Sofia's letter to google and YouTube
Posted with approval from Sofia.*
911 MYSTERIES
Avatar, LLC
PO Box 698
Cardiff CA 92007
June 1, 2007
Google, Inc.
YouTube, LLC
[agents thereof]
Re: “911 Mysteries” - DMCA Counter Notification
On or about May 25, 2007, Google Video and YouTube removed links to the video (and to segments from the video) entitled “911 Mysteries,” produced by Avatar, LLC, as a result of a DMCA Takedown Demand filed by Richard A. Siegel, an individual associated with a work entitled “9/11 Eyewitness,” for reasons of copyright infringement.
Mr. Siegel’s claim of infringement is false. First, well before the release of “911 Mysteries,” Avatar obtained express permission from both Blue Star Media Group (co-owner of the copyright in the “Eyewitness” work) through its managing partner Jim Brewster, and from Mr. Siegel’s partner David Shaw, to incorporate limited segments of “Eyewitness” in “911 Mysteries.” Mr. Siegel’s two partners were fully cooperative with Avatar in licensing this material. Second, even if Avatar had not obtained express permission from the creators of “9/11 Eyewitness” to use their material in “911 Mysteries,” the 38 seconds of incorporated footage that Mr. Siegel has taken issue with is fully protected by the copyright Doctrine of Fair Use.
While Avatar was working with Mr. Siegel’s partners, Mr. Siegel completely delegated the handling of this matter to them, even though Avatar had included Mr. Siegel in its initial contact letter. Additionally, Mr. Siegel is indiscriminately filing takedown demands against other works on the subject of 9/11, as demonstrated by the recent removal from YouTube (also initiated by Mr. Siegel) of “September 11th Revisited” by Dustin Mugford – a video that does not even use any material from “9/11 Eyewitness.”
“911 Mysteries” is considered by millions to be an important and effective commentary on the events of September 11, 2001. Indeed, Avatar has received a flood of emails and calls from citizens concerned about the removal of the video from your highly valued websites. Even Mr. Siegel’s own business partners are deeply upset by his groundless actions, and wish to see “911 Mysteries” restored on all of its formerly active links.
Therefore, Avatar requests that both Google Video and YouTube restore all removed links for “911 Mysteries,” many of which are listed on the attached enclosure, and that at the same time you restore the settings on the counters for those links, which figures demonstrate the vast numbers of viewers who have found “911 Mysteries” to be a highly important work that provides valuable information to the general public on a subject that has affected this country more than any other in the last 60 years – the devastating events of September 11th, 2001.
Sincerely,
(letter ends)
* This item was submitted as a blog entry in by johndoex and Jim Fetzer. I have combined the blogs into a news item, because it is news.
Jim Fetzer had this comment at the top of his blog entry;
Rick,
I must tell you that, after reviewing the bidding on this one, I think that Sofia is in the right and you are in the wrong. To the best of my knowledge, "9/11 Revisited" does not even include any of your footage. Isn't there a more constructive way to resolve this conflict? Especially in light of the permission granted by your associates, I believe that your actions are damaging to the 9/11 truth movement. Please reconsider.
Jim
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| 9-11MysteriesPDF.jpg | 134.82 KB |
- Login to post comments
Good luck in resolving this Sofia and 9/11 Mysteries...
and shame on Rick for his stance...
Many thanks and best wishes
where is Lucile Ball when
where is Lucile Ball when you need her..... "awwwww...what's a matter little Ricky?..... bitter your video isn't as popular?"
..........maybe he was caught in the space beam
Where'd he go?
What ever happened to Siegel? Did he accept a payoff to stay quiet, or was he one of the space-beamers?
whatever the reason, that's shameful behaviour on his part.
I can't believe Siegel did this
Fortunately, the video will likely be reinstated. The way the DMCA works, Rick must have sent an Infringement Notification letter to Google. Google automatically takes the video down immediately. Sofia sent a Counter Notification. So Google will put the videos back up. At that point, it is up to Rick Siegel whether he wishes to file suit. Let's hope he doesn't.
For reference: Google's DMCA policy
damn
Siegel's a freaking turd.
We're not talking about a short comedy video getting ripped off.
We're talking about the most important historical event in the freaking WORLD.
To fight over two or three scenes is bullshit - especially when the source material is referenced and mentioned DURING THE FOOTAGE SHOWN.
It's actually some of the more convincing scenes - the rumbling and white smoke rising from the base of the towers.
Siegel's lucky she didn't show his nuclear bomb theory footage - or more of his insane narrator's strange and ridiculous voiceover - no one would have been interested in his 911 EYEWITNESS vid if she had.
So he's in it for the money? Jesus - he's worse than the people that planned the attacks/demolitions. WTF, Siegel?
I'm all for paying for these vids to help the creators out with the production costs - that's why I ordered the dvd from INFOWARS. now I'm glad I did.
Siegel seems to be in it for the profit. Vulture.
$$$
Siegel is acting like this is some big money maker. Most copies of 911 Mysteries are Free and this was on-line. Not a penny being made from it. Instead she has gone into terrible debt because the film is being copied. This is the kind of behavior that is expected when big money is involved. Is he being paid off? Is there actually big money involved?
War Makes War, Peace Makes Peace Sitting Bull
fetzer
and what's fetzer talking about? does he have the right movie?
My brain stack dumped when I read Fetzer's comment...
In particular...
"I believe that your actions are damaging to the 9/11 truth movement"
It left me speechless...
Best wishes
---
Fetzer was referring to "9/11 Revisited", which I cannot understand how Rick could have had any influence over... Maybe the producer Dustin could clarify !!!
space beams
funny. I didn't realize the irony in Fetzer's comments. : )
9/11 Revisited (v2) pulled too
Yeah, Rick had my film 9/11 Revisited (v2) pulled too. It was an error on his part. I have been in contact with Rick since I found out it was him and we are getting this matter resolved ASAP.
I got back from my Memorial Day weekend trip to find my video "9/11 Revisited (v2)" was pulled from youtube & google. I contacted Sofia when I found out that her film was pulled too in order to ask her who did it. She told me it was Rick Siegel and I told her there was no way he had mine pulled because none of his footage is even in my film.
Long story short.. Rick's partners jumped the gun in filing the DMCA notification against my film.
I faxed google & youtube DMCA counter notifications and it will be back online within 14 days.
The clown has really stepped
The clown has really stepped over the line with this crap, I can't actually believe something so ridiculous as this has happened. The genuine 9/11 Truth Movement needs a formal rejection of all these disinfo artists who are neatly compiled on Siegel’s "shills'R'us" website.
"It was an error on his part."
No, It wasn't. He's a disinfo agent, period. Obvious Shills like this are laughable & do not worry me, it's the subtle disinfo agents who don't want you to look beyond the the puppet show (Bush admin) that concern me.
Okay.. let me rephrase that...
Okay.. let me rephrase that...
He told me it was an error on his part and that his partners mistakenly filed a DMCA notification against my film 9/11 Revisited.
Do I know that's what happened for sure? No, I am just letting you guys know what I was told.
Fetzer misidentifying the movie
seems to be typical of his half-assed approach to 9/11 Truth. He's an egotist, not an advocate, at best. At worst, he's a conscripted disinfo shill.
He's talking about the OTHER movie.
Also mentioned in Sofia's letter.
This just goes to show that
This just goes to show that Siegel is an enemy of the Truth Movement, as if we didn’t know already that he was disinfo, but this just underlines the fact for certain. Can anyone imagine Alex Jones calling copywrite infringement on a fellow Truther? I can't. Agent "Rick" is a shill period and I call for his crappy video "911 Eyewitness" with it's abrasive narration and ridiculous and completely out of place elevator music soundtrack, to be deleted from 911podcasts. Also I think the links 911blogger has up on the side need to be urgently revised. As it stands we've got a number of known disinfo artists linked to there in the name of fairness and big tent neutrality, I think this is a mistake. We need to be linking to credible and genuine sites only.
I agree.
The tent is getting plenty big now even without the shills. No need to let the town drunkard and a handful of escapees from the psych-ward have the same billing as guys like Steven Jones, Richard Gage, Kevin Ryan, Johnny Wave... The tent is getting RATHER full, and many of the occupants are now very well credentialed. Time to remove the links to Killtown and some of the other repeat offenders. We need to start thinking more about creating air-tight credibility. And, this IS an infowar. Why would we want to help the enemy by guiding people to their disinfo?
------------------
"Peace comes from within. Do not seek it without." - Buddha
"What you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that you do it." - Gandhi
"The Sun never shined on a cause of greater worth." - Thomas Paine
STOP SPAMMING !!!!
.
Fallacies
I haven't read the entire document yet but I noticed some fallacies:
"Velocity of Air Expelled From Tower"
"The high velocity of air jetting out also explains why a significant amount of pulverized concrete and shredded glass was ejected to a distance of several hundred meters from the tower"
Up and out velocity and high speeds are not caused by pancaking. Also, how would you explain:
WTC2 Flashes
http://www.vsocial.com/video/?d=90134
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWi1fmxCGAw
squibs on WTC7 at the top
squibs on Twin Towers many floors below collapse wave
Another fallacy:
"Another criticizm claimed sightings of 'pools of molten metal' within the rubble pile, purportedly produced by planted thermite-based incendiary devices. But all of the supposed evidence is entirely anecdotal, and is refuted by the facts in NIST (2005) report....But these elements were to be expected since they were contained in gypsum wallboard, electrical wiring, galvanized sheet steal, etc"
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
http://TruthSeeker.us
Just wait...
... until Steven Jones gets his hands on this "paper" (or any other fine scientists featured in Journal of 911 Studies).
Also anyone remember
Also anyone remember Siegel's key role in breaking up scholars for 9/11 Truth, attacking GW from this site and fermenting the fractures between Fetzer and Dr Jones? Because I do. This guy is a shill in my opinion, but he is bad news either way for us in undeniable fact. Please Dz, Sbg take down all association between 911blogger / 911podcasts that even remotely relates to this individual. In fact he posts/disrupts here under the screen name "Constitutionalist" or something right? Ban the clown!
What we need to do is forget
What we need to do is forget those that we see are obviously hurting the movement. It hurts to get rid of Fetzer, because he was my favorite 9/11 Truther at one point. He was clear, concise and to the point. But we have to dump these guys.
And by dump, I don't mean wasting time calling them names and pointing our their strategies. I mean just forgetting they existed and ignoring them. They want us bickering and to start trying to point out why they are wrong.
However,
we need to keep them firmly in the back of our minds as they may potentially become a Trojan Horse for our movement (ie. Fetzer's national tv appearances). I strongly agree that the links to Siegel and yes, KILLTOWN, should be removed from 9/11blogger immediately. In fact this needs to be hammered home repeatedly until it gets done. We can't afford to have these wolves-in-sheeps-clothing blending in among us. We have to keep in mind that there are 9/11 truth beginners who are not well-versed in 'disinfo-ism' as we are. We need to be mindful of who we associate with, even peripherally , as it's understood that an info-war is now well underway. Even Rosie O'Donnell was complimentary toward Judy Wood which is totally unacceptable.
Word of the Day: AIRTIGHT!!
Agreed...
It is surprising, though, to see serious researches like DRG still as members of Fetzer's scholars. What are they thinking? They should avoid all association with Fetzer and co. like a plague. There are so many credible organizations and people around now that there is no need to "tolerate" the shills.
"Potentially" a Trojan
"Potentially" a Trojan Horse? IMO, that's one perfect description of what they already ARE. Great comment. I've had a problem with Fetzer, Wood, Seigel and Reynolds for quite some time now.
They can all just... pog mo thuin. (Thanks Rob.) :)
My guess is he is being
My guess is he is being handled by the perps who were delegated to contend with the inevitable skepticism that would come after 9/11.
Fact #1: He was filming the event as it happened - ( the original copy was "confiscated" by the feds )
Fact #2: He had access to WTC 1,2 months prior to the event ( I do remember seeing his ID badges in the version of 911 Eyewitness )
Fact #3: He is an ass clown. :D
^ Say hello to agent "Rick"
^ Say hello to agent "Rick" everybody.
stasis, RIP
Haha.
Haha.
ROTFLMFAO!
"The theory of comminution
due to impact energy correctly predicts the observed size range of pulverized concrete particles (0.01
mm–0.1 mm), and shows that only about 10% of the total gravitational energy converted to kinetic
energy of impacts would have sufficed to pulverize all the concrete slabs and core walls (while at
least 237 tons of TNT per tower, installed into many small holes drilled into each concrete floor slab
and core wall, would have been needed to produce the same degree of pulverization)."
What a complete mongoloid you would have to be to buy this pathetic double speak.
"Clearly, the fluctuations
"Clearly, the fluctuations of air speed can reach the speed of sound, and thus create a sonic booms, which are easily mistaken for explosions (attaining supersonic speeds requires that the orifice through which the air is venting be shaped somewhat like convergent-divergent nozzles, and it is not impossible that such configurations might intermittently develop)."
Yeah...that's the ticket...the debris spontaneously formed supersonic nozzles...yeah!
Brilliant.
“On the altar of God, I swear eternal hostility against all forms of tyranny over the mind of man."--Thomas Jefferson
The Ultimate
The Ultimate Con
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7aRR9FGGJc
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
http://TruthSeeker.us
Pesky Fritolay Theory
Another case of the "Pesky Fritolay Theory" -these carbohydrates won't go away.
lol
Best I have had all day. Plus the "Pesky Fritolay Theory"..... heh.
I'll have to search out some of 'Kookbreaker's other stellar bits of wisdom.
==================================================================
"There are none so hoplessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free." (Goethe)
apparently toner cartridges will also explode
BUT let's keep our potato chip theories straight. THE original potato chip theory was Bo Dietl's, and involved Pringles, not Lays. This is important because Dietl was referring to the towers as comparable to a stack of pringles, whereas this Lays theory simply involves the bag and not the chips themsleves, since Lays do not stack neatly like Pringles do, and like the floors of the twin towers...
____
♠
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
NEW---> the real truther repoRT!
WAIT!
WAIT!
With or without ridges?
Thanks for the link
The paper has already been shown to be an absurdity:
http://911blogger.com/node/9154
A latest trick by Google is for some videos to suddenly become
almost too blurry to watch. I reposted a crystal-clear copy of this brief video to Google & LiveLeak, and within a few minutes, both had became a blurry messes!
Repost: Here is ABC newsman N. J. Burkett being warned by 2 officers that the, "North Tower was leaning" so they needed to back away immediately. http://www.zippyvideos.com/2374884495450566/outputwtc_01
However, the North Tower never "leaned", so who was giving these 2 cops the foreknowledge to get away & that the building was going to come down in a few moments???
No, it's to do with down
No, it's to do with down resing so that the videos will play fast and not take up a ton of bandwidth, it's a policy that applies to all uploaded videos, there's no "trick". Anyway try clicking on the inverted triangle button in the bottom right hand corner of a google video and select "Smooth video".
Thanks for the info, DBLS! I think that blurry, messy videos
obscure many details and evidence, especially those of the buildings erupting & exploding.
Clear, crisp videos should be shown, especially to newbies & those sitting on the fence, IMO. Perhaps it's best to show copies on professional DVDs, as opposed to using blurry ones from the web.
Fine audio, when available, is very important too, as many of the best WTC clips are totally silent for some reason.
"Clearly, the fluctuations
"Clearly, the fluctuations of air speed can reach the speed of sound, and thus create a sonic booms, which are easily mistaken for explosions (attaining supersonic speeds requires that the orifice through which the air is venting be shaped somewhat like convergent-divergent nozzles, and it is not impossible that such configurations might intermittently develop)."
Did they perform experiments with falling objects to test this theory.---that explosions heard were the supersonic booms of air exiting in a particular shape?
Is it ridiculous? Well, I assume they actually tested their theory, did they? No?
I would like to know where
I would like to know where these nozzles are on the building. The outer shell of the towers were very regular and there is nowhere, that I can see, of forced air being driven through small orifices. Fluid flows in the direction of least resistance...
JFK Terror Plot Foiled
Check this out. JFK airport plot foiled. http://www.wnbc.com/news/13431721/detail.html?dl=mainclick I know this is off-topic but I just spotted it and thought it was worth sharing. I guess the Bush gang is getting desperate. What BS.
All these "foiled plots" since 9/11 have always been shams
created to distract the press and give the public the impression that the Feds are actually fighting crime. In this case however, there might be an additional purpose. JFK is where the only significant remains of the WTC is located, in Hangar 17. I would not be suprised if this particular "foiled plot" was used as an excuse for the Feds to seize the airport and dispose of any incriminating evidence in that hangar. I hope not, though (this is just a theory).
"They took it from the top to the bottom, we're gonna take them from the bottom to the top." - Dan Wallace
Copyright problems with 911 information and video
John A MITCHELL
Herblay FRANCE
Bonsoir ,
At the end of 2001 I started to put information for and against the theory that 911 was an inside and I noticed that some of the pages linked to were taken down weeks or months later. This happens more for the against information pages. It is for that reason, every time I made a reference to an important document, I would put up a copy in pdf or html so that the internautes can always find again the original information given out to the public.
I believe for a subject like the 911 no one should be making money out of it and the information ( some propaganda ) should be for a free access to all the citizens of the world. For me 911 documents and videos once put public can not be protected by a copyright and become public property.
Last April ( the 04/04/2007) I received the email from JP Desmoulins ( copy below) asking me to take off my copy of his internet page. His page is perhaps not so important and I could drop my copy but if I should have to take of this copy why should I not be obliged to take of all the other hundreds that are up. It is important that when the 911 truth breaks out we can put the journalists , etc in front of their responsibilities for doing Bush’s propaganda work.
I will give just one example. My copy of the article in the Le Monde attacking Thierry Meyssan because he was putting doubts on the 911 official version.
http://mouv4x8.club.fr/11sept01.html#A33.
The original article is no longer available to all the internautes as it was on the 4th of Mai 2002
http://mouv4x8.club.fr/11sept01.html#A33
but my copy of the same article is always there for our citizens who want to know how Le Monde badly treated the subject in 2002.
http://mouv4x8.club.fr/11sept01_A33_c_Un_crash_chez_Ardisson.pdf
I want to keep my archived documentation for you all but should I comply to JP Desmoulins copyright request ?
Yours
John
------------------------------------- email from JP Desmoulins --------------------------------------------------
Bonjour
You have put on the internet at the address
http://mouv4x8.club.fr/11Sept01/A0085_english.pdf
a copy of my internet site ( in fact an old version ). I ask you to take the copy off immediately from your site.
I accept links but not copies
Thanks
JP Desmoulins
Bonjour
Vous avez mis en ligne à l'adresse :
http://mouv4x8.club.fr/11Sept01/A0085_english.pdf
une copie de mon site internet (en fait, une vieille version). Je vous demande de bien vouloir retirer immédiatement cette copie de votre site.
J'accepte des liens, pas des copies.
Merci.
JP Desmoulins
are you asking *us*?
Was that meant to be a solicitation for ideas from us here at 911blogger, or were you simply letting us in on things? BTW, if you ever need someone to tidy up your English text, feel free to contact me.
Want to figure out 9/11? Ponder the 9/11 "Mineta Stone"
Copyright problems : I am asking for advice
John A MITCHELL
Herblay FRANCE
Yes I am solliciting for ideas on wether we should stick our guns and keep the copyright material on the web dispite not having the permission of the person who first put it up or should we take the material down when asked ?
Thanks
John
This may or may not....
have anything to do with money, however,one thing which is plain for all to see, is that Rick Siegel is not interested in the truth about 9-11. Those who have heard me before talk about this sort of thing have heard me quote Jesus when he said "by their fruits, ye shall know them". Rick Siegel represents a corrupt tree, which cannot bring forth good fruit and indeed, as you look around, Rick Siegel spews forth garbage everywhere he goes. Just take a look around one of his websites, www.911researchers.com, not that I recommend giving this site ANY attention whatsoever.
The first thing that I notice is the Orwellian name, 9-11 Researchers. This would actually be laughable if it weren't such a serious subject. 911researchers.com is anything but a "research" site, but rather, a cesspool of dis-information, attack articles, and outright venom, not with the goal of getting at the truth behind the events of September 11th, but rather, with the goal of spreading dis-information, promoting infighting, attacking and distracting real researchers, and eating out the movement from within. The "research" presented at this site showcases a who's who of the most horrible "researchers" presenting the most horrible information in the most vitriolic way possible. "TV fakery", no planes on 9-11, lasers, nasers, and plasmoids, ideas which have been universally decried by serious truth activists, all find their way front and center at 911researchers.com. Similarly, the accompanying venom finds itself prominently linked and/or displayed at the websites main page. For example, check out the link at the top-right, the very first link which is fraudulently titled "911Truth.org". Clicking this link does not take you to the 911truth.org website, but instead, to an ad hominem attack site set up to be a cheap parody of the real site. Check it out here, http://911truthy.org/about.htm. Again, laughable if the topic weren't so serious. (I actually laughed real hard when I first saw this, and indeed it is very funny, until you think about the who's, why's, and WTF's)
So ya ask yerself, is this the kind of things that are going to get 9-11 Truth into the mainstream? Would you be embarrassed to show this site to anyone you were trying to wake up? Is this site, in reality, and as it's name suggests, a site for legitimate 9-11 research, or possibly a site with more sinister intent? Why would a 9-11 site which purportedly promotes research, attack a 9-11 site well known for it's careful and meticulous approach to 9-11 evidence and research? You might be asking yourself a whole slew of questions.
Now, fast forward to today, and this current attack on 9-11 truth by Rick Seigel. It doesn't make sense that he would have one of the best 9-11 films out there taken down from Google/Youtube video for 38 seconds of borrowed video. Most producers of 9-11 video have given 100% permission to copy the entire video's for distribution and to get the truth out. This is highly admirable considering they often spend $1000's of their own money to produce the videos. Not that I recommend the video at all, but has Rick Siegel made his video available for activists to copy and distribute? I don't know the answer to this but I would assume that he hasn't since he singlehandedly had one of the best 9-11 films out there REMOVED from Google and Youtube over 38 seconds of his video footage. If he so jealously guards his "work" and copyright, its highly unlikely that he will sacrifice that profit margain for mass production of his video where he isn't getting his cut. If Rick has given his approval for folks to copy his film, then his actions here appear even more sinister, which contain a double standard.
Question? Has taking down the film, 9-11 Mysteries from Google and Youtube been a good thing or a bad thing for 9-11 Truth?
Its as simple as that. This is more of the corrupt fruit from a corrupt tree. This time, Rick Seigel showed his true colors, for those of you who hadn't seen them before. I hope this will lead to some real dialogue amongst the good folks who run 9-11 Blogger and a consideration of the question, " At what point is enough, enough???"
I agree whole heartedly with the previous comments regarding the dis-info specialists which find a home at 9-11 Blogger and 9-11 Podcasts. It should be known that I don't agree with censorship of legitimate opinions and viewpoints. However, 9-11 Blogger is a private site, and is therefore subject to the final decisions of its owner, whom I highly respect. I do not consider "cleaning house" as being a gatekeeper or censor, but in fact, a necessary thing that must be done from time to time in this business. I agree with the notion that there are several links to intentional and known dis-information sites here including Rick Siegel and his ilk. In my opinion, these sites should be taken down, Rick Seigel's film should be taken off 9-11 Podcasts, and the known trouble makers to be banned from the comments section. I also agree 100% with Dem Bruce Lee Styles in that it's a mistake to include these clowns in any form of serious research or activism and will ultimately lead to a loss of credibility to anyone associated with them, a tar baby of sorts.
I will conclude this commentary with a quote from Dr. William Pepper from the June 2006 conference in Chicago, when he said:
"I'm going to say this group, more than any other, that I can think of in terms of a movement, is going to be infiltrated, is infiltrated, and there are going to be all kinds of efforts to subvert your work, all kinds of efforts to corrupt your work, and all kinds of efforts to discredit you. Please understand that and take it the spirit in which it's being given, because this is what will happen, and probably is happening, so please, your work is too important, your mission is too precious. Be careful in every aspect of the work. Make sure your allegations, your claims are well founded, because if they are not, you will be discredited."
Dr. William Pepper, from his Chicago conference key note address.
http://www.visibility911.com/cointelpro.htm
I am replying to the ideas
I am replying to the ideas in this sentence: "I agree with the notion that there are several links to intentional and known dis-information sites here including Rick Siegel and his ilk. In my opinion, these sites should be taken down, Rick Seigel's film should be taken off 9-11 Podcasts, and the known trouble makers to be banned from the comments section."
Rather than remove links from the left sidebar, why not place them in rough categories--"excellent," "good," "poor," "disinfo"? Something like that. This adds educational value to the sidebar and will help people learn about all sites relating to 9/11.
I strongly oppose censoring the comments section. Why? 1) Disinfo comments teach all of us how to recognize disinfo and how to handle it. 2) Disinfo or unruly comments can easily be ignored or answered, and are usually quickly voted down. 3) We are in favor of openness and more information. That's a main part of 9/11 Truth. Censorship too often goes too far. It's a slippery slope. 4) It's best to work through disinfo issues here, on-line, where all can see and learn, and learn how to be prepared. If people do not learn how to deal with bs here, they will get slammed by it in face to face formats.
The big tent approach is still right for this site IMHO. If dz wants to change anything, it might be good to have a section devoted to research questions and another to history.
________________
JFK on secrecy and the press
disinfo is in the eye of the beholder
You say the name "9/11 researchers" is Orwellian. Why? Because you disagree with the views expressed at the site, and do not think it can legitimately be called "research."
Others think the name "9/11 Truth" is Orwellian. Why? Because they disagree with the views expressed at the site, and do not think it can legitimately be called "truth."
It seems to me that the name "Truth" is much more presumptuous and potentially Orwellian - Lies are Truth has an Orwellian ring to it. Try to do that with "Research."
You say: "I don't agree with censorship of legitimate opinions and viewpoints." So who decides what is "legitimate"?
You say: "Why would a 9-11 site which purportedly promotes research, attack a 9-11 site well known for it's careful and meticulous approach to 9-11 evidence and research?" Once again, you base this on your own opinion of what is and is not "careful and meticulous." That's great that you have an opinion on what is "careful and meticulous" -- everyone should. It's not great that you want to impose your views on others in such an accusatory and conclusory manner.
My understanding of Rick Seigel's concern is not that his footage was used without compensation, but that he thinks his footage was misused by altering the audio.
http://www.911researchers.com/node/114
I do not know whether his claims are true and whether those claims justify getting 9/11 Mysteries removed is a matter of opinion, but we should at least be clear about why he says he is doing this -- he thinks 9/11 Mysteries is misusing his work for disinformation purposes. If one genuinely believes that to be true and has a reasonable basis for so believing, and does not want one's work to be used in such a way, then asserting a copyright seems a reasonable course of action. I don't mean this in a legal sense - I don't know copyright law. My limited understanding is that "moral rights" to the integrity of one's work are stronger in Europe than the U.S. I'm just saying that it seems reasonable to not want one's work to be altered in a way that distorts it.
I want to see you banned
I want to see you banned from here, I have no clue why you’re tolerated, it's perplexing. You spread "no planes hit the Towers" disinfo and defend all the worst people to have ever attached themselves to 9/11 Truth. Your shill tactics are plain as day to me and I just hope everyone else catches up and calls for your banning also.
There tactics have
There tactics have definitely changed since Jan/Feb. Seems their strategy has moved from disruption (short term) to quiet infiltration (long term).
Or maybe I disagree with disruption
How interesting to see that my way of expressing myself has become a "strategy" and a "tactic."
I'm sorry to see you joining the ranks of those making baseless accusations. I think that is highly disruptive.
Nothing I said above was false. Rick Seigel is claiming that Sophia Smallstorm altered the audio on his video. No serious debate can take place without acknowledging the reason he is claiming - how else to even beginning to judge whether he's right on the facts and whether that justifies his actions? I simply pointed that out.
No, you push "no planes hit
No, you push "no planes hit the Twin Towers" disinfo - something BLATANTLY false and absurd. You support Rick Seigel and all the other trash. So you've got ZERO credibility and ZERO respect from anyone in the genuine 9/11 Truth Movement.
well goddamn, Siegel isnt
well goddamn, Siegel isnt even TRYING to hide it anymore.......
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Former Director, CIA
FROM YOUR OWN INTERVIEW
SF: Very lucky. Usually I was in the office at 7 am and having breakfast with colleagues in the 96th floor cafeteria by 8:30 am. In fact one of my colleagues was there in the cafe when the first plane hit the Tower 1. He WATCHED IT coming in over Manhattan.
KT: He saw it coming? How did you find this out?
SF: Well he survived and we talked about it often. We used to joke about the planes over Manhattan and that one day one would hit the Trade Center. He ran from the cafe and took his colleagues from his team and left the building. Had he not seen the plane with his own eyes, he and his team would have been far more relaxed I'm sure.
This survivor must be a hell of a liar, eh Killtown???
Complacency is the demise of us all, the power is with the people.
He watched the plane
with his own two eyes, unless he was lying of course. This interview completely debunks your "No-Plane" theory.
Complacency is the demise of us all, the power is with the people.
and just so your aware
Killtown, I am not attacking you. Like I said before, I respect your here for 9/11 Truth, BUT you need to re-evaluate your approach. Your support of outrageous theories with no evidence only hurts us. If you are truly here for the cause, you had better quickly come to realize that.
Complacency is the demise of us all, the power is with the people.
"You cannot waken a man who
"You cannot waken a man who is feigning sleep"
wow bro
you really are that stubborn. I give up on you, your a lost cause for this movement.
Complacency is the demise of us all, the power is with the people.
some games are better left
some games are better left unplayed... especially the ones were you cannot win, like casinos. The odds are in the houses favor, so the only guaranteed way of not losing, is not to play.
In no way do I suggest that your position is correct or true, merely any attempt at arguing with you is pointless.
Ha!
"You are not one of those people who think I think no planes were even in the area, are you?"
Well, that's a new twist to your madness, isn't it Killtown!! Never once have I heard you say anything whatsoever about planes "being in the area" but not actually hitting the towers.
I truly believe this liability makes this stuff up as he goes along. Or is it his superiors who make it up?
9/11blogger: delete Killtown's link NOW!! pretty pweeze?
My last effort...
I suppose you have an explanation for this plane engine on the streets of NY...
Is it just a part of our imagination too? Was it "planted" there in front of other New Yorkers? Better yet, did ALIENS drop it off??
Get a grip Killtown.
Complacency is the demise of us all, the power is with the people.
That's exactly how ridiculous you sound.
By the way, I await your explanation of the engine being there...or perhaps you don't have one, and you are now fully enlightened that planes did in fact strike the towers.
Complacency is the demise of us all, the power is with the people.
you still didn't answer the question
(I'm curious too.)
Want to figure out 9/11? Ponder the 9/11 "Mineta Stone"
im asking nicely. how did it
im asking nicely. how did it get there?
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Former Director, CIA
Since you are offering it as evidence . . .
perhaps you can explain how it got there. Even NIST said that the engine would stop before exiting the other side. NIST said that it might be possible to change some assumptions to get it to exit the building. NIST also said that in order for this part to land where it did, it would have had to exit the building at 120 mph. Exiting and exiting at 120 mph are not the same. Their model shows the engine not even reaching the external columns on the other side. Even if it could reach and could breach the external columns on the other side, it would be going very slow once it got through.
Yes, it was planted. That is clear. Planting it is trivial in terms of difficulty. Your "aliens" comment just shows how little you have thought, or how little you want people to think, about this.
The purported piece of fuselage on top of WTC5 is also planted - the idea that it exited the building intact with enough velocity to land where it did is plain absurd.
I studied a piece of debris, supposedly from Flight 11, in more detail:
http://ningens-blog.blogspot.com/2007/01/little-wheel-that-could.html
http://ningens-blog.blogspot.com/2007/01/little-wheel-that-could-not-par...
NIST is laughable.
Are you really going to use them to support your "planted engine theory"? Give me a break. YOU even say they could change some "ASSUMPTIONS" to get it to exit the building. I think we all know what assumptions do.
"Exiting and exiting at 120 mph are not the same." What the hell does that mean? The planes were going well over 400 mph when they struck the towers. At this speed you had better be damn sure it is possible for an engine to enter and exit the building. Watching the videos even, you see debris flying everywhere. (But I guess these must be forgeries, because we all know no planes ever hit the towers.)
How can you say the engine was planted when:
1) It was still smoking (http://www.rense.com/1.imagesG/smokin_engineC.jpg)
2) It cracked the pavement on impact (http://www.rense.com/1.imagesG/streetengine2cutC.jpg)
3) It was captured on TV flying through the air heading for the intersection of Church and Murray
(http://www.rense.com/1.imagesG/Flaming_engineC.jpg)
Show me your evidence that it was planted. My aliens comment shows nothing of what you say, you and Killtown seem to be confused on what reality really is, thus my smart ass alien comment. The answers are staring you right in the face, and you refuse to acknowledge them.
If this is truly what you believe, you are just as disillusioned as Killtown. Granted certain levels of our government may be behind the attacks, but planting a magnled engine would have been the very least of the worries.
I still await Killtown's explanation of this. Your's is just as laughable as using the NIST's "assumptions."
Complacency is the demise of us all, the power is with the people.
I agree that NIST is laughable
We all agree that their "collapse" argument is patently absurd. I also think their analysis of how the plane supposedly penetrated the towers and then disintegrated inside is absurd.
That does not mean that I cannot point out that even NIST cannot explain how the engine piece got through the other side and exited at 120 mph. Yes, they could tweak their already questionable analysis to get the engine to exit the building, but presumably knew that their tweaking was limited by the need to at least appear plausible.
Physicist Greg Jenkins says he has no reason to doubt NIST's analysis of the plane impacts.
"I do not endorse the NIST report as a whole, but find sections of the report to be well-conceived. I currently find no reason to reject the finite element impact analysis of a Boeing-767 with the WTC Towers based on flawed methodology, misguided assumptions, or contradictions with observation."
http://www.journalof911studies.com/letters/Boeing767DecelerationTowers.pdf
I disagree, but for purposes of this argument, I am taking their analysis at face value, and pointing out their analysis does not explain how the engine part left the building at 120 mph.
I am of course aware of the videos and photos, and am questioning their authenticity based on the physics. If you don't want to address my argument, fine. Mockery has no effect on me, nor does the very evidence whose authenticity I am questioning. "Contradiction with observation" as stated by Dr. Jenkins begs the question of whether these images constitute observation or fabrication.
The fact is
I have provided you with evidence of the engine and damage it caused when it hit the street. If you want to question the authenticity of the photos and video, thats your issue and quite frankly it is one you will never prove seeing as there are multiple pictures of it. Are you telling me all these citizens forged photos and video as part of the conspiracy? Also you have provided NO evidence to support your claim that it was "planted."
Complacency is the demise of us all, the power is with the people.
All what citizens?
We are talking about one photo - the one you posted as evidence.
Yes, I did provide circumstantial evidence that it was planted --- the physics of the supposed exit velocity.
"Are you telling me all these citizens forged photos and video as part of the conspiracy." That's called begging the question.
The fact is that you posted a picture. I raised a serious question as to its authenticity. You have not addressed the question and it appears that you cannot.
No, I don't have pictures of it being planted or witnesses to it being planted. You win? No.
I actually posted
3 more in my above post if you would have taken the time to view them. If I really wanted to I could also post about a dozen more pictures of the same engine from all sorts of different angles. I will not do this because I am sure you will question them as well. The Naudet brothers cover this engine in their 9/11 documentary as well. Quit making bogus claims with no evidence. And yes, I win...common sense and critical thinking always win.
Complacency is the demise of us all, the power is with the people.
and
I still await Killtowns explanation...ever so kindly...
Complacency is the demise of us all, the power is with the people.
OK, I misspoke
I did look at the other pictures you posted, but I thought you were speaking more generally of all the pictures and videos of planes. You are the one that shifted the debate to forged photos, which was not my argument. I carelessly let you change the argument, and apologize for the lapse in rigor in my thinking.
But again, I say, all what citizens? Do you know who took the photos? Do you know they were not altered?
Of course, those photos could have been taken by random innocent citizens. And that proves what? Understand that a photo can be authentic but still not be what it is purported to be.
Further questions could be asked: Do you know if the crack was there before? Do you know if the crack is consistent with an object of that mass hitting?
A dozen more photos from different angles would not address the question I raised. I am questioning what it is said to be, not that the object was there when photographed. If you do not want to address the question I raised, fine.
Killtown reports he is blocked from posting here:
http://killtown.blogspot.com/2007/06/banned-at-911blogger.html
The Plane (said like Tatoo)
http://www.infowars.com.au/forum/viewtopic.php?t=296
____________________________
On the 11th day, of every month.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Q9nRs8cu5Y&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Ftruthaction...
No, he was talking about someone else who said he saw the plane
This is simple reading comprehension. Mr. Forbes was truthfully relaying someone else's account. The accuracy and veracity of the third person's account is a separate question.
Your literacy seems stuck at about a third-grade level; I would reccommend repeating fourth grade and then continuing your research from there.
Hope this helps.
Good point
which was not helped by the second paragraph.
I don't think Rick was
I don't think Rick was breastfed or something... deeeeeep resentment.
Drawing the line
>>Time to remove the links to Killtown and some of the other repeat offenders.
It's because of the movement's unwillingness to act against those who engage in personal attacks and promotions of well-debunked crap that we end up in situations like the current one.
The overt abusers are in front of us clear as day, yet sites like this link to them (i.e., 911blimp and 911eyewitness). It's one thing to disagree on theories, but it's another thing to call up people on the phone who are organizing events to harass them, to file lawsuits, to verbally trash our strongest researchers all over the internet, etc. That's what these people do on these sites. You are linking to them, steering the newbies to their sites so they can continue to attack everyone and polarize people who don't know any better.
That isn't even an issue of "Big Tent," that's just drawing a line at simple abuse.
That footage was broadcasted
That footage was broadcasted on september 13th for the first time.
http://www.911blogger.com/node/8980
Please watch my movie: WTC7 The Smoking Gun of 9/11
Still questioning
I appreciate your research but the fact that he is in a US uniform doesn't comfort me. Since the other 2-3 buildings were brought down by controlled demolition a few days later everyone in the area would know and be evacuated I'm sure. This looked spontaneous. Are some people sensitive to the impression that he could be Israeli (or Russian as you say).
War Makes War, Peace Makes Peace Sitting Bull
I can't remember saying he
I can't remember saying he was russian. I said 'foreign'. There's no indication that the footage was shot on 9/11. He wears an American uniform. There were evacuation of ground zero in days after 9/11 because of fear that other buildings might collapse.
Look up the context of the footage at archive.org. (it's posted in my blog)
Please watch my movie: WTC7 The Smoking Gun of 9/11
Ratings?
It was in the link you posted. So you didn't say it but others discussed it.
Why am I being rated the same as Killtown? I have searched the site and can't find anything about rating. How is that happening and why? I'm asking questions. I am NOT killtown. What is going on please. How does one rate and why would I be given minus points for asking questions?
Minus
Being rated again. Oh well, if I'm going to take the heat I might as well do the crime. He may be just a foreigner but he throws his hand over the camera in the way that we see often in documentaries done in the Palestinian terrorities and he takes that commanding voice as if something is being done wrong. I know, he is just shy!
Have you looked up a larger
Have you looked up a larger segment of this footage in the 9/11 archive yet?
Please watch my movie: WTC7 The Smoking Gun of 9/11
help
I don't know what the 911 archive is. And I don't know what your blog is. I still question why he was there. I guess I'll never really find out.
Here's the link to
Here's the link to archive.org: http://www.archive.org/details/abc200109131818-1900 at 25:17 minutes
Please watch my movie: WTC7 The Smoking Gun of 9/11
Yes...
& it shows some foreigner in a military uniform that doesn't, evidently, like camera's. I find this very disturbing.
Rick's a dick.
and he's aligned with the space beamers, the no planers, and the mini-nukers. And he's always been bitching about not making enough money off his film.
____________________________
On the 11th day, of every month.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Q9nRs8cu5Y&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Ftruthaction...
i SECOND THAT
i SECOND THAT RICKS A DICK GET A LIFE PAL
WMD at the WTC - Siegel is obvious
I spelled out my suspicions almost a year ago:
http://www.911blogger.com/node/2289
International Truth Movement
http://www.truthmove.org
Dennis Kucinich on OBL in Dem debate
Dennis Kucinich may have been talking to us indirectly in tonight's Democratic presidential debate. They asked the question, if you received intelligence that Osama Bin Laden had been located, and had only 20 minutes to respond, would you as president be willing to bomb the area, even if it involved killing innocent bystanders. The other candidates said yes, depending on the particulars of the situation, how many innocents dead, etc. Kucinich said no, he would try to capture Bin Laden, then put him on trial. He emphasized that he would put others on trial for war crimes also. I don't have the exact quotation, but I got the impression that he could have been referring to Cheney. He had a look in his eye like "You know who I'm talking about."
Did anyone else catch that? Your impressions?
Sounds good...
But he'a a gun-grabber. If there ends up being any authenticity to this election, which there won't, he would beat Ron Paul, because all the phony liberals would flock to him... Maybe. Ron Paul is our best bet. We need to do everything we can to help him advance as far as possible.
------------------
"Peace comes from within. Do not seek it without." - Buddha
"What you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that you do it." - Gandhi
"The Sun never shined on a cause of greater worth." - Thomas Paine
Ron Paul...
sounds good, but he's a uterus-grabber.
I believe his position is
I believe his position is that it should be left to the states. His pro-life stnce is principled and stems from his libertarian views "Protection of Life" as opposed to "It's a Sin! Your gonna burn in hell".
Its a rational approach to a divisive issue.
hes against stem cell
hes against stem cell research too. im sorry but its pure insanity to classify a cell we cant see with the naked eye as "human life" when those cells could potentially lead to huge advances(and possibly cures a long time from now) in the treatment of various diseases. he has no right to stand in the way of that. and i happen to be pro-choice so im with casseia on that one too. not that i wouldnt support the guy just because of those 2 things, i still think hes the most honest out of the bunch. not that thats saying much.
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Former Director, CIA
I'm tentatively supporting him
but it's DESPITE these two (at least) things. Should we leave gun control to the states? Basic human rights? How 'bout if some of the states want slavery back? The right to bodily sovereignty is a basic human right.
"The right to bodily
"The right to bodily sovereignty is a basic human right."
exactly my thoughts.
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Former Director, CIA
Ron Paul
Ron Paul is against FEDERAL FUNDING of research, any research. This should be up to the private and charity sector, not up to the government to be funding research. There is nothing in the Constitution that grants the federal government the power to fund scientific research. Prior to federal funding of research, which began in a big way well less than 100 years ago, there was plenty of scientific research going on in the US without any need for federal funding.
So Ron Paul has NOT called for federal bans on stem cell research, simply a ban on federal FUNDING of stem cell (and other scientific) research.
His stand is principled and consistent 100% with the Constitution.
Stop giving attention to the "no plane theories" and other disinfo agents who are sabotaging this movement,, either by sheer stupidity or intentionally as government moles.
I agree with your
I agree with your interpertation of Ron Paul's stance on that issue 100%. Government needs to be shrunk down in size and scope, this is almost alien to most as we have lived under the shadow of this behemoth for all of our lives. And thats the crux of it all, its too big, and as it grows our freedoms diminish.
see jk1@Ron Paul: ..you may
see jk1@Ron Paul:
..you may see that there is no conflict. Right now academia is restricted and using limited stem cell lines, some contaminated with mouse material - the state of research is handcuffed and substandard, under current federal policies.
I am curious about how a new direction of reduced government would affect cloning, and beyond. Thats the real ethical problem we are going to be butting heads against very very soon.
What a loser
when did rick become such a shit pot little piss ant.
The day he was born!
The day he was born!
911 STRIKE ACTION
Another good form of action is STRIKE ACTION, start getting union members to bring national strike to de-stabilise BUSH & THE NEOCONS bring the government to its knees through all out strike action across America... CUT THEIR MONEY
Mainstream media, if you can call it media that is.... BOYCOTT all mainstream media, REJECT SKY and all there Neocon loving so called journalists CUT THEIR MONEY & PROFITS, cancel sky subscriptions, STARVE THEM OF CASH.
Dump Google and Youtube to your recycle bin, there are plenty others who are just as good, no one really needs them .
STARVE All the companys who donate money to the Republican party by boycotting their products, DON'T shop or buy any products from the funders of these neo-cons liberty destroyers.
Finally... REMEMBER IN THE FUTURE YEARS all these nasty people who have turned against real Americans, never let them into your lives or on your televisions again.. DONT EVER FORGET THEY ARE THE ONES WHO ARE DESTROYING YOUR COUNTRY IN FRONT OF YOUR VERY EYES.
Shilltown's (Web)Fairy Tales
Against my better judgment, I followed Killtown's claims about large passenger jets buzzing by the towers when the planes crashed. Unsurprisingly, the sourcing wasn't exemplary. There's only one source really...
http://thewebfairy.com/911/slideshow/eh/
"http://terrorize.dk"
"original source
http://thewebfairy.com/911/cameraplanet/north_tower_on_fire.mov
For flash video of this scene see:
http://thewebfairy.com/911/eh "
The "Webfairy" is a fake image manipulator for many years now. It creates nonsense clips to get the gullible following up on pixels. It's a big waste of time and sanity, and Webfairy / terrorize.dk / Killtown has no credibilty left whatsoever.
Avoid like plague.
70 Disturbing Facts About 9/11
John Doraemi publishes Crimes of the State Blog
http://crimesofthestate.blogspot.com/
johndoraemi --at-- yahoo.com.
I have always wondered about were his loyalties
lie.
He didn't release 911: Eyewitness for years after 9/11/01.
He included a piece from the FEMA director that stated that FEMA was Deployed to NYC 9/10/01 to take part in a planned Operation the next day.
He claims to have grabbed things and ran out of his house and got down there.
I would like to know who has the complete video. If he were as upset as he pretends to be in the video why would he have already changed his mind.
My thinking is that perhaps FEMA had hired him to video the entire show. Someone has to have tapped it all.