The ABC News message board is currently censoring any new posts made in support of the 9/11 Truth Movement

There can be no doubt about it: The ABC News message board is currently censoring any new posts made in support of the 9/11 Truth Movement.

Yesterday, I signed up with the message board under my standard username, Mekt_Ranzz, and created the forum “Why did the BBC report the collapse of WTC7 23 minutes early?” to discuss the recently revealed BBC reporting blunder of the WTC7 collapse:

"I would like to know why ABC News has not covered the recent story where on 9/11 the BBC reported several times on a live feed that WTC7 in New York had collapsed -- 23 minutes before it actually did!

Here is the link detailing this fascinating story so far:"

For awhile, I was actually getting a quite a few responses from other board members who ranged from being outright debunkers to friends of 9/11 Truth.

However, this was not to last.

Despite the fact that most of the relevant discussion was civil and constructive and that all statements and claims, at least on my part, were backed by Internet links to facts and credible sources, my thread was deleted.

So I checked the “House Rules” to determine if I had inadvertently violated them. Here they are for all to see:

Specific House Rules:

• We live by words online, so we don’t allow obscene, racist or sexually explicit language. Personal attacks are not permitted. We reserve the right to remove posts that are abusive, hateful, or defame or insult anyone. We also reserve the right to remove posts that are off-topic or not in English.

• It is illegal to harass or threaten anyone. We take threats, harassment and stalking very seriously. Posts that might be construed as such may be deleted and made available to the proper law enforcement officials.

• No solicitations or advertisements are allowed. This includes advertisements for your business, your own online endeavors or the latest get-rich-quick scheme.

• You may link to other informational Web sites when relevant to the discussion, but links to commercial sites are generally not allowed. We may make exceptions when the sites in question are pertinent to ABC’s coverage of the news.

• You may not suggest or encourage illegal activity. will assist law enforcement officials in any investigation of such activities.

• Choose a username carefully. You may not use names that are offensive, that suggest illegal activities or that are meant to imitate other users. Any such names will be blocked from posting on our message boards.

• You must have copyright ownership of all material that you post on our message boards. No articles, recipes, song lyrics, art or graphics may be posted without the express written consent of the copyright holder. If you’d like to refer to a news article from another site, please post no more than a few lines summarizing the article and include a link to it.

• You must respect the privacy of individuals. This means no posting of phone numbers, addresses, social security numbers or any other private information. We discourage users from posting such information even about themselves, as we cannot control how that information may be used beyond our message boards.

• Good manners online means that you don’t post the same note more than once. The online word for posting many times on one topic is “spamming.” We don’t allow it.

• You participate at your own risk on the bulletin boards, in chat rooms and in e-mail. You take responsibility for postings under your username and use the information provided here at your own risk. takes no responsibility for the content or opinions posted here.

After perusing much of the ABC News message board, I can tell you that such rules are broken regularly – in some cases, ridiculously so. That being said, I’m certain that nothing I wrote in my thread could possibly have constituted grounds for deletion. However, in the spirit of being fair and holding no grudges, I set up a new thread with the same title, the only difference being that I included the words “Again” and a disclaimer expressing a wish to avoid violating any of the house rules in the future:

"I don't know why my last thread was deleted. I read over your house rules and I didn't see a single one which I, or any of the other participants in my thread, violated . . ."

And guess what? After just one post by a debunker suggesting that I should get out my “tin foil hat” and during my attempt to respond to his insult, AGAIN my entire thread was deleted:

"Re: Again: Why did the BBC report the collapse of WTC7 23 minutes early?

I would appreciate soon REAL answers for a change! Is that the method people use here to censor a question? You call the person asking it "a tin-foil hat wearer" so that the moderators of ABC News can say "Oh, he’s throwing insults -- let's delete his thread!

By way of your insults you overlook the very serious fact that the BBC -- the UK media giant -- is not willing to acknowledge this issue head on with a sensible explanation as to how, for example, their tapes of 9/11 could have disappeared.

For clarity, nobody is saying the BBC is part of a conspiracy. But I and many others want to know where the BBC, and CNN for that matter, got that early report that WTC7 was going to collapse.

Answer my very important question someone. And please, READ THE ARTICLE AND SEE THE FOOTAGE FIRST BEFORE YOU DO."

Well, no one even got a chance to do that. I was furious!

Keep in mind that I had taken extra pains to be careful; as my experience will show, one can’t be careful enough.

Feeling the mantle of censorship envelop me, I devised a plan. I would post under other members’ threads to at least get my message out that the BBC has some explaining to do. I decided I would not use any links and I would only post names of people in the established media and in the public spot light (as opposed to my own which I did as a signature in my first thread). And I would continue to be professional, factual, polite, persuasive, and stay on topic.

With my resolve in hand, I first posted in a thread called “Are there conspiracies?” by JavaTheHut2.

Unfortunately, in this thread, and to my utter annoyance, most members were pointing out the “nuttiness” of the 9/11, JFK, and UFO conspiracies. Nevertheless, I focused on what I thought were the most relevant of 9/11 conspiracy posts and competently broke down my argument to that of WTC7’s mysterious collapse. But I was met with a considerable amount of skepticism mostly coming in the form of verbal cracks and sly remarks that were unsupported by any facts whatsoever. So to the direct question “Are there conspiracies?” I responded with the following statement:

"Yes, there is a conspiracy here to censor my inquiry into the BBC's and CNN's early reporting of the collapse of WTC7. I have said nothing that isn't true and yet BOTH my threads have been deleted for as yet unstated reasons. I have meticulously adhered to the "House Rules" and have not made any slanderous or racist remarks -- unlike many of the members here at this message board regularly do. And I can present facts to back up my statements. The truth is that those censoring me and my questions about BBC's erroneous 9/11 reporting are terrified of what may in fact be the truth and in response to this they spout pointless accusations about tin-foil hats and other such ridiculous nonsense in order to desperately maintain the position of that oh-so-needed pacifier strategically positioned in their mouths."

Needless to say, within about an hour, the entire thread along with my posts was deleted.

Not long after, I noticed that there was yet another thread (apparently one that got away) related to the premature BBC report of theWTC7 collapse:

“BBC strangest of explanations for WTC7”

At the time I posted in it, there were several voices arguing for each side of the debate, albeit to different degrees. I contributed my view which thankfully exactly mirrored at least a few of those providing their input. I noticed within about an hour so that the size of the thread had grown exponentially, at one point having 48 posts to its name. But within about ten minutes of this observation, there were a number of sudden deletions. Now the thread has only 36 posts. Guess which ones got the axe?

Bottom line, the ABC News message board is practicing censorship, plain and simple. And strangely enough, seemingly not at all of the extreme left or extreme right as there are plenty of posts from either end covering a wide range of hot button topics.

In summary, as far as I can tell, the ABC News message board house rules are only being applied to only one group and all its members: The 9/11 Truth Movement.

When I really think about it, this does not at all surprise me. Does it surprise you?





Getting on ABC's message boards.

Great effort getting on ABC's message boards Mekt. That is what we have to do. Repeatedly try to find new avenues of getting this information out and about and discussed in public. I keep trying to get on but they are very good at censorship as well. I have snuck some information in there though. Also. I don't think I've ever been censored on the blog at I was surprised and excited by this. I often get a lot of resistance to my posts but I never remember being censored there. There are also some friendlies there as well. Other than that we need to keep trying to find new blogs and message boards to infiltrate. I've tried Bill Maher's and Stephen Colbert's.

Its funny how the so-called leaders in our society are actually just followers and once the critical mass is reached they will all follow suit and pretend again to be leaders. It's sickening. I wish we had some more risk-takers in the media and entertainment industry. Oh well. I'm sure they'll all follow suit when it is the "popular" thing to do. We'll see. Peace bro and good effort.