world, with the most far-reaching set of client states, military bases, deadly weapons and decisive voice in international bodies (IMF/World Bank/United Nations Security Council) means that the Lobby has a means to leverage its reach in most regions of the world. This leverage power extends over a range of issues, from defending the fortunes of murderous Russian-Jewish gangster oligarchs, to bludgeoning European allies of the US to complicity with Israel’s ethnic cleansing of Palestine.
The ZPC represents a basic threat to our existence as a sovereign state and our ability to influence whom we elect and what agendas and interests our representatives will pursue. Even worse, by serving Israeli interests, we are becoming complicit with a State whose Supreme Court legalizes political assassinations across national boundaries, torture, systematic violations of international law and a regime which repudiates United Nations resolutions and unilaterally invades and bombs its neighbors and practices military colonist expansionism. In a word Israel resonates and feeds into the most retrograde tendencies and brutal practices of contemporary American politics. In this sense the Lobby through its media, Congressional influence and think tanks is creating an Israeli look-alike. Like Israel, the US has established its own Pentagon assassination teams; like Israel, it invades and colonizes Iraq; like Israel, it violates and rejects any constitutional or international legal restraints and systematically tortures accused but untried prisoners.
Because of these fundamental considerations, we cannot oblige our Jewish ‘progressive’ colleagues and compatriots and refrain from confronting the Zionist Lobby with force and urgency. Too many of our freedoms are at stake; too little time is left before they succeed in securing a greater military escalation; too little of our sovereignty remains in the face of the concerted effort by the Lobby and its Middle Eastern ‘expert-ideologues’ to push and shove us into a new and more devastating war with Iran at the behest of Israel’s pursuit of Middle East dominance.
No other country, abuser or not, of human rights, with or without electoral systems, has the influence over our domestic and foreign policy as does the state of Israel. No other Lobby has the kind of financial power and organizational reach as the Jewish Lobby in eroding our domestic political freedoms or our war-making powers. For those reasons alone, it stands to reason, that we American have a necessity to put our fight against Israel and its Lobby at the very top of our political agenda. It is not because Israel has the worst human rights agenda in the world – other states have even worst democratic credentials – but because of its role in promoting its US supporters to degrade our democratic principles, robbing us of our freedom to debate and our sovereignty to decide our own interests. The Lobby puts the military and budgetary resources of the Empire at the service of Greater Israel – and that results in the worst human rights in the world.
Democratic, just and peaceful responses to the Big Questions that face Americans, Europeans, Muslims, Jews and other peoples of the world passes through the defeat and dismantlement of the Israeli-directed Zionist Power Configuration in America. Nothing less will allow us to engage in an open debate on the alternatives to repression at home and imperialism abroad.

PAGE

PAGE 1

The Israeli Prime Minister's Connection to 911

Ehud Olmert, the current Israeli prime minister, seems to be more popular and influential with European and American politicians than he is among his own constituents.
After the disastrous and illegal invasion of Lebanon, which he foolishly provoked and prosecuted, an Israeli poll found that 63 per cent of Israelis wanted Olmert to resign.

http://www.iamthewitness.com/Bollyn-Olmert-22Dec2006.html

You're welcome...

Cheers.

Cheers.

Zelikow = FILTH

Thank you, Mr. Gold, for being a true American patriot.

You mentioned The Gypsy speaking up to Zelikow. Anyway, I believe it was you who told me about this.

Well, here is the link to the google video of The Gypsy and others speaking up to Zelikow. I believe Zelikow was supposed to have a really pale and frightened look on his face when confronted. I personally did not see that.

Everyone involved in the 9-11 truth movement should watch this 8-minute video, which is a patching together of different events where Zelikow was speaking and The Gypsy and others stood up and spoke out like the best kind of human beings on this planet would do.

I do not know how to properly insert hyperlinks when on 911blogger, though I do know how in MS Word. Anyway, here's the link....

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8888742751442686831&q=the+gypsy...

I was unable to watch the last couple of minutes of this short video because Zelikow is such FILTH. He is lying unAmerican traitor FILTH. He ought to be in prison for life at the very least, and if justice were truly served, he would be charged with mass murder and treason and given the death sentence. If you look into the face of this evil man, you will not see the visage of a human being with a conscience. You will see the face of evil.

Those "escorts" at these meeting who took The Gyspy and the others by the arm and escorted them out are also good examples of disgusting unAmerican traitors.

The Gypsy and others who stood up and spoke up are probably the greatest Americans and the greatest human beings many of us will ever have a chance to see in our lifetimes.

It is not my practice to refer to any human being as FILTH, however, I am not at all sure that Zelikow belongs to the human race.

Blessings from Dachsie in Austin.