ALERT: Check and see if your IP ban has been lifted at 911blogger

Does "credible" mean never speaking of any evidence that ties Israel or Israelis to the crime? Speaking of intolerance, Ive noticed that YT,Victronix and other preferred members of 911blogger can get away with smearing those as racist who bring the Israel-911 topic up. No repurcussions for them. Ever.(I read just yesterday that YT was conflating speaking of Israels possible role in 9/11 with "holocaust denial" and David Duke-such a tired and pathetic tactic. Is that ok at 911B?)

I was banned from 911B when Reprehensor decided to purge the site and make it more friendly territory for those that want to pin 9/11 on arabs and push LIHOP crap. I was never given a specific reason though and Reprecensor of course failed to tell me why I was banned. Are you still in touch with that dishonest snake? Maybe you could ask him for me. I was nothing but respectful to him until he banned me without explanation, so thats not the reason.

I appreciate your more open style but to be honest  911B looks the same now as it ever did. Certain topics are still clearly off limits and 911B is still not capable of looking beneath the surface. How many people there are critical of the supposed "hijackings"?  Have any threads on Dominic Suter or Dov Zakheim lately?

I wasn't directly accusing you of being an agent. I was suggesting a possibility should be considered. I will take it a step further, I have witnessed a pattern of activity at 911Blogger.com that would boost the probability of this possibility.

It's easy for you to say that heavy workload and the woes of 911 Truth activists caused this secret purge, although I don't buy it. Even if true, it's still un-acceptable. Users were silenced by 911Blogger specifically because they challenged other users and specific information.

The truth is that years went by and this secret purge was never even acknowledged. Myself and others got no response, no admission, no explanation, no justification. Specific information was allowed to go unchallenged. I'm not worried about how the purge affected me as much as other users who could really could have used a critical point of view at key moments of their 911 Truth introduction and learning.

Let's be clear. This kind of action is extremely suspicious. You are asking us to take your word that it was the result of exhaustion, a claim we can't verify and a position I just don't believe. You might and that's fine.

The lack of critical evaluation of certain information is obvious to those who were secretly purged because those are in fact the ones who challenged this information. And we believe that is precisely why there was a secret campaign to purge users who challenged such things at 911Blogger.com.

I want to address a paragraph from our e-mail exchange:

You seem to admit that the reason for the secret purge was that specific people were called out and specific information was challenged. So the question is was this the result of exhaustion or was it a coordinated campaign? Mainly, I was suggesting that the latter is still on the table.

And likewise, I would also suggest the same thing to you. Consider your own biases. Your extreme work load, dedication and association with 911Blogger.com would seem to be a source of bias for you and allows you to overlook some pretty shady business.

Hi Leftwright,

I got the email from you. If you can do me a favor, please delete my account completely from 9-11blogger, or at least the personal details from my registration to the site. i hold no grudges against you and admire your work for 9-11 truth, but I cannot entrust my private details to the website after everything that has happened.

As for 911Blogger propping up the OCT, I think that is a patently ridiculous argument on its face.

En totale, I agree with that.  Clearly the overwhelming majority -- dare I go on a limb and say "everybody" -- at blogger understands that the towers were demolished.  I'd even go as far as to say that most people at blogger are well aware of the Dancing Israelis, etc.  If you argue against CD at blogger you're guaranteed to be voted down, as has been the case with Gold in the past.

But...

Let's add the words "various aspects of" to that sentence:

As for 911Blogger propping up various aspects of the OCT

Now this is absolutely true.  While there might not be an official, written policy defending various aspects of the OCT, just have a look at some past blog entries, and watch how people fall for them hook line and sinker.

In particular, look at how much sheer time and energy Loose Nuke, Victronix, Jimd3100, and a few others put into trying to defend the idea that real Islamic hijackers actually hijacked the planes. 

Jimd3100 wrote a verbose entry (riddled with spin) defending the idea that the phone calls were all genuine despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.  Within a few minutes of the entry being posted, in comes Jon Gold to say "Great work Jim; I shall forward this to Dr. Griffin and ask that he stop promoting bad information."  (There's no way Gold could have read the entire essay that fast.)  I deconstructed a small amount of the essay and while most people voted me up for that, Loose Nuke and Jimd3100 fiercely opposed my posts and went to great pains to always have the last word and try to spin me.

Then of course, there's the real biggie, defending the idea that Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon.  Forget the CIT flyover for a second.  Victronix and crew, and I'll repeat, defend the claim that Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon.  They will vote down anyone who even suggests that an empty, remote controlled, Northwoods-style-swap 757 crashed into the building.

Over in the Frank Legge "What hit the Pentagon" thread, Victronix said this:

I'd bet my money that a real 757 hit with real passengers and a lot
of real people died that day.

It's ugly, boring -- relative to Skywarriors, bombs, faked morphed
phone calls, etc -- and awful. It's about death. And yet, it's most
likely what "happened," at the end of the day.

The proposed "magic show", on the other hand, is exciting,
contentious, mysterious, and devoid of the nastiness of human bodies
instantly crushed into oblivion against mortar walls, families no longer
with a wife or a husband or a son or a daughter, and the experiences of
those in DC who lived through it who will never ever forget the images
and likely will have PTSD the rest of their lives.

That post received seven up votes.

My response to her, which was totally on point, was heavily downvoted.  I compared her argument to John McCain's argument against the entire truth movement in his foreword to the Popular Mechanics propaganda, where he said the following:

...But though the evidence for Al Qaeda's central role in the 9/11
attacks is overwhelming, many have found the facts unsatisfying.
Perhaps this is understandable. We want to believe that 19 men could not
murder our citizens, destroy our grandest buildings, and terrorize our
country. Surely, something more was at work...

...We would like to think there was something more at work on
September 11--something hidden, more sophisticated, something as grand
as the lives so easily destroyed. Those unsatisfied with the ordinary
truth of the attacks have concocted stories more fanciful, more
conspiratorial than the events as we know them...

This is especially unbecoming of Victronix in light of what we know about the Northwoods Documents. Honestly, it really kind of makes my blood boil to see her make the argument that people like myself "want" to believe in the no-757-crash because it's "exciting" and "mysterious" and that the "real truth" is "too boring." And then the pseudo-righteous soapbox: reminding us that real people died that day, as if we forgot. Honestly, she really shouldn't be allowed to talk like that. When alleged "truth activists" speak like this I can't help but question their agenda.

Now, regardless of what your opinions are re the Pentagon issue, I think you have to concede that my response to her was totally on point and the only reason anyone would downvote it is because they either dislike me personally, or they have a vested interest at basically shouting down (via the votes) anyone who challenges the particular aspect of (not the entire) the OCT in which Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. I think there's also the holier-than-thou mentality of "Gasp! How could you possibly have the gaul to compare a dedicated truth activist to a debunker like McCain?"

Finally, it should be noted that the "unofficial" policy of defending AA77 crashing into the Pentagon can be seen in that pro CIT entries are NEVER front paged, whereas several decidedly anti CIT entries sometimes (but not always) are. Jim Hoffman's anti-CIT interview with Michael Wolsey, for example, was front paged, a few days after I posted the release of National Security Alert, which, despite the numerous endorsements from prominent members of the movement, was back-paged. The Frank Legge "What hit the Pentagon" entry, which is really nothing more than an unscientific opinion piece (and besides, how is Legge, a chemist, qualified to dismiss the technical findings of professional pilots like Balsamo???) with a "double negative" hypothesis - which amounts to giving the official impact narrative the benefit of the doubt - was also front paged. This is enough for the astute observer to become suspicious.

Finally LW, I don't think you're one of the infiltrators. I think you're a good egg who's trying to do some great things, and honestly I have to disagree with the commenter on this thread that blogger is the same as it always has. I think things HAVE gotten better since Reprehensor left (and heck, even Screw Loose agrees with me here!), even though it is by no means perfect. I wouldn't attempt to have this kind of dialogue with you if I thought you were on the payroll of the other side. I myself was a bit "slow" in "waking up" to the compromised nature of some aspects of blogger, particularly the way the Pentagon issue gets marginalized and wrongly framed. But I have to say that the policy of back-paging the Pentagon entries that challenge the official story simply because the issue is "too contentious" is absurd; all it does is diminish the readership.

Edited to add:

Here is a new comment by Victronix that is a CLASSIC example of how she lumps the very real issue of no 757 crashing into the Pentagon and conflating it with the truly absurd claims of TV fakery or holograms at the WTC, bunching all of it up as "no planes." Now, we'll see how that comment gets voted on, seeing as how this particular entry is on the front page:

http://911blogger.com/node/23005#comment-229790

Off topic but intriguing.

Hi Jpass,

I can't remember my password nor the email that I used to create my blogger account. That would make it difficult for them to validate my account. I would rather register a new account but I cant even find a registration page. They have made it so not worth it for me to get back in.

On top of that I don't trust them at all with my connection details (IP address and email). So sorry I can't join you there.

Regarding the Israeli agents, I don't think they were planning to get caught at all. They intended to be seen but only as Arab dressed assholes celebrating the demolitions.

That might not even be their mission, they could have been tasked other stuff earlier, and was only watching the demolitions as spectators then, being part of the plot they knew when it would happen and knew to bring video cams and position themselves at the right place. Besides, even without those Mossad agents, the juxtaposition of Larry Silverstein and other Israeli connected personalities just points most of the fingers at Israel. Think about it, three of Larry Silverstein's building were wired to go down on 9-11. He owns the buildings so how could the demolition charges be put in place without him knowing it. If he wasn't part of the plot then he would have spoken up after the fact and claim that the buildings were infiltrated and demolished by some group who evaded his security. Now Silverstein isn't some low level schmuck in Israel. He is a big time fella who is in close terms with Israeli Prime Ministers. If he was a victim, Israel would come to his aide and find out who blew up his buildings. The Mossad would be converging on the WTC site after the demolitions, not before or during the time of the demolition itself. The fact that the Mossad were already there on the morning of the demolitions, and remember Dominic Sutter ran away to Israel right after the attacks speak so much of their guilt.

I think the Israeli angle is being played down and hidden because they are the main beneficiary of the WTC attacks. But I don't think they are where the buck stops. You have to go one level above the Israel project to find the true perps, and there I think you will find the old banking dynasties pushing the buttons that ultimately led to 9-11.