The 911blogger site was originally a melting pot of all ideas about 9-11. All sides seem to be open to debate. Then positions started to harden against certain ideas. While moderators at first seemed neutral, they later took a harder line against mention of Zionist and Israeli involvement in 9-11.

There was also good reporting of issues about controlled demolition, but there seemed to be moderator bias to protect Jon Gold, a blogger who quite often tried to put down controlled demolition and its supporters with less than logical arguments.

The moderators eventually implemented moderation queues for bloggers that were critical of certain individuals and banned those in the site who supported Real Truther's then new WTCDemoliton.com. Posting a link to WTCDemolition even in a sig line was totally unacceptable to the 911blogger moderators then.

At a certain point the admin, YT who was quite neutral at the start but later seemed to passively side with the biased moderation was replaced by Reprehensor who was iron fisted in his biased moderation. The site's bias and attempts to control discussion reached a peak when mass bannings took place (mostly of CD and zionists-did-it supporters) and the registration page was removed. Can you imagine a blog site that purports to report and debate the truth but doesn't even have an accessible registration page!

Then 911blogger started to promote itself as an all stars site where the bigwigs like Stephen Jones and Richard Gage would write blogs. If you wanted to read about their latest issues, 911blogger was where to find it first. Nice it seems, but at the same time, the site also held discussions where these very same 9-11 researchers were being undermined. If it were just valid criticism of these researchers, it would have been totally fine, but as before, the arguments that were putting down the research of these esteemed truthers seemed to hold no merit at all, yet allowed to flourish unchallenged within the site.