CNN and FOX did a great job covering 9/11 Truth on 5th anniversary...NOT!
Gideon524 Thu, 09/28/2006 - 7:48am
I recorded both CNN and FOX all day coverage of the 5th anniversary and this was all I found from the all day coverage.
- Gideon524's blog
- Login to post comments
Thanks for that! Morgan
Thanks for that! Morgan Reynolds is such an assclown, but at least Fox gave Barry Zwicker some airtime, that was a surprise.
we should just surrender
the disinformation brigades are so powerful at this point that i think we should call it quits if we do not find some way of getting the focus back on this movement.
look - just the sheer volume of known disinformation proliferating on the internet is a clear indication. i do not for one minute believe that the vast majority of these websites are real.
no planes. nuke at the WTC. these are just ways of disgusting people away from the movement. they are purposely embarassing distractions.
and -it appears that we do NOT have an effective way of dealing with this problem. Morgan Reynolds gets air time - and Able Danger gets swept under the rug.
maybe it is because it is also an election year - but the bullshit is being laid on so think lately that i almost feel like this is a lost cause.
what is the POINT of bringing attention to the movement when the movement does not have a clear focus on what IS real - and what is NOT real?
its funny that so many people are capable of embracing that 9/11 was an inside job - but then are incapable of understanding that this movement was co-opted from the start with the pod-people and the no-planers and the nukes people and the Cleveland switcharoo.....
meanwhile - Lt Col Anthony Shaffer's career is ruined because he came forward and testified that a 2 star general ordered him to lay off Atta - ignore him - he was "untouchable"
and the commission itself admits they wanted to file criminal charges against NORAD for intentionally giving them FALSE information on why our air defenses failed.
i feel sick to my stomach that all the evidence you will ever need is right at our fingertips - and it is SO successfully being diluted and poisoned by disinformation and ignorance.
It might be easier to deal
It might be easier to deal with on this site at least soon when the karma/approval system gets added, like at daily kos etc. That way we'll just be able to click on a post to disagree with it lol.
yes, and it would be
yes, and it would be appreciated if everyone would avoid trying to provoke any arguements!
similarly, i cant moderate someone for doing something wrong, when the opposition in turn does the exact same thing they are complaining about. take the high road people!
(not directed at you DBLS, just in response to your comment, which is exactly correct)
i disagree
you deleted my blog which was a legitimate story run by someone who was complaining about the personal attacks of the disinformation crowd against Steven Jones.
you ask us to take the higher ground. This is akin to asking us to be punching bags for the disinfo crowd - while they appear to have free reign to post whatever lies and trash they want against us.
i believe disinformation is the BIGGEST problem of this movement - and the STAKES are very high. allow us to take the gloves off DZ and expose this for what it is.
we are supposedly fighting for 9/11 Truth. either allow BOTH sides to post freely. Or censor both sides based on some realistic standards.
but - to obviously allow disinformation to be posted here day after day - and then stand silent while they ruthlessly personally attack people who attempt to debunk their junk science - and then ask us to take the "higher Ground" ???
no. i believe disinformation should be exposed. and if they engage in personal attacks - THAT should be exposed as well.
the blog you deleted was dealing with that issue. i know thsi all probably annoys you - but - if keeping the integrity of 911 TRUTH and the information we disseminate is not a priority - then what is the point?
john, instead of continuing
john,
instead of continuing to question my motives publicly how about respond to the 3 emails i have sent you today so that we can work together on appropriate measures.
thanks.
sorry but i am not home
and do not have access to my home email. i will catch up with it all later.
i will cease posting until then.
but - just for the record - putting 911Blogger aside - i think this is a much bigger issue for the entire 911 movement. Disinformation is the biggest problem we face, and unless we clean house and find some national unity on a consolidated and simple message - and an immediate course of action for a national consolidated action - we will remain fractured and co-opted.
so - before you become too myopic about my personal V for Vendetta against the no-planers, take a step back and consider your responsibility as a moderator of this most EXCELLENT website, and consider the serious nature of this disinformation problem.
all i ask is that you notify
all i ask is that you notify me when things get out of hand so that i can do some moderation, here-to-for you have not emailed me once regarding any specific attacks against you. i do see however numerous times where you have commented on how i should ban someone, or delete some post, but the truth is that i cannot read every single comment, and that i need to be notified when issues arise.. typically i do not see these comments until after other users have in turn followed suit whereby my only solution is to moderate both parties.
ill look forward to your email, and i promise that i definately understand the issues at hand, but that a quick and easy solution is not readily available. after the server switch this weekend i will put into place new features for handling these issues, until then i would definately appreciate your patience.
btw, the best advice i have ever read regarding internet based arguements is this - the only way to win an arguement on the web is not to reply.
once users can rate blog entries it will become readily visible what posts are valued by the community, and which posts are clearly not supported by the community, unfortunately that is going to take a bit of time to make happen.
Trust John, when the
Trust John, when the approval system comes in Nico's post for example will have about 50 negatives and perhaps one to two positives from a couple of retards or shills. Any impartial viewer will be able to see that that point of view is fringe, perhaps even better then they are able to today when we have to take it to them and show them up etc. It’ll be like;
+2|-99
No planes hit the Towers
By ewing2001
I'm the first one who will
I'm the first one who will promote these ranking systems.
It just proves, what we're saying all along.
This movement is deceived into pushing limited hangout topics much more than actual physical and visual evidence.
They're trusting phoney authorities because they have not the guts to break through the orwellian doublethink and actually re-evaluate all oppressed research, which has a point.
And that's why the real disinfo crowd will support these topics even much stronger right now (Sibel Edmonds, Able Danger etc...) and always follow frauds like Mike Ruppert, Karl Schwarz and Co.
Fact is, the so called political breakthrough did not take place at the anniversary.
MSM is playing this movement and they know what they're doing.
Next: A phoney false-hope campaign for the election, followed with some debates including 'frustrations' triggering the e-voting issue, surely *after* the fact.
The script is convenient:
The military background of MSM *IS* 9/11 perps.
"This movement is deceived
"This movement is deceived into pushing limited hangout topics much more than actual physical and visual evidence."
Like what "no planes hit the WTC" LOL, I don’t know what’s more incredible Nico’s disinfo, or the brazen way he spreads it. John don't worry man this frustrates the crap out of me also.
and of course.......
.....he calls two researchers frauds.
Does he ever NOT work a nice personal attack against other researchers into his answers?
How does Nico answer his phone? "Fuck Ruppert. Hello?"
so - what we have here is a basic game of chess. some people are pawns - and just have limited moves. others are watching the board and the strategy.
so - assuming that we are not pawns (and on some days i really do wonder) - now that we know the opposition's limited moves - what is the opposition's next logical move?
their moves are so predictable at this point that i hang my head in shame for still playing my usual game. disinformation mixed with constant in-fighting and disruption - divide and conquer - all feeding into a media that cherry picks the most absurdist research and makes the movement look arcane at best - and stupid at its worst.
tell me Dem Bruce. If you were sitting at that chessboard - knowing your opponent - and knowing their next predictable move - what would you do to counter it?
answer: stop playing Chess - and start playing Risk
"...moves are so
"...moves are so predictable..."
I think *your* moves are predictable.
Supposedly we would run the show in this movement, why are we getting not the same airplay on CNN, FOX and Co. like all others?
"In Plane Site" was shown in full length on australian TV during the 9/11 anniversary.
That's a big deal.
Yet i find the same v.Kleist BS also in Rodriguez' latino TV MSM projects and his former mentor James Randi is pushing the flagwavers around ScrewLoose and Abby Gold on his messageboard.
9/11 Truthlings do not care, if Karl Schwarz worked with CIA company In-Q-Tel. They do not care, if Ruppert is under investigation for his alleged "burglary".
They believe in any kind of pretended authority like AJ Chavez and close their eyes on forgery of documents.
As a matter of fact, they seem to love the closer a government connection is revealed, *that guy* must be "on our side". -;
Compared to all this the evidence on 9/11 TV Fakery is still a fart in cyberspace.
Odd, isn't it?
Fox & CNN are CIA assets.
Fox & CNN are CIA assets.
"What we have here is a failure to communicate..."
Dear DZ, John Albanese, Dem Bruce, Ewing2001 (Nico), and Gideon524:
“What we have here is a failure to communicate…”
The above quote is from the old movie, “Cool Hand Luke,” and it is spoken by the Prison Warden right before he shoots and kills the lead character, played by Paul Newman, who is essentially serving a life term in prison for burglarizing a parking meter.
In the so called 9/11 Truth Movement, we also have “a failure to communicate,” and this line is usually spoken or paraphrased by the 9/11 Pro-Planers and/or the 9/11 No-Planers (proponents of the 9/11 TV Fakery & No-Big-Boeings Hypotheses), right before they shoot themselves in the foot.
DZ, your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to bring some scientific and quasi-legal reasonableness to the "No Big Boeings" debate. IMHO, neither side of this debate has succeeded in doing so. (Hopefully, this message will not self-destruct in 5 seconds.)
Seriously, DZ, I would suggest that you set up a CLOSELY moderated debate in a special forum to semi-rationally discuss the No Big Boeings Hypothesis (and related hypotheses). Steve Jones accepted my request to sign Nico’s petition requesting scholarly articles in his own journal on the "No Big Boeings" and TV Fakery Hypotheses. Thus, I would suggest that you not allow others to close down debate on these questions before they are fully examined & debated.
Steve and his Journal of 9/11 Studies are about to publish four (4) scholarly articles on these hypotheses. My statement of the hypotheses (about which Steve spoke approvingly): 1) The 9/11 Pro-Planes Hypothesis; 2) The 9/11 No-Planes Hypothesis (No Big Boeings); 3) The 9/11 TV & Media Fakery Hypothesis; and 4) The 9/11 TV & Media Integrity Hypothesis.
Thus, unlike the trial in “Alice in Wonderland” in which the execution comes before the verdict, let’s wait until the scholarly articles are published and we have a debate by a jury of 9/11 peer researchers before we execute Nico & Co. (then we can do like they did in "Alice in Wonderland" – LoL).
As for the “ad hominem” and similar attacks about which John Albanese is complaining, I agree with John that such attacks should stop. When I reasonably suggested an examination under oath with cross examination of the 9/11 eyewitnesses who allegedly saw Big Boeings hitting the WTC towers (see “Scientific Evidence May Be Better than Eyewitness Testimony” at http://www.911blogger.com/node/3212#comment-74134), John’s response to my request was: “Sure - if you agree to take a psychological examination and be laughed at by a jury of your peers.”
Would John & you agree that such a statement by John is completely and totally inappropriate for reasonable 9/11 debates & discussions – and a prime example of the types of attacks about which John is complaining? If so, DZ, then would you please appeal to John and others to cease & desist in such divide-and-conquer attacks (which are just what the 9/11 cover-up perps would want us to do)?
In addition, calling a hypothesis “disinformation” does not qualify as scientific debunking in my book. Saying that there were “eyewitnesses to planes near the WTC towers on 9/11” should not preclude a discussion of the scientific evidence to that No Big Boeings actually hit the WTC towers (in a manner similar to how we NOW classify the eyewitnesses to a Big Boeing hitting the Pentagon on 9/11).
Such eyewitnesses have NEVER been examined under oath with cross examination, and few of them say that they saw a Big Boeing actually hitting the WTC towers. My understanding is that John Albanese does not even say that he saw Big Boeings hitting the WTC towers, but he does say that he saw “both planes” NEAR the WTC towers on 9/11. Please correct me if I am mistaken, John. This is where scientific evidence may be better than the eyewitness testimony…
Let me know. Thank you. Best regards,
Thomas J Mattingly
P.S. By the way, a friend of mine & I were the ones who facilitated Dr. Morgan Reynolds' appearance on Fox News to duscuss the "No Big Boeings Hypothesis." Morgan did well; but, of course, he could have done better.