"Jon Gold, you still can't show us any evidence. Why can't you admit that you have no evidence, Jon?"

(I trust that the fine Mr. Gold will not mind that I used his populist name in this example quote from one of our more frequent and beloved anonymous posters here at 911blogger. You'll let me know otherwise, won't you Jon? : ) )

The tampering, removal and/or destruction of evidence (beyond the immediacy of saving lives), can be considered a crime in itself as it delays, hinders or outright prevents the apprehension of the perpetrator of the first crime. Thus, the quite logical deduction that willful destruction of evidence is often considered proof itself of culpability in the first crime as well. You disagree, Anonymous?

Deduction, is therefore a valid tool for the investigator to use when searching for a perpetrator who would have very good reason to attempt covering up his tracks. No?

If nothing offered to-date explains the [near] symmetrical, [near] free-fall collapse of WTC 7 better than fast-acting incendiaries and/or explosives... then this strong evidence of incendiaries/explosives MUST be considered when nether physical evidence remains (destroyed), and nothing else explains the facts better. It is not the nature of generator fuel, nor office supplies and equipment to produce the effects as witnessed by so many. Do you find fault with this position, Anonymous? If so, please offer an explanation or source of uniform heating needed to produce the [near] symmetrical and almost-speed-of-gravity collapse of WTC 7.

For most people (at least those not dizzy with war-fever nor scarred into great fearfulness about swarthy malcontents hiding under every bed)... a raging uncontrolled fire (with the firemen all safely pulled out) will progress through predictable and repeatable stages, as large sections of structure are ablaze with great leaping flames, while sporadic and uneven chunks of building fall away, crumble and topple over the sides. This asymmetrical (uneven and random) deterioration of a burning building MUST progress through the course of at least several hours, if not literal DAYS. WTF is this silliness about debris falling from adjacent buildings, damaging corners and sides, starting fires on unique or isolated floors... and yet that alone is somehow responsible for Global, Uniform, Fast-Acting Total Collapse .... within seconds?

Why are you such an "America-hating" ass, Anonymous? The crime of 9/11 could NOT have been possible without some form of complicity and involvement by trusted Civil Servants and/or their personal contacts in the paramilitary-criminal world. The destruction of evidence (impossible for the accused swarthy Evil-Do'ers to accomplish), the delaying of an investigation, and the Zelikow manipulation of the Kean Commission (again, something IMPOSSIBLE for a man reportedly "hiding in a cave" to further perpetrate), logically insists that untrustworthy civil servants have played some unsavory role in the unsolved crime of 9/11. Thus, some grouping (no matter how great or small their number) of Civil Servants must be considered Prime Suspects. People from around the globe have reached this simple conclusion on their own, with and without the aid of the internets' "propaganda spreading" features.

In order for justice to be served (that is ALL that most "9/11-nutters" want)... We the people continue to DEMAND that a transparent investigation be held, and presented in full view for the public to examine. The world has yet to deal with an issue such as this. The False-Flag "set-up", nor the psychological operation it stems from, has yet to be confronted in a court of law, nor even in the court of public opinion as the crime remains in effect and underway. Yet providence and desire for genuine lasting tranquility... implore all well meaning people to face such a nefarious situation (even if it's just pranksters quacking like a duck) with sober conviction in purpose, and for the betterment of the human condition.

Would you still disagree, Anonymous? Please explain yourself politely without shifting ground, as I have likewise offered to you in the polite, although pointed, words above.

Erin S. Myers

Hi Erin...

It's really very simple, and I've posted this for Anonymous on SEVERAL occasions, and quite franky, I've gotten tired of posting it.

On this site, 911Blogger.com, I have created more blogs than anyone else. Most of them are FILLED with pieces of evidence that indicate elements of our Government were complicit in the attacks.

On top of that, I have a website referred to as "The YBBS" that has a forum called, "The 9/11 Truther Forum." In that forum are 2000+ posts that contain so many pieces of evidence it's not even funny.

Keep in mind, I have WELL OVER 1,000,000 posts on the internet pertaining to 9/11 Truth. Too many pieces of evidence to count.

I can't help it if Anonymous doesn't know how to read.
___________________________________

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

And yet you are STILL not

And yet you are STILL not 100% convinced that the Twin Towers were brought down by Controlled Demolition.

That's strange.

When Professor Jones...

Debated Leslie Robertson, I sent him the following email.

Dr. Jones,

I think you did phenomenally during your debate with Leslie Robertson. Admittedly Professor Jones, I'm not a huge advocate of promoting Controlled Demolition. Please understand why. I'm not someone with your education. I'm just a simple guy trying to make a difference. When I talk to people about 9/11 Truth, I ask myself three questions. 1) Will this interest someone? 2) Will this bring someone into the movement? 3) Will this make me sound crazy? The reason for number 3 is because as I said, I'm not a Professor. Who am I to say that Controlled Demolition took place? I'm just a regular joe schmoe. That's not to say when asked about Controlled Demolition, I don't point them in your direction. As you know, I've collected almost every article about you. It just means that I know I'm not smart enough to talk about it.

Anyway, the free-fall discussion was incredible. You were very convincing. Also, the molten metal discussion. The other stuff was beyond me.

I think it's shameful the way Leslie ended the debate. I recently wrote about "Dishonoring The Families." You can read about it here...

http://www.911blogger.com/node/3177

Also, I don't know how familiar you are with the families, etc... but here is a massive collection I've gathered over time.

http://www.911blogger.com/node/2505

A long time ago, when I would post 9/11 Truth all over the internet, I used to follow up with a phrase. That phrase was "For The Families." Part of me still believes that today. Part of me believes with all of my heart that they deserve better than they got.

Don't let them use them against you.

Thanks for a very interesting debate.

Sincerely,

Jon

His response...

Thank you so much, Jon.

Steve
_________________________________

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Sometimes the truth just

Sometimes the truth just makes you sound crazy! Would you advocate that the earth if flat if that was what everyone else thought?
If people cannot perceive the truth, then there's little to do about the fact that they are morons!

That's my opinion anyway!

Dear Jon

Yes! It pisses me off that people say it offends the families.
In all reality those familes WANT & DESERVE the truth!

Jon knows I disagree with him on this.

Specifically, I think non-physicists can look at the videos and see that what is taking place is not "collapse," but an event involving much, much more energy, or "explosion." I think "controlled demolition" may be too narrow a technical term to be accurate, and it isn't my job to explain how it happened anyway.

My point, though, is that you can forget about beating Jon Gold over the head with controlled demolition theories. He has his reasons for not going there and I recommend you just get over it.

He's not?

Look Andrew... I'm not going to get into this with you. If you take away every piece of 9/11 related information promoted by Nico Haupt, and instead, look at his actions, I have every reason in the world to think that he is either an "agent" or just one of the biggest assholes I've ever seen.

Before dz enabled "blog discretion", you may remember this site was being bombarded with blogs promoting the debunked "no planes at the WTC theory." During that time, I posted a blog entitled, "A Critical Review Of WTC "No Plane" Theories", and in that blog, I posted a comment.

Here is part of it:

Nico Haupt... an individual with a history of causing disruption within this movement. An individual who starts email campaigns directed against certain individuals in this movement. An individual who writes denouncing articles against certain organizations within this movement. An individual who writes denouncing articles about certain events that take place within this movement. An individual who keeps tabs on what certain individuals within this movement are saying so that he can use their statements against them in the future. An individual who makes sure to act like a lunatic when the mainstream media decides to give this movement some attention. An individual who takes it upon himself to "investigate" certain individuals within this movement in the hopes of discrediting them.

No one has ever denied any of those allegations because they are all true.

According to Nico himself:

Radical Pragmatist: Are you disrupting, and do you understand why people think that?

Nico Haupt: Ok, first of all, I agree, I'm disrupting the movement, but I'm disrupting the movement since day one because I want to have real activism.

WHATEVER the reasons, this is completely unacceptable behavior. If you don't agree, then I don't know what else to say.

As for Killtown, I don't know he/she other than posts on here, and the list of 200 Smoking Guns.
___________________________________

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Speak of the Devil...

If you want to laugh...

Click Here
___________________________________

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Welp...

He attacked Dr. Griffin... and casseia and sbg are boyfriend and girlfriend... oh man...
___________________________________

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

I just told you...

His "history" in one paragraph. Do you condone that behavior or not?
___________________________________

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Then...

Why haven't you exposed him?

And incidentally, "exposing" people is not my first choice when it comes to activism. However, if someone acts the way described above, you bet your ass I would call them on their bullshit.

However, I wouldn't dwell on it. I have better things to do with my time.
___________________________________

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Und es gibt auch uberHAUPT kein NICO!!!

David Ray Griffin as a "god" ? Well, I must have been some sort of atheist then, 'cause I haven't know about Griffin for more than a short time.

Ok, let me be even more controversial:

yes, here it is:

"THE NO TOWERS THEORY"

Yes, they were never there and that's why there is no evidence! Oh, it's all so clear now , isn't it!!? And now you call me disruptive. Oh, I'm already such a martyr! "but what about this?" You say "but what about that?" Oh, only I, the gifted one, can see that now,but you still dare call me disruptive.

Look, the "NO PLANES THEORY" is at best a "NO BRAINS THEORY"

Und es gibt auch uberHAUPT kein NICO!!! :)

ah

6)
John Albanese, who wants to destablize ny911truth.org with more limited hangout elements
(Pakistan 9/11 connection, Sibel Edmonds hangouts, "Stand-down" order hangouts and much more).
Rumour has it that he is brainwashed into a multiple identity concept, one of them claims, he's working for Canadian Intelligence.

(end of quote)

Now i'm Canadian intelligence? Or just brainwashed into believing i'm Canadian intelligence?

Hmm...

where does this guy come up with such drivel? its not even GOOD drivel. Canadian? Why couldn't i be intelligence for one of the cool european contries? But i suppose the dental plans for British intelligence sucks.

what exactly does canadian intelligence do? track moose?

meanwhile Nico is not even a USA citizen. no one can explain what he is doing here - and why he is doing it. he is just HERE smearing everyone in the movement - and then we have all these loyal online personas who want to have a "reasonable debate" on whether or not we should include Nico in our discussions?

one really has to wonder what exactly is gained by this whole line of nonsense

That's hysterical...

___________________________________

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Trying out my new signature...



"I think that we have to look at these alternative groups and these alternative people who are continuing to make films and bring their research to the public."

Sally Regenhard - 9/11 Family Member

Jon Gold, you yourself said

that you're not a professor, and that who are you to speak about controlled demolitions.

 

So how could you possibly deny directed energy weapons or TV-Fakery possibilities?

 

Also, you (and others) keep tricking yourselves into thinking TV-Fakery was debunked. But it has NOT been debunked. No scientist has used the Laws of Physics to explain how an aluminum airplane can glide through a steel/concrete building like it glides through the air.

 

Let's get to the root of 9/11, and expose it 

I was listening...

To Mike Berger yesterday... the media coordinator for 911Truth.org, the Director of Improbable Collapse, someone who has made amazing appearances on the mainstream... and he says that he has a cousin who saw the first plane.

How many times does "TV Fakery" need to be debunked?

I'm finishing this conversation before it even gets started.



"I think that we have to look at these alternative groups and these alternative people who are continuing to make films and bring their research to the public."

Sally Regenhard - 9/11 Family Member

Show "it does harm to the movement" by CB_Brooklyn

Looks like...

It's my word against yours. ;)



"I think that we have to look at these alternative groups and these alternative people who are continuing to make films and bring their research to the public."

Sally Regenhard - 9/11 Family Member

You added all of that mumbo jumbo...

From logic on while I was posting.



"I think that we have to look at these alternative groups and these alternative people who are continuing to make films and bring their research to the public."

Sally Regenhard - 9/11 Family Member

only if you want to hurt the

only if you want to hurt the movement. You admit to not having a scientific mind. You should not say anything one way or the other.

Tell me CB_Brooklyn...

What qualifications do you have to discuss scientific evidence? Please provide proof of the University you attended, and the diploma showing the degree you earned. This will require you to come out of your anonymous shell.



"I think that we have to look at these alternative groups and these alternative people who are continuing to make films and bring their research to the public."

Sally Regenhard - 9/11 Family Member

Es gibt auch uberHAUPT kein NICO!

Would it not be easier to use real planes? Is that not logical? Then you wouldn't have to have the media in on the plan? Fewer people involved, fewer leaks. Plus 4 planes are missing,plus all the passengers, oh, but they are all in on it,right? Plus, real planes do real damage!

Now let me do some real damage to your pathetic brain:

You have no evidence either that Santa Claus doesn't exist!
It's very obvious that people like you who are probably only used to watching "reality" on tv will perceive the whole thing as being constructed by Holywood!

TV-Fakery? I need no tv to see who's a fake!

And now you probably say that I don't know you. Yes, and I am proud that I have no acquaintance with such morons!

Und es gibt auch uberHAUPT kein NICO! (And NICO does not at all exist either!)

Another example of ad hominems instead of science.

would it not be easier to use real planes? Is that not logical?

No. Real planes follow real physics. As retired aerospace engineer Joesph Keith says: "The video is phony because airliners don’t meld into steel and concrete buildings, they crash against them!"

 

Then you wouldn't have to have the media in on the plan? Fewer people involved, fewer leaks.

9/11 was orchestrated by the global elite, which includes the TV networks.

 

Plus 4 planes are missing,plus all the passengers

Actually only two planes were missing: Flights 175 and 93. The other two (11 and 77) were phantom flights and never existed for the morning of 9/11. They were not listed in the BTS database. Very few passenger names are listed in the Social Security Death Registry. This is because most were fictitious

 

oh, but they are all in on it,right?

Well, that was the plan for Operation Northwoods in 1962.

 

Plus, real planes do real damage!

Now you're catching on.

 

Now let me do some real damage to your pathetic brain:

Your childish ad hominems demonstrate your insecurity.

 

You have no evidence either that Santa Claus doesn't exist!

HO HO HO

 

It's very obvious that people like you who are probably only used to watching "reality" on tv will perceive the whole thing as being constructed by Holywood!

You're projecting your problems onto others. You're the one who things an aluminum airplane can glide through a steel/concrete building like it glides through the air. You're been watching too many special-effect movies, and been playing too many video games.

 

TV-Fakery? I need no tv to see who's a fake!

Of course. You're looking in a mirror.

 

And now you probably say that I don't know you. Yes, and I am proud that I have no acquaintance with such morons!

In a world where being dumbed down is the norm (as in your case), I am glad to have no affiliation with you.

 

Und es gibt auch uberHAUPT kein NICO! (And NICO does not at all exist either!)

and that is why there are no

and that is why there are no planes on the "What we saw video" ?

And to refer to that video, which I'm sure you know of, if anyone else comes forward with a new video, that's fake too? Oh, and I'm also fake!?

it doesn't matter if there were a million videos.

If it violates the Laws Of Physics, then it can't be real. It doesn't matter if 500 million people swore on a stack of bibles that they saw it happen. If it violates the Laws Of Physics then it can't be real.

Airplanes don't meld into steel/concrete buildings, they crash against them. Interesting how not one scientist or researcher came forward to explain exactly how those videos can be real without Newton's Laws of Motion being violated.

Do you know how many moving panels and rivets a commercial airplane's wing has? An aluminum wing is not going to glide into structural steel columns and slabs of steel reinforced concrete like it glides through the air. Thinking it can is absurd.

There's no visual signs of the plane "vaporizing" in those videos. Besides, according to the media, wreckage was found. So it could not have vaporized.

A real plane would have crashed against the Tower, with most damage to the airplane and less damage to the building.

Million videos

And what about a bullet? Velocity means everything.

How can you know that planes would crash off of the buildings with absolute certainty? What experiments have been conducted to prove this?

There is simply too much evidence to support that planes hit the buildings. You can't ignore 99% of the evidence because it's inconvenient to your theory.

“We're an empire now, and when we act we create our own reality."

no proof for real planes at the WTC

And what about a bullet? Velocity means everything.

A plane and a bullet are two different things.

 

How can you know that planes would crash off of the buildings with absolute certainty? What experiments have been conducted to prove this?

There is no scientific data showing that a plane would meld into a steel/concrete building, completely disappearing, and create a cutout hole of itself. It breaks several BASIC Laws of Physics including Newton's Laws of Motion and Conservation of Energy.

There is simply too much evidence to support that planes hit the buildings. You can't ignore 99% of the evidence because it's inconvenient to your theory.

 

Sorry, there is no evidence that those videos are real. It breaks Laws of Physics, period. Look into this and you will see, just like I did. No scientist has yet to explain.

There's no need to "hide"

There's no need to "hide" C.B Brooklyns comment with all the standard answers.
All the video of the attacks doesn't support the no plane theory, therefore they must all be fake. It doesn't get much more childish than that.
I attack the theory and whoever supports it,because it's downright stupid,at worst, an attempt to discredit the 9/11 movement.
I'm sorry,but that is not an ad hominem attack. I'm not saying you are a moron and therefore I won't hear your argument. I am saying your argument is ridiculous and therefore I think you are a moron, which is just my opinion.

Here's Wikipedias definition:

"An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin, literally argument against the person), personal attack or you-too argument, involves replying to an argument or assertion by attacking the person presenting the argument or assertion rather than the argument itself. It is a logical fallacy."

More of the same from Wikipedia:

"Merely insulting another person in the middle of otherwise rational discourse does not necessarily constitute an ad hominem fallacy. It must be clear that the purpose of the characterization is to discredit the person offering the argument, and, specifically, to invite others to discount his arguments. In the past,the term ad hominem was sometimes used more literally, to describe an argument that was based on an individual, or to describe any personal attack. However, this is not how the meaning of the term is typically introduced in modern logic and rhetoric textbooks, and logicians and rhetoricians are in agreement that this use is incorrect."

Don't use standards answers if you don't know what they mean!

Ho! Ho! Ho!

Show "you are seriously derranged" by CB_Brooklyn

That's not ad hominem

That's not ad hominem either,but that's your opinon and I am glad to hear I sound deranged to you. That's what I expected.

Interesting eh?

Interesting eh?

Interesting Reading on What's *Really* Going on in this Movement

Ali aka Danish says Nico does not exist, but he's certainly writing a lot of material.

 

See the following link for some interesting information:

(I do not necessarily support everything on that page.)

http://www.bloglines.com/blog/ewing2001?id=2216

I am not saying he doesn't

I am not saying he doesn't exist.It was a sarcastic play on his theory. You thought I was serious? I'll admit I cannot back up a "No Nico Haupt Thery" :) I would have to pay off alot of eye witnesses. :)

You should not necessarily support everything on that page. Clever move!

Show "statement not an admission" by Anonymous (not verified)

it's worth noting that this

it's worth noting that this anonymous poster (assuming its the \\\\\\ guy) - who has become known as Ernie to some - most recently has pulled another trick out of his bag.. on one hand he is obsessed with bashing members of this site, but interestingly enough he has lately posted comments as though a 9/11 truth supporter, but always in the context of bashing other 9/11 skeptics across known 9/11 skeptic divides.. in other words he is trying to facilitate inner-arguements..

for this (and other reasons) anonymous commenting will be going away.. i tried to hold out as long as i could, but on at least 4 occasions now i have seen anonymous commenters post on opposite sides of an issue (replying to themselves, etc.) in order to illicit (or provocate) feuds..

crazy stuff..

Hallelujah.

That's very interesting. I'm always suspicious when one anonymous is fighting with another. On the other hand, I'm always suspicious when one anonymous is backing up another, too. We even made up a word for it -- too bad we won't get to use it now. Not.

Adress the left wing gatekeepers paranoia

hmmm, it's more likely that people are just anomynous for the simple reason that they do not wish to give away their identity to people who are really agents. It's more likely that real agents don't use giveaways like "anomynous" and that they will expose themselves if you just think logical about which blind road they are trying to lead us into. (like that guy with the "NO Towers Theory" posted above!!)
Oh, you never mentioned the word "agent" !? That is so suspicious!!
The paranoia will never stop and it's disruptive.
You know who has a paranoid conspiracy theory? The left wing gate keepers who think we are all right wing agents trying to destroy their credibility! Adress that! They won the election, so maybe they will be less afraid of 9/11 truth now! An agent would never suggest that, so this must be reversed psychology,right?
We got "PARANOIA" written all over us in the eyes of the sleeping public. Then when they finally get to a site like this an read a post like yours they think that the MSM is right to call us paranoid.
Look, you don't have to post what everyone can figure out for themselves!

"Just because I'm not paranoid doesn't mean someone isn't following me!"

This was not a statement about all anonymous posters.

This was a statement about two particular phenomena that involve tag-teams of anonymous posters -- or more likely, one anonymous poster pretending to be two. As you will note from dz's post, he has actually verified that anonymous posters sometimes engage in pseudo-dialogue with themselves, so my suspicions are not baseless. It really has nothing to do with paranoia.

I like your posts, Ali, but why don't you get to know us regular posters a little better before you insult us. :)

Wasn't meant to be

Wasn't meant to be insulting,sorry if I offended you.
But he did expose himself,right? It's just really a shame if people who are afraid of exposing their identity don't adress us here.I mean, any little detail could be important.
My post could be better .I'll try to be more constructive henceforth.

No problem.

We like our European Truthers here at 911blogger. Extra points for a Muslim perspective.

Yes, a Dane and a Muslim, so

Yes, a Dane and a Muslim, so my people sacked France from both the south and the north. :) (Great times they were!)
But I'll try to keep the attacks at a minimum on this site.

w00t!

Please reserve "Ernie" for our exhaulted guest!

the bottom line is these

the bottom line is these debunkers have such big egos they cant possibly reverse their positions now

the government is at least 100% criminally negligent
in the 2nd tower if the employees had all known there was a terrorist attack happening to the other tower would have evacuated and not delayed at all. However since the government didnt warn the employees or anybody for that matter that "planes used as missles" will be launched into the WTC, many of them assumed wrongly it was just an accidental crash. Many of those people who assumed that could be alive today had the government just released a warning (and we know they love to do that post-9/11 dont we)

anybody who can not at least see this is cause for criminal negligence prosecution is simply ignoring facts. Its very easy to ingore facts when your Ego is trying desperately to stay aflaot.

Without any involvement in 9/11 at all...

By limiting the scope of the Congressional Inquiry, by creating a compromised Commission, by refusing to cooperate with said Commission, and everything else this Administration did to cover-up the attacks of 9/11... shows that at the very least, they are guilty of aiding and abetting whomever was responsible for the attacks.

That's if you follow the "official story."
___________________________________

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Do you know...

What a "soundbite" is?
___________________________________

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

That's funny.

That post made me laugh, Andrew. (The fuck it all, I'm bored part -- not the Tower blowing up part.) Will you tell me what alias you were using or do I have to guess?

I'm betting...

It began with an "h."
___________________________________

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Hereward

For instance...
___________________________________

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."