Pictures From 9/11 Actions Today NYC

These were from "The Big Lie Hole" (which is what I call it in order to claim it. "Ground Zero" must be what the perpetrators named it, so I don't like to use that term, and if I do use it I will sound too much like I'm talking about a place that was nuked.)

Port Authority Destroyed the Subway Awning at the edge of the Big Lie Hole, for benefit of Private Parties. Named changed from "Freedom Tower" to "World Trade One." (Guess they decided to try for the less blatant lie, now that 5+ years have past?) Area for Memorial shrunken.

Click on pics to see larger versions, please.

This guy is saying, "H'uh?"

Lots of people crowded to see the large informational posters. Now that the pictures of some of the evidence were removed from the chain link fences which surrounded the hole, tourists have nothing else to look at but our information.

The sun was glaring hot, especially now with the awning gone, and not everyone had caps for protection.

Activist spread the word with a lot of conviction.

More crowded around the info posters than I can ever remember. And some were skilled at holding the public's attention with their speech.

They've torn down the Awning for the Subway Station.

Here are from Union Square NYC, same day:

Click on Pics to get Larger Versions , Please.

Mark Roberts - the hit-man against 9/11 Truth, who carries thick notebooks with stategies to help him marginalize the arguments which displease the government and intelligence services, was there in a baseball cap and a green plaid shirt. Maybe you can see Les Jamison making sure he captures him on film. Roberts also starts arguments with the truth activists.

Paul is trying to ward him off with the flag.

Theodore is wonder-struck.

Les plays James Bond.

Please click on links for larger version , if your computer can handle it. Thank you.

This the "no planes hit the

This the "no planes hit the Twin Towers" disinfo artist Peggy Carter, correct?

Great photos, but anything produced by this individual has been rendered completely worthless by the fact that she pushes credibility damaging absurdities. "The Big Lie Hole" (aside from sounding frankly disgusting and disrespectful as this is a place where people died) to this individual was a result of "Mini Nukes" and "Space Beams" after "no planes" hit the Towers – clear and blatant disinformation.

Hey "this individual"!

1. You are the one who is attacking.

2. Read more carefully please. I stated I did not like "Ground Zero" as a term since it made it sound as though the place was Nuked. How does that match with your claim I "promote" "mini-nukes?"

3. How would you know what my opinions are? Everyone who promotes research that doesn't agree with you has been driven off this site from beng voted down. I post here only things I think will be valuable. But you're not happy with that? You've got to drive me off too? Is that why you claim I am the one who is divisive?

Reality is that which when you stop believing in it, it doesn't go away." - "Horselover Fat" Phillip K. Dick
Sheweth Picts
Conspicuous Plot

Do you not push "no planes

Do you not push "no planes hit the Twin Towers" disinformation? If so then yes, you have no place associating yourself with the genuine 9/11 Truth Movement and by extension this website.

Show "If you say, "No," People want to look." by Peggy Carter

"research" or fantasy fiction?

If you persist in pushing a thoroughly discredited theory on us, we are going to continue discrediting you. Your "TV Fakery" angle is as fake as what they purport to expose. You are either delusional, and misled by puppeteers, or you are one of the puppeteers. Either way, your moronic fantasies have no basis in reality, and no bearing on the "truth" of September 11th. You and Ningen are without a shred of credibility on this site.

If I were you, I'd either go away, change my screenname and never speak of "TV Fakery" again, or get an education and APOLOGIZE TO EVERYONE for foisting this nonsense on us.

70 Disturbing Facts About 9/11

John Doraemi publishes Crimes of the State Blog

johndoraemi --at--

Show "thoroughly discredited where?" by ProspectorSam

Journal of 911 Studies

A Critical Review of WTC 'No Plane' Theories
Eric Salter

And, most everywhere these idiots bring it up. The theory is a non-starter, completely implausible on its face. It's as if New York wasn't populated by eyewitnesses.

70 Disturbing Facts About 9/11

John Doraemi publishes Crimes of the State Blog

johndoraemi --at--

"being on the far side, I didn't see the plane "

You are a fucking imbecile, Agent N.

And I mean that with all due respect.

70 Disturbing Facts About 9/11

John Doraemi publishes Crimes of the State Blog

johndoraemi --at--

You're no imbecile, "johndoraemi"

I don't know what you are, since you hide behind your blog.

I can read what David Thom said. I can also see the picture he took:

Are you seriously arguing that he was not in a position to see and hear a plane coming in?

Yes, I'm aware that he says that he was not in position to see the plane, and that he says that people behind him had a wider view and said they saw a rescue plane. His perspective was plenty wide and people behind him would be on the same side of the building as him.

His words and pictures speak for themselves, and suggest that he was watching the whole time and only saw an explosion.

People should read for themselves rather than rely on your dishonest reading.

I see I made a mistake earlier and posted one blog twice, so I will add the one I meant:

Question, John

Do you know about this technology and warfare technique?

Told to author by Pentagon officer in 1997:

With the Pentagon's fleet of EC-130 "Commando Solo" aircraft--capable of inserting radio and television programming into national broadcast systems--the implications of such electronic wizardry were obvious. First, journalists monitoring media in a war zone would need to question constantly whether what they were receiving was U.S. military disinformation. Assuming they asked, would the military take the journalists into confidence to spare them from spreading disinformation? The officers at the retreat indicated that they would not.

Steven Jones discusses "mini-nukes" and para-magnetic effects

Hey Dem Bruce lee you have a "funny" slur name for Steven Jones now? Are you gonna stop calling me and Judy Wood and James Fetzer and Rosalee Grable and Nico Haupt "mini-nukes" now?

Better update your slur list?

I'm gonna let your insults stand and not ask for a retraction. hahhahhahhahhahhhahhhaa.

Steven Jones discusses "mini-nukes" and "para-magnetic effects" and neutron activiation with Bill Deagle:

Bill Deagle: "I was a doctor taking care of people working with people for 6 years working with directed energy weapons for US Star Wars. [6]
[]so I know about Tom Bearden's type of coherence interference weapons systems and scalar weaponry and plasma cannons at Lockheed Martin and skunk Works and Lucent[8] Technologies and the company I was working [at] was General Dynamics."

Reality is that which when you stop believing in it, it doesn't go away." - "Horselover Fat" Phillip K. Dick
Parking Lot

Great reference to the X-Files there "Peggy"!

Just the kind of kooky "conspiracy theory" stereotype that we're not trying to smash in relation to 9/11 Truth. What else to do push, hmm "No planes" "Space Beams" "Mini Nukes"... hmm, you support enemies of the genuine 9/11 Truth Movement like Morgan Reynolds, Judy Wood, Nico Haupt, Fetzer and Siegel... hmm, I think you’re a disinfo artist.

Oh and that "X-Files green"

Oh and that "X-Files green" chalk too, put some thought into that one huh "Peggy"!

Show "What have you done lately?" by Peggy Carter

So boooooring! Yesterdays hero's, more ego than substance!

Thank god you guys are only good for a laugh now days.

WE GOT TO TAKE THE POWER BACK!... rage against the machine!!

Show "Never Watch TV" by Peggy Carter


Yeah right, that's just unbelievable..."we didn't know it was a TV slogan".

How about the slogan listed on today's front page Peggy? "9/11 Truth Ends War!"

"Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective — a New World Order — can emerge..." - George H.W. Bush, 9/11/91

Back on topic

Hey, so what is up with them tearing down the awning???? What is that all about do you think???

Thanks Peggy for the post. I

Thanks Peggy for the post. I also believe that you need to seriously either help us by not publishing "no plane" nonsense or otherwise I agree that you should be banned from this site and others, because people who publish this paranoid nonsense bring the entire movement down more than popular mechanics does. Whenever someone new starts reading these "no plane" arguments they immediately associate those beliefs with the entire 9/11 truth community. I have looked at the videos on your sites, they are lacking in substance. You need to be able to distinguish between real undeniable evidence, and these distortions of reality. In short, please realize that you are bringing the movement down.

Show "The only person that should be banned . . ." by Ningen

these guys are still goin'?

"No planes" is strictly for suckers and dupes and (cough) agents.

Imbecility ain't just for kids now!

A hologram hit the WTC - you don't say!

Grow up.

The Eleventh Day of Every Month

Show "Nothing said about "holograms"" by Ningen

Rating system working fine.

I'm a little puzzled that everyone took this opportunity to question Peggy Carter's stand on 'no-planes'. I understand the frustration, but in this case, why waste the energy? Maybe everyone just need to vent? All she did was post some pictures of street action that she participated in. You might not appreciate her past contribution to the movement, but this is just news.

We shouldn't have to talk about banning people, when the ratings system, and our responses seem to be quite adequate in sidelining distraction and wild speculation. And whatever you think of her philosophy or strategy, Carter is an active member of the local NYC 9/11 truth community.

In other words, its better sometimes not to shoot the messenger and stick to responding to the message. If Carter says or does something you disagree with, counter it. But don't have a knee jerk reaction every time you hear her name.

I enjoyed having the opportunity to look at these pictures. Although, 911blogger is not a photo archive.

International Truth Movement

9/11 Blogger is an everything 9/11 archive.

Including photos, news, videos, etc. It is my belief that no-planers/tv fakery supporters are disinfo agents. I wrote an extensive article on the subject at Pilots for 9/11 Truth forums and in the almost 3 weeks it's been posted, nobody has tried to touch it. The link to the article is here:

Back on topic, the pics are great and i can't STAND to even look at Mark Roberts.

Show "It would help if I didn't have to register to read it" by Ningen

My bad

I hadn't completed registration. Sorry.

I was being overly brief

To be more clear, there are photo archives like Flickr or Photobucket, where you can store and present your photos. This makes it easy to refer to a large set of photos rather than posting them all. Just a suggestion, really.

And I had not heard that RT had been banned. Despite my best intentions I have been banned from forums in the past simply for getting a bit too snarky. I'll miss his posts, whatever were his ultimate intentions. It not like he was going to lead me astray. But I also trust that the moderators had some significant justification for banning him. If we do not know the exact circumstances we shouldn't prejudge their decision.

International Truth Movement

Show "Boo!" by Mark Roberts

So I'm downrated for asking for a working link?

Rob with Pilots for 9/11 Truth gave me a link to another of the same forum's posts, which also did not work even though I registered. I would like to read both those posts.

I have registered and logged in, and am able to read some of your posts, but not 7308.

Please make your work available. Thank you.

then why was Real Truther banned?

"We shouldn't have to talk about banning people, when the ratings system, and our responses seem to be quite adequate in sidelining distraction and wild speculation."

his ratings consistently exceeded 10 points. he is sorely missed and 911blogger will never be promoted by me again.

They ban people?

Why was RT banned?

This shouldn't be allowed. He actually was pretty knowledgeable, although I disagree with some of his positions.

What happened to free speech?

And why do my blog posts mysteriously never show up sometimes!!!

70 Disturbing Facts About 9/11

John Doraemi publishes Crimes of the State Blog

johndoraemi --at--

if realtruther was banned

if realtruther was banned then this place has gone to hell!!!!

i hope that its not true..

real truther


Yes, its pretty sad that RT got banned.
I do not agree on all his positions either, but his posts were among the most readworthy on this site, imo.

I noticed that Real Truther had posted a lot of legitimate stuff

at first, but then he began going off on subtle disinfo tangents more & more. It was as if he built himself up to be a credible truther to facilitate pulling the wool over our eyes later on. (Also, see my somewhat related post re: disinfo artist Peggy Carter on this node.)

Good to know I'm not the

Good to know I'm not the only one who was thinking that. At first all his statements were backed up by many strong arguments but when he started attacking Christopher Bollyn at a very crucial moment his arguments were suspiciously weak, very unlike him. As if he was pulling a Fetzer.

more & more? like...which?

Name one "disinfo tangent" he went off on, please. And to be clear: disinfo as in deliberate dissemination of false information, not deliberate discussion of uncomfortable topics. You can't.

That's because, as far as I can tell, RT, while sometimes being so skeptical as to appear paranoid, is genuinely searching for the truth. And if that necessitates confronting whatever orthodoxy's reigning -- whether that be MSM or education or groupthink induced -- RT's proven himself to be willing to take the heat. Remember the times when "Zionist" was still considered a dirty word indicative of "anti-semitism"? Remember the times when the H-word would still cause uncontrolled knee-jerkery and immediate propositions of witchburning? Then you should remember who always was among those that followed their own intellect rather than the herd's, irregardless of reflex guided peer approval: it was RT, and it took guts. It always takes guts to go against the flow, and as everyone here should know, in this world -- where even widely held beliefs may not correspond to the truth at all -- it is imperative that someone does, or ignorance will ultimately prevail.

We owe almost all of our knowledge not to those who have agreed, but to those who have differed. --C.C.Colton

With RT being silenced, those who would differ are now barely audible here. The silence of the lambs? DKos, anyone? I didn't post much lately because I felt I could only add redundancy to RT's hyper-skepticism covering all bases, but the way things turned out, I'm not motivated to step into his shoes. I'd rather step off the blight, entirely...

And don't forget to update the house rules to state something like:

911blogger accepts that the 9/11 attacks were perpetrated by agents of the Bush administration, soon to be history, anyway. It is forbidden to write diaries that:

  1. refer to claims that Israeli or any government except Pakistan's assisted in the attacks
  2. refer to claims that any accepted icons of the 9/11 Truth Movement might have ulterior motives. That includes members #1-15.
  3. suggest there might be other gross falsehoods systematically pervading history, unless explicitly approved of by the accepted icons of the 9/11 Truth Movement.

Authoring or recommending these diaries may result in banning from 911blogger.

I'm outta here.

interns < internets

I agree ppl get banned too

I agree ppl get banned too easy on this site

"Users who maintain an extreme case of continued low rated comments may have their commenting abilities removed."

electronic voting huh?
we should know the nicks of ppl who voted
What does it mean when a comment has 0 points? dead boring? or highly controversial?
at least show the amount of votes!

"911blogger accepts that the 9/11 attacks were perpetrated by agents of the Bush administration, soon to be history, anyway. It is forbidden to write diaries that:

1. refer to claims that Israeli or any government except Pakistan's assisted in the attacks
2. refer to claims that any accepted icons of the 9/11 Truth Movement might have ulterior motives. That includes members #1-15.
3. suggest there might be other gross falsehoods systematically pervading history, unless explicitly approved of by the accepted icons of the 9/11 Truth Movement.

Authoring or recommending these diaries may result in banning from 911blogger."

This is a problem on this website, I agree

but apart from that I still feel RT was not himself lately

but I'm against him being banned and would like to know what is going on.


There are no such rules here. Your post is misleading.


Please don't go bruce1337...

You add a great insight and level headedness to 911blogger, and you produce some great things too (i.e. your PDF hand-outs - still the best I have seen).

I'm not too sure what happened to RT, so many of his posts were brilliant, some controversial, but always seemed pretty on target to me.

I think he recently became frustrated with the ISI stuff and just "let loose".

I don't agree with his thoughts on Loose Change and Alex Jones, but he still made good contributions.

911blogger needs as many honest vocal friends as possible.

Good luck and best wishes whatever you choose...

Thanks for the kind words, man!

The infowar rages on, and I'm far from deserting -- just transferring to another unit. I don't agree with everything RT says, either, but banning is another thing, entirely. And frankly, it left too sore a taste to swallow...

I'll check by occasionally, and will do my best to hold on to the good memories. All the best to all of you good people! In closing, I'd like to quote Erin once more:

"We won before this even began. We just had to figure out whether we wanted it."

and don't you ever forget that!

interns < internets

Yes, Colombo, an example would be nice.

Not hard to slander someone who can't defend themselves. I for one am sickened by the whole ordeal, now I only check in to see what disinfo's offered up 'today'. Pretty sad a person who asks tough questions gets banned & yet the 'no-planers' are allowed to flourish... I just haven't figured out why I haven't been banned. Guess I'm not applying myself ;)

I'm not going to waste my time digging through Real Truther's

old posts. IMO, the guy remained credible for a long time to establish himself here, and then he began spreading disinfo under the guise of the good faith he had built up.

To me, it looks like you are trying to bash the credibility of 911Blogger because some shills get banned on occasion. Shills need to be banned because life is short & honest truthers don't have time to play endless devil's advocate with disruptive shills.

(BTW, we all know that no one can really be banned from a blog. One can just get another IP address or come in here via a proxy server & assume another alias.)

LOL, I'm not surprised.

No offense but, judging from the majority of your posts, old or new, reading comprehension isn't your strong point. So, I'll consider the source & let it go. Anyone can spot a Fetzer, the real detractors are much more insidious. You should go back through some of those old posts, you might learn something.

show me where rt was using

show me where rt was using disinfo, please...

show where he did anything that he should be banned for..

yes, does anybody know why

yes, does anybody know why he was banned? like a lot of other people here, i disagreed with him enough, felt that he was too harsh on certain people that greatly helped this movement get to the point it is now etc.(this might be what columbo was talking about, though i wouldnt say RT changed like he did, he just doesnt know the difference between constructive criticism and tearing somebody down) but ultimately i appreciated his contributions. and when he got it right he really got it right in my opinion. its ashame he got banned and i would like to know why if anybody knows. this sucks, i know some people here are probably happy hes gone but we lost an important voice on this site in my opinion. and i say this as someone who cussed him out at one point,haha.

"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Former Director, CIA

911Blogger uses Double Standard in banning people

Apparently what precipitated RT getting banned was a running feud between RT and Jon Gold. Both RT and Jon Gold had been warned by dz to stop commenting in each other's blog postiings that continued prior arguments and attacks. They were given a restriction to not post comments any more on each other's blog postings on 911Blogger. Apparently both were warned that if they violated this restriction, they would be banned. Well, as far as I know, it was Jon Gold who broke this restriction and posted on RT's blog.

Now, here's where it get's interesting, er, unfair. After the latest brawl between Jon Gold and RT, Both RT and Jon Gold appeared to be banned at the same time a couple of weeks ago. Both of their blogs were removed and their log-ins were disabled. However, Jon Gold's was quickly re-established while RT remaines banned. Why is this? Jon Gold clearly violated both the established rules ("thou shalt not use comments to attack people and continue previous arguments" or something along those lines) many times and not just against RT, but he also violated the new restriction against posting comments on RT's blogs.

There is also something in the site rules about people getting consistently negative ratings that could lead to being banned. Incidently, RT's blog ratings were very high - 9/10 - and his comments ratings on average were fairly positive. So, in this case, ratings seemed to have not played a part in it.

Jon Gold is apparently one of the favored early members (#1-15) of 911Blogger. Is that why he is given special treatment? That really irks me and makes me suspiscious of 911Blogger's agenda. Especially considering the fact that Jon Gold has been one of the more disruptive and divisive persons here, with his frequent snarky comments, often using obscene language against people, his throwing around the "disinfo agent" accusation in all directions, particularly whenever anybody disagreed with his LIHOP mantra (you know, the small but high profile LIHOP clique on 911Blogger that tries to:

1) Exagerate the importance of Patsystan and the fictitious ISLAMIC TERRORIST MENACE or any misdirection that tends to prop up the myth of the 19 hijackers coordinated by a Boogy Man in a cave in Afghanistan (such as the story of the supposed all important wire transfer from Patsystan to Mohammed Atta that keeps being trotted out, even though in reality it is questionable evidence and has only A SINGLE SOURCE - THE TIMES OF INDIA, which coincidently happens to have a perpetual ax to grind with Pakistan - breaking all the rules of journalistic integrity having to do with assessing credibility of sources)

2) Put all the blame on the soon to be leaving Bush Administration, while visciously attacking anybody who tries to discuss some of the more permanant institutionalized perp layers, such as the one foreign power who has 1000 times more connections and sets of fingerprints on the 9/11 operation than any other - MOSSAD and ZIONISTS controlling the US - purposely and repeatedly conflating the Z-word with "anti-semite" nonsense

3)Knock out one of the strongest legs of 9/11 Truth - the GIANT HOLE IN THE STORY OF THE PENTAGON ATTACK, PUN INTENDED. Working in tandem with the Jim Hoffman/Arabesque disinfo crew this clique attempts to turn reality on its head by claiming that people who don't accept the fiction that AA77 hit the Pentagon are disinfo agents.

So, the fact that someone like Jon Gold, who does the sorts of things that those sorts of people do against the truth movement is protected and given a double standard as far as the rules that get some people banned, while real truthers like Real Truther who have contributed so much integrity and education and assistance to the cause of 9/11 truth get censored, really is disquiteing to me and makes me want to reassess my previous preception of 911Blogger being an INDEPENDENT 9/11 Truth web site. This latest fiasco and the fact that certain people with "other" agendas like Alex Jones are given way to much coverage, is making 911Blogger look more and more CONTROLLED, rather than INDEPENDENT, and I'm not sure I like what agenda the controllers appear to have with where 911Blogger is going.

I agree, I think RT made a significant positive contribution to 911Blogger and it is a huge loss to have him banned.

wow. well thanks for that

wow. well thanks for that explanation. i dont want to start a flame war, so i'll keep it short and cryptic. i agree with just about everything you just typed(like RT though, i think you put too much stock into the negative effects of Alex Jones while conveniently ignoring the good hes done. but thats another argument) and if what you say is true it is indeed an injustice and hypocritical. i take issue with your statement about the favored early members though, im pretty sure im one of the first 15 or so and ive been banned(unfairly in my opinion) in the past. i actually think 911blogger has gotten better in the censorship/banning department but this latest development is sad. anyway, stick around Keenan, i didnt always agree with RT but he was a great ally on the 3 issues that you listed among others and it would suck to lose another ally on those issues. and for the record, i dont think looking into the ISI/patsy angle is a bad thing, its just not enough, thats all. its ok to expose the patsies and the network they really work for, just dont stop there.

"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Former Director, CIA

Not really, Jules. Disinfo artists like Peggy Carter will post

a few legitimate blogs to gain credibility, & then they'll foist "no planes at the WTC" or other absurd crap to trick the weak-minded or the newbies into thinking that the 9/11 truth movement is preposterous.

We should shout down disinfo agents & frauds like Peggy Carter before they establish themselves in our movement.

Very familiar with the strategy

I'm not certain how much influence Carter has over newbies, accept on the local NYC community. And, quite obviously, whenever she posts something to 911Blogger, she receives criticism. Newbies aren't going to simply not notice the high tide of negative sentiment.

I'm making the argument that she can't poison the well. Now, she in cooperation with others could very well serve to obscure the truth. But I consider it more effective to focus on these people's data, mission statements, and actions, rather than trying to discern their exact intent or motivations. When she posts something about 'no-planes' research, I have great confidence that this community will respond in the appropriate manner. Although we could use a bit more tact at times.

I think it is possible that

I think it is possible that the ppl who planned 9/11 at one point did consider using some Illusionistic tricks. That plan may not have been on the table for very long but it is possible they took it out of the drawer again to give to the disinfo shills years later.

Just a thought.

Show "Paranoia Strikes Deep" by Mr. Id

Where have I heard that before...

no plane?

I checked out the no plane information when it came out. I found it interesting because we have the technology to do it. And it did seem strange that the wing of the plane would disappear infront of a building it was passing. I just filed the info in the back of my mind and didn't wish to promote it. Since then, I have see some news report of that day(not sure the valility) that shows the no plane may have something. The reporters are caught saying , "live view for the second time".

What this tells me is: We really need a criminal investigation of 9/11.

I don't want to promote it(no plane), but I don't want to totally throw it out either.

I like looking at more then one perspective, it makes for better decisions

When you put up a wall to block information, then you are acting similar to the official ct followers.

Is there another site we can go to to share information? If this one gets to strict?

I think someone is trying to divide us and cause us to fight? hmmmmmm

Let's find Peace

Isn't it harmful to insist that no plane hit the 2nd tower (the

plane that was seen, heard, videoed, photographed, etc., by thousands of eyewitnesses?

Shills keep harping on "no planes at the WTC" to try to make it part of the 9/11 truth movement, & to ultimately make the movement seem foolish.

I contend as well that the

I contend as well that the genesis of the NP-WTC disinformation campaign was to create confusion over other legitimate no-plane assertions, such as that there was no plane crash apparent at the site where 93 allegedly went down, no plane hit WTC7, and no plane debris consistent with a Boeing 757 appeared at the Pentagon (despite that the first official explanation of the anomolous entry hole was that the wings were entirely sheared off before it jauntily continued on its way into the building).

Pretty clever, considering how well it's worked. As soon as a person hears the phrase "no plane," whether a truther or a Faux News mouthbreather, a reflexive mental barrier is erected.

Show "There is ample evidence of faked videos of the WTC impacts" by Ningen

Now I'm sure you're a shill.

You're turning nonsense into a science. This is Fetzer level disinformation.

You have to dance through some pretty crazy hoops to sell this to yourself. Pretty crazy, man.

I don't believe for a second you actually believe any of this idiocy.

You're a sick pup, Ningen.

70 Disturbing Facts About 9/11

John Doraemi publishes Crimes of the State Blog

johndoraemi --at--

Cozy little disinfo nexus...

Webfairy spotted on Ningen's blog:

Links to "webfairy" and "".

These are sources you rely on to persuade people of the accuracy and correctness of your theories?

The fecal fingerprints of deliberate disinformation have appeared...


70 Disturbing Facts About 9/11

John Doraemi publishes Crimes of the State Blog

johndoraemi --at--

Show "No, johndoraemi" by Ningen

Can anyone tell me...

... the last name of the man wearing the firefighter helmet and blue tee shirt warding off Mark Roberts with the flag? I bekive his first name is Paul. I should know but, due to information overload from trying to manage reading too many open articles at once, blog comments, and more while listening to riveting talk radio, I am drawing a blank.


"But truthfully, I don't really know. We've had trouble getting a handle on Building No. 7."
~~ Dr. Shyam Sunder - Acting Director Building and Fire Research Laboratory (NIST)

Show "Paul Isaac Jr., and just to" by Mark Roberts

He's an auxiliary firefighter,

and to me, that's a firefighter.

Check this:

Provide a description. Embed a still with a link. I've seen more than my share of videos of people getting hurt that are supposed to be funny. So, I choose to no longer follow blind video links, unless they come from a "trusted" source. It may very well be interesting and relevant but, rather than waste my time leaping to another useless goobletube, I think it best for now just to ask you for a little more consideration.

"But truthfully, I don't really know. We've had trouble getting a handle on Building No. 7."
~~ Dr. Shyam Sunder - Acting Director Building and Fire Research Laboratory (NIST)


That was a video that shows a live news broadcast of that day and is live more then once of the different images.
Makes me see why we really do need an investigation of what happened on that day.

Good Report Back, ...911Blogger attack dogs

Nice pics Peggy. Pretty strange what was done to the ground zero awning.
I thought this site was supposed to be all about (non-internet) activism?

Gotta say though the comments here are consistently disappointing. There may not be written rules but there are certainly defacto rules about what topics will be discussed.

I've seen the bar of what is acceptable discussion move several times over the years. The exact same methods of name-calling & over generalizations leveled at Peggy were first leveled at anyone that dared to mention "9/11" & "truth" together. Later anyone that mentioned "controlled demolition" was labelled a 'wing nut' or some such pejorative.

The repitition of this behavior is worth noting. It should be discarded.

Personally, when out on the streets i ask everyone to look at ALL the evidence and decide for themselves. If we (the 9/11 truth rabble) are to succeed it will be because we encourage people to develop their own reasoning abilities, not because we tell people what to think.

It took less than 10 minutes...

for the negative ratings to begin!

I supposed I'm going to get banned for pleading for rational discussion.
... deaf ears & all that.

I've always thought that 9/11 Truth activists should hold themselves to higher standards. I do.
For the people I work with this includes, no name calling, NEVER make fun of people (sheople or otherwise) for what they believe & no generalizations. Engage evidence and arguments, not people or egos.

Show "Thanks for Proving My Point" by WTC Eye Witness
Show "Well, Well" by WTC Eye Witness


I've always thought that 9/11 Truth activists should hold themselves to higher standards. I do.

So uncool.

"Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective — a New World Order — can emerge..." - George H.W. Bush, 9/11/91