Recent Headlines

Rosie O'Donnell is picking up where she left off.
Once Again, The Will of the Voters Is Denied
Uzbek officer says Tashkent bombings falseflag
US Congressman Ed Markey gets a copy of 9/11 Nano Thermite Scientific report
Ex-ISI Chief Says Purpose of New Afghan Intelligence Agency RAMA Is ‘to destabilize Pakistan’
Taboo News and Corporate Media
Peter Phillips Of Project Censored Endorses NYC CAN
Polls show broad skepticism among Americans of official 9/11 narrative
New York Judge Dismisses Claim Negligent Construction Contributed To WTC 7 Collapse
Bombshell: Bin Laden worked for US until 9/11
Drills successful planting bombs in 10 buildings, including DHS offices: GAO
Kevin R. Ryan: Demolition access to the WTC Towers
Naval "National Center for Energetics" Records Of Pre-9/11 Nano-Energetic Materials Development, Nonexistent Or Destroyed
Did the Earth Shake Before The South Tower Hit the Ground?
29 Engineers: Only Explosives Can Explain 9/11 World Trade Center Destruction
David Chandler responds to Frank Greening
“Chief Engineer” Hyman Brown by Patrick Marks
Two Days Before 9/11, Military Exercise Simulated Suicide Hijack Targeting New York
Psychologists Weigh In On 9/11
New York Senator Gillibrand Supports New 9/11 Investigation
Much Of 9/11 Commission's Findings Cite Intelligence Garnered By Torture
AE911Truth in Washington DC July 14th-16th
Daniel Sunjata: Intellectual Dishonesty In The Age Of Universal Deceit...
Vice President Biden receives Thermitic Material paper
Pardon Our Dust, or, Why the World Trade Center Dust Matters
Marie-Paule Pileni (Bentham Open) and nano-technology
Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe

On Disinformation and Damaging Associations

Entries in this section are created by individual users who register with this site and are largely unmoderated. Content in this section should not be interpreted as being supported by 911blogger.com, or by any other members of this site, and should only be viewed as a posting of the individual who created it. Please contact a team member if you notice a post which violates our general rules.
|

Nearly seven years out from 9/11, and disinformation remains a persistent problem within the 9/11 Truth movement. Part of the problem has been that sites like 911blogger.com have been slow to label blatant disinformation as such. Back in April, I noted that certain topics would no longer be tolerated here. In the interim, two of these topics were introduced in a U.S. District Court in New York, setting a poor benchmark for future 9/11 Truth-related cases in New York. It's now time for a firmer, (and admittedly glaringly late), stance on Fakery, DEW, and "SBHT" syndrome, here at 911blogger.

To start, let's skip back to 9/11/2001;

"So did you hear?"

"Hear what?"

"An airplane hit the World Trade Center this morning."

"What kind? You mean, a little plane?"

"I don't know, just 'a plane'. It was on the radio."

Immediately, something didn't seem quite right. I thought that it could have been a small commuter plane, but not a jumbo, not with contemporary guidance and radar systems. No way. However, before long, the radio was delivering the news of a second plane strike. Definitely a big jet.

This was an attack.

Aircraft struck the twin towers. It's very likely that they were Boeings, and it's also probable* that they were the very Boeings that the media reported as "hijacks". It seems absurd to have to say these things, but the fact of the matter is, there is a disinformation campaign afoot, largely confined to a handful of sites and YouTube, to trick people into thinking that "no planes" hit the Towers, that the objects that hit the Towers were cloaked in holograms, or were holographs, and that digital alterations were made to broadcast footage on the fly, on 9/11.

If this were the case, then there would be no video or photographs in existence that are basically anomaly free, depicting the 2nd aircraft hitting the other WTC tower, but this is not the case;


It's just not the case.

Further, the transcribed oral histories of First Responders that were recorded in the days and weeks following 9/11 indicate strongly that debris from loaded commercial jets was in plain view in the area surrounding the towers;

Christopher Attanasio (EMT): "...we took 2nd Avenue all the way down. Upon arrival, towers one and two were both ablaze. The second plane had hit the second tower already. Both towers were totally engulfed. People were jumping out of the buildings. There was airplane fuselage and landing gear around the site. Body parts, victims' remains on the floor. There were some injuries on the street. Some cars were on fire."

John Breen (FDNY): "We did see part of -- I didn't see it, but Jeff Johnson told me later on he did see part of the landing gear actually fell right through the roof and it was in one of the Jacuzzis in another room."

Michael Cain (FDNY): "We parked on West Street and I guess about Albany, West Street and Albany, got out of the car and started going up West Street and there were body parts in the street. The plane wheel was in the street."

Richard Carletti (FDNY): "When we passed 10 and 10, there's a bridge that runs I guess into one of the buildings directly south of Trade Center No. 2. There's a pedestrian walkway. As we passed that, we came into the debris field. It was jet parts and body parts."

Manuel Delgado (EMS): "An explosion goes off. [Actually, this was the second plane impact. -rep] I immediately tell everyone to get out of the car and hide somewhere, go underneath something. It's interesting because, as we were there, there was a police car, I guess, on Vesey, on the corner there, and some debris comes down from whatever this explosion was, at the time we really didn't know, and it just crushes it, I mean, crushes the top front of the police car, which really scared me at that point.

Q. Could you tell if it was airplane parts?

A. It looked like an airplane part afterward, yes, it did. It looked like part of an engine. It was pretty big. It was probably the size of the hood because it kind of hit it, bounced, and then rolled off."

Michael Donovan (FDNY): "We heard the plane briefly, the earth shook, the buildings shook, a tremendous fireball overhead. I thought there was a bomb or an explosion. A tremendous fireball, flaming debris, pieces of the airplane, fuselage, landing gear, pieces of the building."

Thomas Fiztpatrick (FDNY): "I figured, as long as we didn't get hit by the plane, we were ahead of the game. The next thing I was worried about was getting hit by the parts. Various pieces of the plane were falling on the street. As we went down the street you could see parts of aircraft with stencil numbers on it and things like that. There was a wheel, or like a wheel housing or something else there in the street."

Ray Goldbach (FDNY): "The four of us got out of the car, we started to cross Broadway, and the second plane went into the other tower. I don't know what time it was, but Tom McDonald yelled something like holy shit, oh, fuck. He hit the ground out on the street. We all got up. We kept walking. I believe we went down - I don't know whether it was Dey or Cortlandt Street. We walked down that block. It was littered with airplane parts, pieces of the building."

Steve Grabher (FDNY): "...by the time we got near 2 World Trade Center people were jumping off the roof like crazy. Landing near the hotel and the street was littered with body parts. I don't know if it was from the plane or what. But there was just body parts all over the place. Chunks of meat. I saw an airplane tire. I walked past an airplane tire. What looked like an airplane tire."

Stephen Gregory (FDNY): "I saw airplane parts on West Street.

Q. How did you know they were airplane parts?

A. It looked like pieces of a plane, skin of a plane. I mean, they weren't really discernible. I couldn't say this was this part of a plane or that was that part. Just knowing a plane had hit the building and I looked and I saw it looked like the skin off a wing or a fuselage or wherever it came from.

Q. Clearly not building material?

A. No. The building material was sort of gray and you could see it, you know, how it differed from the plane."

Michael Guttenberg (Office of Medical Affairs): "The other thing that was actually evident, though, is what appeared to be some plane parts, like some circular pieces of a plane, and lots of shoes. I don't know if that was women jumping out of their – jumping out of their heels to run, but there were -- just impressed me there were no -- you know, there were no injuries on the street at that point, but there was lots of shoes all over the place and plane parts. It was the same thing in both directions."

Michael Hazel (FDNY): "We just passed a compact car where the engine was running and the door was open, which looked to me like the driver had escaped, but from the back seat to the trunk was crushed by a jet engine."

Todd Heaney (FDNY): "THERE WERE PEOPLE DEAD PEOPLE EVERYWHERE DONT KNOW IF YOU WANT TO KNOW THAT WHAT DID YOU DO YOU KNOW YOU CAN SAY IT WHATEVER YOU SAW YOU KNOW THEY THE PEOPLE WERE JUST EVERYWHERE SAW SOME LUGGAGE FROM THE PLANE"

Stephen Hess (EMS): "...our initial response was seeing body parts and airplane parts all over the west side. Just traumatic to see."

Paul Hyland (FDNY): "We were coming across and we walked down. We had to go down to the command center. We carried all our tools, the bottles, everything, and as we're walking down, part of the plane engine was sitting right in the street, still burning. I said, look, this is the plane."

Robert Kimball (EMS): "Like I remember walking by with the chief, and I remember seeing the airplane engine, you know, pieces of, you know, obviously trade center all over."

John Lynn (FDNY): "I parked soon thereafter on West Street, geared up and walked along West Street, where I noticed landing gear and the evidence of some kind of explosion."

Orlando Martinez (EMS): "Once we started taking off, I guess 30 feet in front of us, there was a lady on the ground by the curb and she was just waving her arms. That's all she could wave. Her legs were crushed. Apparently she got hit by part of the landing gear, one of the tires of the airplane. There was a large tire next to her. The person who was next to her, I guess worked with her, said something hit her. It may have been the landing gear. It was a large piece of metal that was so sharp it slit her whole back open, buttocks. Her legs were exposed, bones. We boarded her as fast as we could. There was nowhere to grab her. She was too slippery, so I grabbed the hip bone. That was exposed. We just kind of picked her up, put her on the long board and we strapped her up, put her on the stretcher and took as much flesh as we could. It was just hanging all over the place, put it between her legs. Put her in the ambulance and rushed her to Beekman."

The above lady was not hit by a "holograph". She was mangled by an aircraft part. An aircraft part that came from one of the planes that crashed into the towers. It's really that simple.

One of this site's users, "SCAFFOLDRIDER", sent us photos that may reflect some of the kinds of airplane parts that the First Responders saw that morning. You have to forgive them for not grabbing pictures of the parts themselves, they had a few thousand other things on their minds. Nor were they expecting that the PsyOp of 9/11 would be extended indefinitely, attacking the verity of their experience. Here is SCAFFOLDRIDER's story;

I was there that morning of 9/11 working on a nearby roof and the following week I was asked to go to Ground Zero to help with the rigging of some of the buildings that were damaged. I worked on, 1 Liberty Plaza, Century 21 Building, Hilton Millenium Hotel, and The Federal Building.

Working at the Federal Building, it was our job to hang swing stage scaffolds from the 7th floor setback roof. When I first got up on the lower setback roof and saw the amount of debris I was amazed. Giant pieces of the World Trade Center aluminum siding were everywhere. We had to move most of them to fasten our tie-back scaffold cables. While moving one of these 7 foot pieces of aluminum I noticed what looked like an airplane part. I picked it up and it had a serial number on it and something in writing "hydraulic piston".

About a half hour later, the Postal Investigator and an FBI Agent came up to the setback roof. I was asked where exactly did I find it and not to remove anything else, especially anything spray painted in yellow paint. I was told that there were many airplane parts on the roof and most of them were identified by yellow spray paint.

Well throughout the day working on the roof I had come across the yellow paint on some objects. No one was supposed to have a camera on the Ground Zero site, but everyone had one. I had my in my work bucket and took pictures of the whole setback roof and debris.

Well, we had problems securing some tie- back cables to the setback roof and I had to go to the upper roof to see if we could run the cables up there. I had my camera and headed for the upper roof and I couldn't believe what I saw. There was a large piece of a landing gear and pieces of airplane parts all over the roof. I took many pictures and quickly left he roof.

Here are some of the photos that SCAFFOLDRIDER sent in to 911blogger.com;




Pretty persistent illusion, I would say. Most of these photos have been in the public domain since 2005. Other photos of aircraft parts are easily accessible via a google image search.

Witnesses saw the planes come in. Witnesses saw the debris in the streets. Video and photographic evidence confirms the reality of the 9/11 planes.

So those who propose that the 9/11 planes were video forgeries or "holographs" are either seriously confused, or they are purposefully promoting disinformation.

This site will not defend, support, or promote the instigators of these lies, or those who give them a platform. They are not friends of the truth. It doesn't matter if 90% of what they pump out is good. If 10% of what they are promoting is poison that is being injected into the public perception of 9/11 Truth... then they are a liability to accredited professionals laying their careers on the line to investigate 9/11, and they are an embarrassment to 9/11 activists who hit the streets in an effort to wake up the masses. Don't play dumb, unless of course, you are paid to play dumb. In which case, no amount of proof or shame will snap you out of it.

What is striking about the proponents of the above fraud, is their zeal in the face of the obvious. No matter how much proof you throw at the diehards, it won't change their brains by one synapse.

The aggressive promotion of the Fakers is matched only by the devotees of "Directed Energy Weapons" as the cause of the destruction of the Twin Towers.

There are many problems with the DEW idea... it shouldn't actually be called a scientific hypothesis or theory. You have to be able to TEST a scientific hypothesis or theory, but you cannot test a system that you cannot even properly identify. It's an idea about how the Towers were demolished. Just an idea.

Physicist Greg Jenkins has written extensively about the improbability of DEW on 9/11 at the Journal of 9/11 Studies;

Solving The Great Steel Caper: DEW-Demolition Contrary Evidence

Supplemental: DEW-Demolition Contrary Evidence

The Overwhelming Implausibility of Using Directed Energy Beams to Demolish the World Trade Center

INTERVIEW WITH DR. JUDY WOOD AND DR. GREG JENKINS**

Jenkins is also joined by Frank Legge;

"A study of some issues raised in a paper by Wood & Reynolds"

The majority of Jenkins' work has been in the public domain since October of 2007 at the latest. It utterly deconstructs the viability of the idea of DEW on 9/11.

Since then, the so-called Hutchison Effect has been rolled out as evidence of DEW on 9/11. There is a kind of relation. Both Hutchison and the video fakers rely on dodgy video clips to make their points. If Hutchison has been "creative" with his video footage, can the same be said of the anomalous footage of the fakers? It would certainly explain a lot. It is of course possible that some bored technician at Langley is throwing bogus footage out there for the Fakers to "discover", but either way, it's bad business.

In the face of the strong arguments against DEW on 9/11, the DEW proponents only plow ahead, indifferent to reason. So very similar to the proponents of video fakery.

What has support of this idea by a handful of people done for 9/11 Truth? By far (to date) the most damaging thing has been that Morgan Reynolds and Judy Wood attempted to take their ideas to court. United States District Judge George B. Daniels dismissed their complaints, with prejudice;

"Plaintiffs claim that a terrorist attack was not responsible for the destruction of the World Trade Center complex (“WTC”). According to plaintiffs, the evidence demonstrates that the destruction of the World Trade Center Towers was caused by a United States secret military “directed energy weapon.” Plaintiffs’ attorney argues that “the defendants knowingly participated in the fraud of furthering the false claim that two wide-body jetliners hit the World Trade Center on 9/11/01.”
...

"All defendants ... moved to dismiss the lawsuits as being frivolous, and for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1) and (6), respectively. The motions to dismiss are granted and all three complaints are dismissed with prejudice."

"Plaintiffs maintain that the alleged fraudulent nature of the investigation has furthered the deception, perpetrated upon the masses, that the WTC was demolished as a result of terrorists plowing two commercial airplanes, filled with thousand of gallons of jet fuel, directly into the Twin Towers at a high rate of speed. They claim that, through the employment of psychological operations, millions were deceived into believing that the destruction was caused by a terrorist hijacking that murdered thousands of innocent people inside. Plaintiffs theorize that what actually occurred was that the Twin Towers disintegrated after being struck by the United States military’s secret laser-like weaponry. All three plaintiffs [The third plaintiff is Ed Haas. -rep.] explain that these “directed energy weapons” “are operational in Earth[’s] orbit, at high altitude, low altitude, at sea and on land, ranging in lethality from the capacity to do great damage such as that of destroying the World Trade Center Twin Towers in less than 10 seconds each, as occurred on 9/11/01, down to and including imposition of a disabling stun on human beings for crowd control and/or other psy ops [psychological operations] purposes.”

"Plaintiffs, understandably, offer nothing more than conjecture and supposition to support their claim that the towers were struck by high powered energy beams. Their personal hypothesis about what should be concluded from publicly disclosed information does not qualify either of them as an original source of information in order to sustain an individual FCA claim on behalf of the Government."

"Plaintiffs’ theories about the cause of the 9/11 disaster completely fail to state a cognizable claim for relief."

"Plaintiffs merely allege the existence of a nefarious conspiracy of epic proportion. They name all defendants as coconspirators. They therefore conclude that all defendants’ work records and the services they performed are fraudulent because they are tainted by the illegal conspiracy in which they participated. Such generalized attempts at fraud pleading fail to meet the requirements of Rule 9(b). See, United States ex rel. Joshi v. St. Luke’s Hosp., Inc., 441 F.3d 552, 556-57 (8th Cir. 2006)"

The above is extracted from Judge Daniels' dismissal.

This is the bitter fruit harvested by supporting this nonsense.

Now, all of these defendants;

APPLIED RESEARCH ASSOCIATES, INC.; SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORP.; BOEING; NuSTATS; COMPUTER AIDED ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC.; DATASOURCE, INC.; GEOSTAATS, INC.; GILSANZ MURRAY STEFICEK LLP; HUGHES ASSOCIATES, INC.; AJMAL ABBASI; EDUARDO KAUSEL; DAVID PARKS; DAVID SHARP; DANIELE VENEZANO; JOSEF VAN DYCK; KASPAR WILLIAM; ROLF JENSEN & ASSOCIATES, INC.; ROSENWASSER/GROSSMAN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, P.C.; SIMPSON GUMPERTZ & HEGER, INC.; S.K. GHOSH ASSOCIATES, INC.; SKIDMORE, OWING & MERRILL, LLP; TENG & ASSOCIATES, INC.; UNDERWRITERS LABORATORIES, INC.; WISS, JANNEY, ELSTNER ASSOCIATES, INC.; AMERICAN AIRLINES; SILVERSTEIN PROPERTIES; and UNITED AIRLINES.

...have this dismissal to point to the next time some 9/11 Truth activists come calling in a New York District Court with a legal complaint alleging that something other than airplanes took down the Towers.

It's shameful.

If you are promoting this nonsense, you are no friend of the truth. If you give a platform for this nonsense, you are no friend of the truth. This site will not support you.

Finally, on a different track, there is the phenomenon of "Suddenly Blossoming Holocaust Truther" (SBHT) syndrome. Truthers who don't talk of their obsession with proving that the holocaust of WWII is a "hoax", until AFTER they have wormed their way into your community. The most clear cut example of this is of course Eric Hufschmid. (Jim Hoffman's 911review.com tells the basic tale here.)***

The general pattern is as follows, the "Holocaust Truther" makes friends and allies within your 9/11 community, even publishes a great book or video, (in Hufschmid's case, both a book and a video), and after a period of time (after the work of the Holocaust Truther has been disseminated and quoted widely) the real Truther is revealed.

What is one of the most popular 9/11 Truth videos on the street right now?

Arguably, Sofia Shafquat's "911 Mysteries".

Sofia Shafquat is currently selling "The Ernst Zundel Story" at her online store.

I repeat; One of the highest profile 9/11 Truth websites is selling an Ernst Zundel documentary. This has been going on for months.

When you consider the attention that the Simon Wiesenthal Center has paid to the 9/11 Truth movement, and AE911Truth.org in particular, you have to seriously consider the intentions of such a move.

Is Sofia Shafquat giving us a head's up about her future research?

Her store also distributes The Science and Politics of 9/11 - 2007 Conference DVD, which documents a conference in Madison, Wisconsin conducted late last summer (2007) that promoted the disinformation of the Fakers, and the non-hypothesis of DEW.

When the Financial Times of London did its first major piece on the 9/11 Truth movement, it zeroed in on the Madison conference as a wellspring of hit-piece source material;

...Fetzer was off to that seat of academic respectability, Yale University. To prepare for our meeting, I watched a DVD of a 9/11 symposium he held in his new hometown of Madison, Wisconsin last year. The star of this show was Alfred Lambremont Webre, a judge on former Malaysian prime minister Mahathir Mohamad’s alternative international War Crimes Tribunal in Kuala Lumpur and co-author of the Space Preservation Treaty. He delivers what might be the most momentous opening line in the history of town hall seminars. “Fellow Citizens... 9/11 was a false flag operation by an international war crimes racketeering organisation to provide a pretext to engage in a genocidal and ecocidal depleted uranium bombing of central Asia, Afghanistan and Iraq in order to secure vast oil and uranium reserves; to roll out a terror-based national security state system worldwide and ... to implement the final stages of a world depopulation policy.” There are two more “false flag” operations in the pipeline, he says. The first is the war against asteroids, the second the “war against the evil aliens”.

Hearing this, you either experience the thrill of revelation or the sinking feeling that the person you are listening to is having some kind of breakdown. Within 30 minutes, Webre has folded into the 9/11 plot the Skull & Bones society at Yale University – or the “Brotherhood of Death”, as he calls it – neocon think-thank the Council on Foreign Relations, the Rothschilds, the Queen and the City of London. I wondered how all these conspiracies could be maintained without the whole conceit unravelling.

The answer, of course, is that there is only one conspiracy. Pearl Harbour, the moon landing, JFK, 9/11, the Illuminati, the Black Helicopters, Skull & Bones, chemtrails: all faces of the same demon. The plot goes all the way to the top, and all the way back in time. You could come to believe that it involves everyone except yourself – at which point it’s all over for you. And as I listened, I just waited for him to say the Word. And, inevitably, Webre brought it all back to the “international neo-Zionist organisation”.

I asked Fetzer about this as we sat in a cafe across from Yale, home of the Brotherhood of Death: how did he keep his scholars on message? “It’s obvious to me that you have to consider all the possible alternatives,” he says. “You can’t exclude any, lest, as you proceed in your investigation and eliminate hypotheses, you eliminate the true hypothesis because you’ve never allowed it to be considered.”

Yes, you CAN exclude some. The most improbable, the most unlikely, the impossible, the absurd ... grossly obvious disinformation, you CAN exclude this nonsense from your 9/11 horizons.

You can also exclude the proponents and promoters of this nonsense, because they only poison the well of 9/11 Truth.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

* Independent researcher Aidan Monaghan has been having an extremely difficult time even finding out if normal aircrash protocols were followed by the NTSB or FBI which would have verified the plane parts as the specified 9/11 hijacks. His effort continues.

** Greg Jenkins and Arabesque

*** Lots of worthwhile material relating to the topic(s) at hand at Hoffman's site: http://911review.com/infowars.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Further reading:

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

Rebuttal of Ace Baker's "Chopper 5 Composite" Analysis by Eric Salter

Interpreting the Boeing-767 Deceleration During Impact with the WTC Tower: Center of Mass Versus Tail-end Motion, and Instantaneous Versus Average Velocity by Gregory S. Jenkins, PhD

Three Amigos - Reynolds, Wood and Fetzer’s assault on 9/11 Truth by Jeremy Baker

Arabesque's blog.

Michael Wolsey's Special Report on COINTELPRO.

Related video:

William Schaap's expert testimony on the history of disinformation:
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=BA69081DC9C0AE84

Thanks to...

Xenomorph, 911Veritas and arie for video advice.

And Graeme MacQueen for collating the First Responder testimony.

Sorry this took so long.

Reprehensor

.....I've never noticed this web site promoting such stupid ideas as no planes. (Excluding what hit the pentagon) To stand behind the plain and simple fact of our justifiable unanswered questions, and our governments unwillingness to answer them should be enough in itself.
I don't like speculation, however i am not opposed to those who ask ....What if?
Maybe it would be a good idea to have a permanent post here at 9/11Blogger stating what we here believe.

this website hasn't promoted the 'stupid ideas'

but some of the posters have: http://www.911blogger.com/node/10283
"Please register NOW and come to Madison to join the cutting edge of the movement to save our planet:"
http://twilightpines.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=104&I...

Fortunately, that kind of garbage isn't allowed here anymore.

The Eleventh Day of Every Month

Thanks for Posting this Rep.

Almost a year ago I put together a newsletter on this topic. The opening paragraph reads:

Dear Friends,

This month I am sending out a big THANK YOU to all the researchers and activists who have contributed so much in their self-less time and energy toward bringing the light of truth to bear on the 9-11 cover-up. Our numbers continue to grow and our influence is being more and more felt across our nation as ordinary folks begin to think the unthinkable; that 9-11 was orchestrated by rogue elements within the highest levels of our own government in order to bring about a police state here in America and to wage endless, perpetual war on a new and faceless boogie man. Make no mistake about it, we are having an effect. There are many indications that tell us this is true.

One clue to support this assertion is the number of hit pieces produced for the mainstream media which attempt to "debunk" the 9-11 Movement. Millions of dollars have been spent to counter all of our work and we should be proud knowing that none of this would have been necessary for the powers that be were it not for our work in bringing light to truth.

Other clues are out there but are more difficult to see and sort out. These clues revolve around the fact that our movement has been infiltrated at all levels by what appears to be an organized and orchestrated effort to discredit us and our work. This sort of tactic is really nothing new when it comes to our corrupt government. In fact, crimes against the Constitution by the tax payer funded intelligence agencies of America have been well documented in our country's recent history.

We would all be extremely naive if we fail to recognize that those responsible for 9-11 will spare no expense to keep the truth about what really happened on September 11th, 2001 from ever being revealed, for when that happens, they know their jig is up. As 9-11 activists, we all need to learn about the tactics and methods which are being used against us. Disinformation, misinformation, and outright attacks on hard working 9-11 and peace activists are all being used RIGHT NOW in order to discredit us, divide us, destroy our work, and eventually conquer us. We must not let this happen or we risk losing everything; our country, our lives, and our future as a free people.

In order to secure the success of our efforts, we must first become aware of, and then take the necessary steps to ensure that you are not unwittingly participating in the campaign against us. Disinformation quickly spreads as misinformation by well meaning and good people. Once you learn what disinformation is and the effect it has on any movement, you can identify it, and then remove it from your talking points, film screenings, and public meetings. This does not make you a gatekeeper! It makes you a careful and thoughtful activist who researches what he/she presents as "9-11 Truth". A campaign of education is absolutely necessary and we must all actively work to educate others about these efforts to discredit and divide us.

With that said, the bulk of this month's newsletter is devoted to education about what COINTELPRO is, its manifestations, and how we can nullify its effects. In early 2007, I recognized this need when I produced a short series of programs which became my Special Report on COINTELPRO. This series is even more relevant today. That can also be said about the links to the important information throughout this month's newsletter. With our eyes wide open, and with help from each other, we can disrupt the disruption.

Thank you.
Michael Wolsey

These statements are as true today as they were when I wrote them. Please see this, and a collection of disinformation and COINTELPRO related information by checking out our October 2007 Newsletter and pass the link around to your friends and colleagues.

http://www.visibility911.com/newsletter/2007-10/index.html

We must educate ourselves, and then others in order to effectively counter the disinformation program we are all targets of.

Much has been made of...

... the screen going black for a second or so in the helicopter shot right when the second plane hits. What would be the non-TV fakery explanation?

TV Signal Disruption caused

TV Signal Disruption caused by plane impact.

Communication breakdown on NYC-TV networks due to signal loss from WTC1 antenna mast : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communication_during_the_September_11,_2001...
http://www.fybush.com/wtc-recovery.html
http://www.necrat.com/NYCTV.html
There's more articles like this, but I can't find them off hand.

Thanks, that sounds reasonable

The broadcasting tower was the North Tower, right? So the South Tower impact somehow momentarily disrupted the signal?

september clues debunked

perhaps the same thing that

perhaps the same thing that makes the burger king sign flicker in the evan fairbanks footage, an electro magnetic pulse of some kind? Generator or transformers blowing up in the tower? Helicopters transmit their signal through a radio connection. If it could make the lights flicker it could make the connection drop for a second i guess.



___________________________________________________________
Please watch my movie: The Third Tower

Disinformation

9/11 Disinformation and Misinformation: Definitions and Examples

9/11 Truth and Division: Disinformation, Agent Provocateurs, and False Adversaries

"One of the telling signs of many disinformation artists (who may or may not be gainfully employed by some ‘shadowy government agency’) is that a lot of their claims are simply too strong to be true…

I am not suggesting that any of them works for the NSA, the CIA, or the FBI. That creates an exaggerated version of the situation as I see it that makes it easy to satirize. I have no idea why they are doing what they are doing. But there are ample grounds based upon past experience to believe they are abusing logic and language to mislead and deceive others about the state of research... On the basis of my experience with them, I believe this is deliberate. Their function appears to me to be obfuscation... There is a serious disinformation movement afoot, one that finds the work of those they attack to be too good to ignore. Disinformation… is the major obstacle to the search for truth about the death of JFK.” Jim Fetzer

Jim Fetzer: "When I discovered a scientist of the caliber of Judy Wood... [long pause--gets emotional] that I've spent so much time seeking to open minds. To broaden the imagination, to consider alternatives that one might prefer were not the case... [voice hoarse] And I'll say today... when it comes to the study of this video fakery, you've seen a brilliant, scientific objective analysis from this man... Ace Baker. ...I say that between the breath of study provided by September Clues and... Ace Baker, that there's a prima facie case that has to be overwhelmed by superior evidence if it can be produced--not only of the existence of video fakery, but the overwhelming probability to manage events... the whole thing through the media without planes--I'm telling you the evidence is growing... you have to take this seriously... we're down the rabbit hole. This whole thing has been a massive deception... it's objective and provable! ...we had Morgan Reynolds whose been pilloried like practically no one else has been pilloried for even advancing the idea that there's no planes... by God... we could listen to a patient explanation of what really happened in terms of methodical analysis of actual footage... and the point was proven! And it was brilliant! And you were here! You were here! "

"Jim Fetzer: I must say I think we’re finding out Judy, what happened on 9/11. I’m just blown away by your work. This is the most fascinating development in the history of the study of 9/11… I’m going to make a wild guess Judy; I’m going to presume that these [directed energy] beams had to be located in Building 7?

Judy Wood: Nope. I don’t think so.

Fetzer: Planes?

Judy Wood: No… I think it’s very likely it’s in orbit.

Fetzer: “Oh Really?? Oh ho ho ho ho! Oh Judy. Oh my, oh my, oh my. This is huge… this is huge Judy.
_______________
A 9/11/2008 Resolution: Start Your Own 9/11 Blog

In my opinion, the biggest

[below viewing threshold, show/hide comment]

Full disclosure:

Full disclosure: The man who is saying this is the PR manager for Kevin Barrett who endorses and frequently promotes many of the people who endorse DEW and TV fakery. In fact, Barrett is part of the "dynamic duo" with Jim Fetzer.

Barrett's PR representative: "Arabesque, the entire Barrett Campaign appreciates your great work for the Truth"
http://arabesque911.blogspot.com/2008/08/barretts-pr-representative-arab...
_______________
A 9/11/2008 Resolution: Start Your Own 9/11 Blog

Dialogue Concerning the Two

[below viewing threshold, show/hide comment]

This is PR "spin"


Kevin Barrett:

I would urge people to go take a look at this material… 'I think we don't really need any kind of unanimity from researchers… I don't think this is doing any permanent harm to the 9/11 movement… 'I think people who are blowing it up into something really huge are either sort of panicking or just making a tactical mistake… [the perpetrators] would have taken advantage of the most advanced technologies of deception and demolition, and in fact they would have arranged it in such a way that anyone who figured out exactly what happened and described it accurately would sound completely insane… So, I wouldn’t rule out anything and I think we need to allow researchers to pursue their own path…”

"Barrett has supported 9/11 disinformation conferences such as The Science and the Politics of 9/11: What's Controversial, What's Not?[1] On 911blogger Barrett promoted this conference with the plea to “Join the cutting edge of the movement to save our planet.”

"“‘Many participants lamented the phenomenon of "internet lynch mobs" comprised of angry emailers and bloggers demanding that this or that researcher be banished for heresy. Often these internet lynch mobs are made up of people who have not carefully studied the research issues that they so confidently pronounce on. Barrett urged those who find controversial research issues a distraction from 9/11 activism to either study those issues with an open mind, or ignore them and focus on activism. The worst thing to do is waste time and energy on fruitless infighting.’”

“I guess I’ll have to take this possibility more seriously now… In the past, I have assumed video fakery was far-fetched and that anyone who endorsed it was probably a crackpot! Now I’m not so sure.”
http://arabesque911.blogspot.com/2008/03/kevin-barrett.html
_______________
A 9/11/2008 Resolution: Start Your Own 9/11 Blog

Arabesque; that interview

[below viewing threshold, show/hide comment]

Into the "memory hole" we go

"There is nothing on this website about TV fakery or DEW. Nor has there ever been a press release about it and I write the press releases. Nor has Barrett ever done a single campaign media interview about DEW or TV fakery."

And when anyone does an internet search, they find out that he was promoting this nonsense less than a year ago. What is your point exactly? That if I start claiming tomorrow that DEW did indeed blow up the WTC towers, all of my past writings on this subject no longer exist? I never wrote them? This is like saying I could start a campaign as an ex-serial killer on the premise that I no longer do these things. Hey look, I never murdered anyone last year, so now I'm ok, right? This would be funny if Kevin Barrett didn't go around calling for the mass murder of journalists who disagree with him. Of course, he has no problem with being civil to people like Jim Fetzer and Morgan Reynolds.

"The way I study [social interaction] is through dialog... I think we could use a little more conviviality within the Truth movement... one reason for that is that we want people to join us... by reaching out to them in a conviviality way... people will come on board... I think we need to enjoy dialog including with people that we don't agree with... [especially] non-9/11 truth people... I want dialog with [people who support the official story]—dialog is good... this is the key to the politics that we need to practice..."
http://arabesque911.blogspot.com/2008/03/kevin-barrett.html

"MUJCA.com is apparently mostly the work Kevin Barrett. Before August 2007, 9-11 Research expressed concerns about Barrett's apparent sympathy with Holocaust deniers, based on previously published conversations with the OilEmpire.us webmaster archived here. However, we removed quotations from that conversation after Barrett wrote to us to express his belief that our excerpt of it was libelous. Barrett's public statements suggestive of violence are in stark contrast with 9-11 Research's policy stressing civility, verifiable information, and rational analysis. In 2007 Barrett's support for 9/11 junk science presented as 9/11 Truth typified by postings on James Fetzer's website became increasingly obvious."
http://911research.wtc7.net/resources/web/activism.html
_______________
A 9/11/2008 Resolution: Start Your Own 9/11 Blog

I think you're pushing it a bit

I was with this thread 110% until I got to this. Though I like Kevin Barrett, personally, like you I have always been skeptical of some of his extreme tactics and his association with Fetzer, who is out-of-control. But this particular YouTube clip is not offensive to me at all (albeit I think Paula Gloria is a loon). One of the primary objectives of disinfo is to "distract" and create chaos. What has been pointed out here in a number of ways is that disinfo artists mix in a lot of truth, so that it can be discredited later when s/he becomes an outcast -- throwing the baby out with the bathwater, as the old saying goes. I have to agree with Kevin that if you have a problem with a particular point of research, the best thing to do is ignore it. Attacking it accomplishes nothing. Disinfo artists want to be attacked. Their goal is to suck up your time and energy and get you off of the track you're on. Case in point: if you have a problem with directed energy weapons and are sure it was thermite that was used to bring down the towers, do waste you're time proving the DEW theory wrong. Spend it proving the thermite theory correct, god know Jones, Ryan, Gage, et. al. are overwhelmed and can use all the help they can get. And why do we all love Steven Jones? It's not just because he is a soft-spoken nice guy with some crucial evidence. It's also because he has identified his personal contribution, puts his heart and soul into his work, and ignores everything else. It's the perfect model and we would all do well in taking a hard look at it.

The 911 truth movement, like any advocacy group, is vulnerable to harm, intentional or otherwise. That's just a fact of human nature. I think the final judgment on Barrett is still to be determined. If he is a genuine truther, he will agree with this thread, unequivocally, because the points raised here are among some of the most important considerations we need to be dealing with today. I'd like to add that not only are the points you've raised "required reading" and spot on with regard to keeping our message pure and solid, but the timing, as well, was impeccable, especially given the high profile 911truth is and will be getting vis-a-vis the WTC7 report. So thank you Rep. for being alert.

Thank you, 911 peacenik

[below viewing threshold, show/hide comment]

Quoting the words of someone is not an attack

"Reprehensor and Arabesque seem to be doing the work for the disinfo perps! They are sewing discord. Arabesque seems to be making it personal."

Quoting the words of someone is not an attack. You are conflating critique with ad hominem which is a classic technique of people who want to inject nonsense into 9/11 discussion. And your accusation by the way, is calculated to cause disruption. I am not going to be impressed by any accusations or attacks that you will make against me. You should have learned that by now.

"9/11 activists should be wary of any and all accusations that are not readily supported by credible evidence, facts, or documentation. Ultimately, false and misleading accusations create divisiveness and encourage hostility... to create an environment of mistrust, suspicion, and divisiveness."
http://arabesque911.blogspot.com/2007/10/911-truth-and-division-disinfor...

"Strange" how Barrett can call me a COINTELPRO operative or 911blogger "islamophobic" and this is not considered an attack. How is this not, in your words "sewing discord". It looks you have a biased perspective.

Kevin Barrett and his PR Manager Slander 911blogger, Truthaction, and 9/11 Activists
http://arabesque911.blogspot.com/2008/08/kevin-barrett-and-his-pr-manage...

Jim Hoffman “[to] be successful [the] '9/11 community needs to create a culture conducive to critique… Yet… Abusers are tolerated… Rational critique is discouraged and reframed as… censorship… divisiveness… [and] infighting.

Jim Hoffman: “If people are going to inject racism or ad hominem attacks and disruption—why do we waste our time opening our forums to people who do that? There should be these basic guidelines, norms that we follow, and I’ve seen so much resistance to establishing that kind of environment from some of the leaders of the movement. [It’s essential to have a] civil environment in which we can [critique each other] and show that 9/11 was an inside job… the nature of this 9/11 cover-up is—to inject nonsense into the investigation, surround our valid analysis of the attack that can be used in straw-man attacks in the Media, and to create this culture within the movement that is hostile to critique. Our challenge is to create a culture that has these guidelines that doesn’t accept this over-the-line, outrageous [behavior]. What people are making excuses for it, and what people are pointing it out? Maybe that’s a better indicator of who should be recognized as who is really contributing to this movement... You see people who are making the worst kind of ad-hominems, conflating ad-hominem with critique. That’s a key tactic to shut-up the kind of critique we need to really hone our case. [Pretending that] there’s no such thing as critique, to disagree or to discuss something—[claiming criticism without ad-hominem is] all attack—it’s ridiculous. ”
http://arabesque911.blogspot.com/2007/10/911-truth-and-division-disinfor...

I guess I'm a very "divisive" guy. Quoting the words of someone has led some to accusing me of being an agent. If I keep embarrassing these people by quoting their words, they should stop saying these things, don't you think? Some people actually consider it an "attack" to report what someone else is saying. This is like saying that CNN is attacking Georgia when they report attacks against Russia.
_______________
A 9/11/2008 Resolution: Start Your Own 9/11 Blog

Ironic, this....

"Reprehensor and Arabesque seem to be doing the work for the disinfo perps! They are sewing discord. Arabesque seems to be making it personal."

Considering that Kevin Barrett's associates have a history of unethical and legally questionable behavior, all with the intent of making it "personal":

Fetzer: violation trust and confidentiality of an email list
related--violations of privacy
Tarpley: slander and defamation against both peace and truth activists during the KW hoax
Captain May: slander against anyone who points out May's numerology bollox and antisemite leanings.
Tolerance of Paula Gloria, Nico and others who act like agent provocateurs and should by all rights be up on assault charges.

All of the above: demands to "hunt people down" who don't agree with them, a la the Larocuhe play book they know so well. A play book that has historically left dead bodies.

You're taking a stand? To support people who slander, defame, and assault? Please. This is a stand:

THIS IS NOT ALL ABOUT PLANES AND PARTS AND THEORIES--ITS ALSO ABOUT DECENCY

It took the nasty behavior of the ZIHOP wankers--Kev's new best mates-- to make me see what others have seen for sometime---there is a group of people whose ONLY interest is trying to stir up bad feeling and bollox. How can you recognize them? They're doing this: "looking for an excuse to attack people who you disagree with."

And this is the kicker-- they are not all no planers. And contrary to one uber wanker, I do not "hate noplaners", I hate the unethical behavior key "noplaners" have historically engaged in, now being joined by "jewmoonhoax.com", definitely NOT a noplane site.

They want us to fight, true. But the answer IS NOT the big tent. The Big Tent feeds and encourages the excuses to attack people as if they were part of the 911 op. HELLO--it is not the people you disagree with who are the enemy. It is the people in the Bush administration and cohorts who are responsible for 911 who are your enemy.

I have a dream this 9/11 anniversary for the fighting to stop. For the no-planer "war" to end. Whatever you believe, "they" need us to fight over this bollox. But we don't have to. Its not necessary to "fight" over theories to demand a new investigation. Its not necessary to "fight" to go on with your research or speculation. But the "fights" are necessary to sow bad feeling and waste energy in these online skirmishes.

We don't need a Big Tent-- we need a Big Fence. A mutual agreement that, what ever we believe we need to do, we keep it to the appropriate forums and if we do decide to venture out, we respect the differing goals of those forums, and choose to agree to disagree INSTEAD of making it a personal unproductive fight with a fellow private person who has done us no harm.

And then the disruptors on all sides will expose themselves for what they are by their consistent misbehavior. See, they CAN'T NOT FIGHT--they can't live and let live. It's their job to sow discord.

Only the bastards want to keep it personal. This is the subject of a much longer an ambitious blog--stay tuned...

"Even in the darkness every color can be found..."

(To whom it may concern---I'm unblocking your email address. I think you're smart enough to know by now I'm not the enemy. Ready to make history?)
______________________________________
http://coljennysparks.blogspot.com/
http://truthaction.org/forum/
http://www.911blacklist.org/

Well Said!

"Spend it proving the thermite theory correct, god know Jones, Ryan, Gage, et. al. are overwhelmed and can use all the help they can get. And why do we all love Steven Jones? It's not just because he is a soft-spoken nice guy with some crucial evidence. It's also because he has identified his personal contribution, puts his heart and soul into his work, and ignores everything else. It's the perfect model and we would all do well in taking a hard look at it."

I completely agree with your above statement. It is much more fruitful. You can not (and never will) be able to control what others do. Focus, concentrate, and harness your energy on gathering evidence for what you think are the most reasonable hypotheses.

While I do not always agree with Kevin Barrett, I think he is a good guy and definitely not a disinfo agent. I enjoy listening to his radio show, especially when he has guests like David Ray Griffin (beginning of this month). He also had Kevin Ryan on his show for two hours a couple weeks back, which was informative (KR mentioned he is in the process of making some nanothermite).

irrelevant

>>While I do not always agree with Kevin Barrett, I think he is a good guy and definitely not a disinfo agent.

That's irrelevant, sorry to say. The best agent would know how to make you believe he's a good guy, regardless of what KB is or isn't. The issue is what the facts are, not who a buddy or a nice guy is.

Protecting Jim Fetzer when the *entire* movement had rejected him was like a sinkhole in the middle of our movement, providing a fastrack path to Fetzer sucking in newbies and pouring garbage into their brains. How "nice" or "good" the person appears who does that is irrelevant to why they need to be exposed and sidelined.

Well, you are entitled to

Well, you are entitled to your opinion about KB.
I said that I think he is a good guy *and* not a disinfo agent. I did not say he is not a disinfo agent *because* he is a good guy. Those are two different statements with two different meanings.

"providing a fastrack path to Fetzer sucking in newbies and pouring garbage into their brains. How "nice" or "good" the person appears who does that is irrelevant to why they need to be exposed and sidelined."

You give "newbies" too little credit. What makes you think people can't figure out things on their own? Fetzer will do what he does, others will do what they do. You cannot control the decisions people make, or shield them from what you think is bad, they will need to make up their minds on their own. Truth stands distinct from error.

If your goal is really to sideline Barrett, then I think you would be best to spread that message to all those who appear on his radio shows, including David Ray Griffin, Paul Zarembka, Kevin Ryan, Richard Gage, etc...
If the above mentioned figures do not comply with the cease and desist order, you may wish to start exposing and sidelining them as well.

peace

irrelevant

"Irrelevant" is what this thread has become. I see my comment has been knocked down a few points, and I'm with the extreme minority. That's fitting, since being in the minority is exactly where I want to be with regard to the diarrhea of the mouth going on here. And "below the viewing threshold" is now where 911Blogger is being place in my bookmarks.

later.

Let me cut through it, luv....

"While I do not always agree with Kevin Barrett, I think he is a good guy"

Good people don't let their mates do these things without speaking up--

"Considering that Kevin Barrett's associates have a history of unethical and legally questionable behavior, all with the intent of making it "personal":

Fetzer: violation trust and confidentiality of an email list
related--violations of privacy
Tarpley: slander and defamation against both peace and truth activists during the KW hoax
Captain May: slander against anyone who points out May's numerology bollox and antisemite leanings.
Tolerance of Paula Gloria, Nico and others who act like agent provocateurs and should by all rights be up on assault charges."
______________________________________
http://coljennysparks.blogspot.com/
http://truthaction.org/forum/
http://www.911blacklist.org/

Wisconsin Public Radio

I posted it here and it was removed although it had been voted up and I was thanked by several other commenters.

Really pissed me off . . . didn't expect "gatekeeper" activity here.

Kevin Barrett has no "PR Manager'. I think that's fairly evident. Perhaps he could use one.

I listen to Barrett because he is on my list of "truth" radio programs. He has been distancing himself from Jim Fetzer and although they share a radio show on GCN, they don't appear together. That being said, no one has proven that Jim Fetzer has hurt the 9/11 Truth movement.

This whole thread has a disinfo quality to it. I believe that the owners of this site have personal issues with Kevin.

I really would like to see some evidence that Kevin is anything other than what he presents himself to be. Just associating him with Jim Fetzer is witch trial stuff.

Aidan Monaghan

is on Kevin Barrett's program today - is Aidan a disinfo agent? I wish I could post the interview here . . its a great interview and Kevin promotes this site.

I've been posting audio here for years. Am I disinfo for posting an interview with Kevin Barrett and Aidan Monaghan.

Is Richard Gage disinfo because he had Kevin introduce him here in Chicago a few weeks ago?

Thanks Aidan...

I guess I'm dis-info too because I put something of yours up on MY site a week ago. Damn, and all this time I thought I was doing something helpful.

We can't mention questions about a plane not hitting the Pentagon. Until recently, some people around here didn't want us talking about Building 7 because it was too easily "debunked". I guess the laugh riot of the NIST report on Building 7 put an end to that...

I would simply suggest putting the best info out there that we can. I have never been into the moronic "no planes hit the towers" crap or the ray-beams from space stupidity. The way I've always seen it, if someone is stupid enough to follow that crap, let 'em. We don't need them if they are that stupid.

Kind of like one of those signs at the carnival ride: If you are not at least "THIS SMART..." you cannot go on this ride.

Just For The Record

The "No Planes" and "Directed Energy Weapons" theories have been generated in my view by people wishing to bring ridicule upon the 9/11 skeptics community.

These theories have no basis in reality.

"is Aidan a disinfo agent?"

"is on Kevin Barrett's program today - is Aidan a disinfo agent? I wish I could post the interview here . . its a great interview and Kevin promotes this site."

What you say is really interesting because I don't remember calling Mr. Barrett a disinfo agent anywhere in this thread. Would you care to point out where I said this? Where Reprehensor said this?

You can't because we didn't. There is a difference between critiquing the actions of someone and making unprovable allegations. If I have opinions about the personal integrity of someone in the 9/11 movement, I prefer to keep it to myself because having a discussion about opinions is a waste of our time.

This should be common sense, but because you are insinuating otherwise, I'll explain. Simply because one falls for discrediting information, it does not make one an agent. The RELEVANT issue is that discrediting information is discrediting information regardless of intent. If you can understand this, you can understand the basis for this thread.

Put another way: promoting TV fakery discredits the 9/11 truth movement regardless of whether you are doing this intentionally or not. That is the issue here, and that is what we should be focusing on.

Do you call a news organization a "gatekeeper" when they do not promote space beams and TV fakery? What I find noteworthy is the amount of attacks that actually come from Mr. Barrett and his supporters, not the other way around. Criticizing someone for advocating TV fakery or DEW is not the same as calling them an agent, and for this reason your criticism is off the mark.

Calling this a personal issue between Mr. Barrett and Reprehensor is also off the mark. I'll leave my final remarks for the director of the Libertarian Party:

"Note that even prominent people within the 9/11 Truth movement itself are reporting these quotes and claiming that Barrett discredits their efforts. From the references you can also see that there’s a community of people out there who are watching and listening to Barrett’s every word. When he says this junk in the future as a Libertarian candidate, every one of these people will have reason to link these noxious sentiments to our party."
http://lastfreevoice.wordpress.com/2008/06/26/barrett-asks-for-haugh-res...
_______________
A 9/11/2008 Resolution: Start Your Own 9/11 Blog