No--different site.

No, they're not affiliated with one another.

a lot? i would refer you to the 2 threads that announced this new policy for a staggering amount of evidence proving otherwise. just look at the point totals on the comments dissenting for starters. some of them have like 50 or more points. and i dont wanna argue this thing all over again, but a thread like this would have had at least 25 comments by now. take a look around.......

"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Former Director, CIA

I took a look around and I find NO SHORTAGE OF COMMENTS. I do find a quantum leap in the positive QUALITY of the comments and of the atmosphere. Here's hoping your buddies "the good ones" have found other places to practice their disruption and disinformation, and stay GONE.

It sounds like the guy is several short of a six-pack, and probably GOP-sponsored disinfo.

"Tricks and treachery are the practice of fools, that don't have brains enough to be honest." - Benjamin Franklin

Nico Haupt was responsible for posting images of excrement and swastikas in a church, and then later called it "nazi-satire".

Organized Disruption Hits NY911Truth
http://www.911blogger.com/node/6370

Siegel was spreading false allegations about a 9/11 widow and then gave out her contact info resulting in people harassing her. Death threats have also come from this site (read the post). Free speech does not include the freedom to do these things.

Do you think that isn't good enough reason to take down a site?

Free speech is always the rallying cry for attacks and disinfo. We aren't in the business of free speech, we're trying to expose a cover-up and the other side (be that agents, mentally ill, or a combo of both) have lots and lots and lots of free or paid time to abuse everyone if we let them.

Good for John Albanese for taking action of a different kind.

Did the email actually have one of Siegel's email address in the "from" line? Or was this proven to come from Siegel in some other way?

Perhaps Siegel and his ilk are what the NSA calls "DDT"? ( Decoy Distract Trash.)

Shigawire

"To know a thing well, know its limits. Only when pushed beyond its tolerances will its true nature be seen."
-The Amtal Rule, DUNE

It is a form of paranoia to suggest someone in particular is disinfo. What's wrong with using the term misinfo? Gene Sharp, the "Clausewitz of nonviolent warfare" advises that the primary danger of police agents is not their lying or their spying, it's their ability to generate mistrust between genuine activists.

To use the term disinfo implies you know what is going on in another person's head.

Sharp's The Politics of Nonviolent Action is worth the read.

thanks

Yes, usually it is difficult to discern intent.

However, attacking people, name calling, disruptive behavior, pretending to represent 911blogger, spreading false allegations, putting pictures of excrement in a church, calling everyone who disagrees with you an agent, inventing an entire taxonomy of ad-hominems, etc. requires a certain amount of intent. Spending an inordinate amount of time doing this without apparently holding a real job is a further indication of intent. Spending even more time doing this than researching "tv fakery" and "exotic weponry" tells us that yes, it's probably intentional. There is more evidence if you care to look.

If you spend more time attacking people than 9/11 activism, it's a pretty good sign of where your motivations lie.

DISINFORMANTS. The former's mistake(s) can be corrected by presenting them with argument and evidence. The disinformation agent must obviously be exposed. THERE'S all the difference in the world between misinfo and disinfo!!!