What should 911blogger.com do about their comments section

Annoymouse's picture

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Killtown's picture

Btw, the haters prefered the old way at 911blogger

the old way of mob rules with the points system because the haters would just sit their all day and select negative points and each one of the comments left by the people they hated that eventually gets the people they hated banned which is exactly what happened to me!

casseia's picture

Okay, but please...

Your membership was approved here on the premise that you would have more to contribute than rage against the haters. I agree that you were treated unfairly, but why not blog about something interesting?

Killtown's picture

Well most of the blogs here were about hater 9/11 sites

such as 911blogger and LC, the sites that have been giving me most of my problems. What am I supposed to do, censor myself from posting in them?

casseia's picture


Are you so crippled by bitterness that you can't come to a new site and blog about something that has to do with 9/11?

Annoymouse's picture

Sorry casseia, I didn't see the site's rule that...

when you first come here to not post about things that irks a particular admin here.

You know if there where blogs here about Val McClatchey or other non-hater related blogs that's in my current interest, I would have posted on them. Is it my fault that there just happened to be mostly blogposts on hater 9/11 sites when I just stumbled upon this site the other day?

Annoymouse's picture

Hey, I just got banned!!!

Well this site is definitely NOT going on my blogroll, but WILL be mentioned in my next blogpost about censoring 9/11 "truth" sites!


gretavo's picture

sounds good to me

sorry cass, but I didn't see this going anywhere good...

casseia's picture

No need to apologize.

He was given a chance. I guess that makes us haters :)

gretavo's picture

if anyone sees Killtown post anything good

anywhere else, please feel free to repost it here (in other words no guilt by association)

also if anyone feels it was unfair to ban KT (or anyone in the future) understand that saying so (i.e. disagreeing with admin) is perfectly fine... we obviously need to develop ways to make these forums work but until we have foolproof systems we're going to have to resort to the occasional ban and the occasional shutting off of anonymous (annoymouse) posts. sorry if it seems harsh but if your goal is to be fair 100% of the time then the goal of exposing the truth about 9/11 is what's going to suffer...

inside's picture

im with you, rt.. sounds

im with you, rt.. sounds good to me.... i watched the other night when you were giving him a chance and all he could do is say " well i think youre disinfo"..haha i mean, come on...

gold is calling for 911b to be the same way that the howard stern board was set up... unfuckingreal!!! if you cant see how much of a bullshit sytem that is, well, i dont know.

Jpass's picture

Killtown has a point

Much of the initial discourse is about calling out certain information that each think is disinfo / bad info. I would have let it play out a bit more before you banned him from the site.

gretavo's picture

my feeling was

that if KT wanted to discuss 9/11 issues, even those which most people consider blatant disinfo that would be fine, but that doesn't seem to have been his intention. calling people haters instead of just being up front about why people behave in a hateful manner towards them is just childish. I will happily listen to reason if someone can make a good case against any such decision but I should point out that I have a low threshhold of tolerance for blatant disinfo. KT put the cart before the horse. Instead of immediately starting off by painting himself as a persecuted martyr he could have just tried to make his case for what he believes to be the truth. He has never in my experience done so convincingly and it seemed clear he wasn't about to start to do it here....

kate of the kiosk's picture

shut down the comments! Ah-ha!

then everyone can come over here and have-at-it! but then again, they really couldn't call it 911BLOGGER anymore now could they.

Annoymouse's picture

Just noticed this site forbids discussion of certain theories

"We discourage wild speculation not based on verifiable evidence, such as claims of "video fakery" with regard to the planes that struck the towers."

I wonder if me being a no-planer/pro-TV fakery proponent played any part of me being banned here?


PS - and funny this site forbids discussion of theories that if true would prove an inside job, but doesn't forbid discussion about supporting the official story!

kate of the kiosk's picture

september clues

where is the dicussion or blog number for that video?

gretavo's picture

wonder no more!

and please note the difference between forbid and discourage.

Annoymouse's picture

I love it when the truth comes out!

Gretavo seems to confirm that me being a no-planer had at least something to do with me getting banned.

So casseia, a real simple "yes" or "no" question, did me being a no-planer have anything thing to do with you banning me?

casseia's picture

No, it did not.

But you are being quite a prick now. I'm actually less inclined to write you off for being all disinfo all the time than gretavo was, but you are proving I made a mistake, in the sense that you are functionally very disruptive whether or not you're disinfo.

gretavo's picture

yep, that's kind of the point

i'm happy to have people who disagree with me or anyone else post here. i'm not terribly keen to allow "blatant disinfo" types to come here and whine about how everyone hates them because they are all haters and nothing to do with espousing far out ideas in a less than convincing manner. i have been accused of being a "hater" simply because the people I "hated" couldn't make any reasonable points against what I was saying. if Killtown ever says anything worth saying I should hope that someone else will repeat it because otherwise I think I might miss it...

OWN-the-NWO's picture

TV fakery ect ect

The only thing out of all that giant waste of time you've wrapped yourself in KT is may be them faking images on TV, but that doesn't mean planes didn't hit the towers. To propose that is beyond ludicrous, especially when you try and explain everyone who was there, tens of thousands of people.

Chander's picture

911Blogger Redux

My first day here, after quitting 911B because of their censorship, and already I see somebody (Killtown) getting banned. This is not a good omen.

BTW, "reprehensor" in Latin means "censor".

gretavo's picture


sorry Chander, but I suspect most peole here would argue that allowing Killtown here was a bad omen. Look, no one likes to be the bad guy but just as few people want to put up with people like Killtown. This is not bigotry or bias or prejudice. This is common sense. By all means go to Killtown's site (google might help) and take in his wisdom. Killtown wil make everything about HIM and how HIS ideas are hated and bla bla bla. I will let the subtle disinfo crowd deal with the blatant disinfo. It's sort of a pecking order that I'm keen to enforce for myself--why should I bother dealing with people who are more interested in converting people to a dead end theory than in well rounded and broad commentary? I don't need to dis Killtown to earn credibility like the LIHOP crowd, so I won't.

Chander's picture


Sorry gretavo, but your comment is unsatisfactory. Either you're for freedom of speech (including for those whose views you disagree with, or you're not.

Your bias is clear in your comment about "a dead end theory". Who's to say it's "dead-end"? You??

I was banned from 911 Blogger because of my defense of the research of Judy Wood and Jim Fetzer. I expect the same thing will happen to me here soon, also. Too bad!!

BTW, if you're so sure the people here support your banning of killtown, why don't you take a vote?

gretavo's picture

dude, you can make a poll yourself!

use that freedom of speech while it lasts! if indeed you're going to talk about space beams you may as well throw that into your poll as well. being for free speech doesn't mean being for the dissemination of disinformation.

anyone who thinks that wood and fetzer are legit will probably be better off finding another site to post on. to anyone who doesn't understand why the impatience with noplanes/videofakery/spacebeams/directedenergy/mininukes, um, you're just going to have to either trust us or go look into thöse "theories" for yourselves. if you find that we have been unfairly dissing them, then you obviously will have a better time in one of their forums instead of this one...

Chander's picture

gretavo little better than Reprehensor

"being for free speech doesn't mean being for the dissemination of disinformation."

You betray an appalling lack of understanding about what 'freedom of speech means. Who is going to be the judge of what constitutes "disinformation"? You??

"anyone who thinks that wood and fetzer are legit will probably be better off finding another site to post on."

Many people think Wood and Fetzer are legit, including Kevin Barrett, Webster Tarpley and David Ray Griffin. These are people who are certainly held in higher esteem than you and Reprehensor.


You use this term of derision twice. I notice defenders of the party-line orthodoxy have a particular fondness for this slur; and a particular aversion to discussing, in a reasonable manner, the real hypotheses behind the slur.

"you're just going to have to either trust us..."

You have given me no reason why I should. And who is "us"?

"...go look into thöse "theories" for yourselves."

I assure you I have, and it would help you argue intelligently if you were to do the same.

But I can take a hint and won't be staying where free speech is not wanted.

gretavo's picture

whoa--i don't get a grace period?

i'm really not trying to live up to anyone's example... this is a good opportunity to see if we can't as a group try to come up with an acceptable way of dealing with the fact that some people have very different ideas as to what is worthwhile subject matter. should we be happy if 100 David Icke supporters register and begin to flood the blog with shape shifting lizard theories?

Look, if this site ends up alienating everyone who supports no planes at the towers, directed energy weapons, LIHOP limited hangout, SIlverstein is innocent, Israel had nothing to do with 9/11, then yes, maybe that will be a blow to the first ammendment, which would be a shame. But I bet we would be a damn effective group of hard core 9/11 truthers...

Chander's picture

gretavo's mind is made up

No, you would be a damn INeffective group of hard core "Stephen Jones said it so it must be true" nerds.

Annoymouse's picture

i gotta agree with RT here,

i gotta agree with RT here, if you know Killtown you know hes redundant and probably would have done everything in his power to get banned at some point anyway(im not sure what happened today to cause this to happen).

Annoymouse's picture


Do you believe a 757 crashed into that Pentagon and at Shanksville?

gretavo's picture

can I answer?

speaking for myself, not OTN... No I don't think 757s crashed either at the Pentagon or in Shanksville. And no that is not inconsistent with believing that SOME kind of Jumbo Jets were flown into the towers. The no-planers seem to be all about causing trouble over the fact that no planes is probably true in DC and Penn but most likely not true in NY. Wow, how clever. Sorry to anyone who thinks this is overreacting but damn, if we can't agree on who is being blatantly disruptive, how will we ever have intelligent debates about who is subtle disinfo?

OWN-the-NWO's picture

do I believe planes crashed into shanksville or pentagon

I think the evidence shows they didn't. But this is obviously a loaded lead in question to try and bait that somehow through logical fallacy that no planes were at the WTC as well, when the evidence clearly shows there was.

Bullshister's picture

Killtown is right

The vast majority of 911 sites have been infiltrated to ensure that:

(a) The official government conspiracy is shown to be false

(b) The alternative official truth movement conspiracy is what really happened

(c) Do anything they can to stop debate about what really happened.

Maybe some of you can explain the inconsistencies in the video below


Annoymouse's picture

They won't publish this comment

Hi, it's Ningen. Jon Gold wrote a comment which may reveal what is really going on, and which might explain why Real Truther was banned.

What's Going on at 911Blogger?
( Home » What's Going... )
Submitted by GeorgeWashington on Wed, 07/04/2007 - 9:22pm


Jon Gold:

I think...

There's a simple solution to this. For those that decide they would rather bash individuals, or the information they promote because it doesn't coincide with whatever "pet theory" they have rather than contribute something to the site, and to the cause, then ban them. There's nothing wrong with banning people.

Comments should be used to post supporting information (for whatever blog you're posting in), and the exchanging of ideas for activism.

Submitted by Jon Gold on Thu, 07/05/2007 - 5:36am


Thank you, Jon, for stating what this is really about

This has nothing to do with "civility." It has to with certain theories, promoted by certain people who claim that these theories, and only these theories, are in the interest of the cause, and who do not want those theories questioned.

Many disputes arose from accusations of "disinfo," which is uncivil but is a much bigger issue. I was one of the persons often accused of disinformation. I would then respond and explain why I believed that what I was saying was accurate. Much of my discussion of no planes was in this context, meaning that the problem was created by the false and gratuitous attacks. I would of course, quite reasonably, respond with anger at being slandered. Eventually, I identified myself by name and location and asked the anonymous cowards slandering me to do the same, or cease their slander.

I was also accused of an insidious plot to insinuate myself by sounding reasonable and agreeing with a lot of what people say. That is false and ludicrous.

I contributed to correcting misinformation. An example is greenback, who was pushing false claims about DoD regulations, which were explained early on by

I actually disagree with the Mineta theory, because I think it has nowhere near the significance attributed to it, and might even be disinformation of the limited hangout type. Nevertheless, I corrected greenback's information (and Adam Letalik's mistake about the time Mineta entered PEOC) because I didn't want it spread.

Reprehensor, do you plan on checking all the facts that are posted? Can you do that? Don't you see that comments, properly cited, are very useful in correcting misinformation? Can't you see that corrected misinformation is useful independent of the theory held by the corrector, as facts fit into various theories and must be accurate?

Another serious issue is that the rules of this blog were not followed. Comments are supposed to be downrated for violations of the rules, not mere disagreement.

It would be better to hide all comments, for reasons of space and allow people to click on comments or threads of comments.

Jon, many of the disputes arose from users that voted against your blogs, you complaining about that, and people explaining why they did that. You have a "pet theory," and you want to be able to promote that theory here without being questioned. Thank you for being fairly honest about that.

Arabesque has evaded this issue, and the issue of accusations of disinformation creating problems, in his reply to my comment at Reprehensor's blog. I generally agreed with much of what he said in his reply, because his "reply" did not address anything I said.

Annoymouse's picture

Arabesque Here

Thank you for agreeing with me. I'm sorry if I did not address your points, because they did not appear to be clear to me. In fact, my first response to you was "censored" to my amazement.

I don't know why certain people were banned at 911blogger, but if the point of the site is to argue about everything, and fight with each other instead of advancing the cause of 9/11 truth and getting answers, I don't really want to have a part in that. Debating just for the sake of debating is not really of value unless constructive points of view are forwarded, and genuine debate (i.e. not entrenchment) is taking place.

I agree that people shouldn't really name call for YOUR beliefs, and you will notice that I did not engage in this behavior at 911blogger. Yes, people strongly disprove of the no-plane at the WTC towers, but I think that they should either

1. Ignore you
2. Be civil in their disagreement to you

Personally, I think no one is going to ever be convinced of the no-plane at WTC theory, so I'm not that concerned about debating it or worried about it becoming a major issue... The Space Beam theory on the other hand, while equally absurd in my opinion... is supported by some pretty clever disinformation that I have seen some people fall for, and not just the people who think that DEW was used. I'd rather not get into those points at the moment, but I think that discussing this issue is partly useful for example in ending misunderstandings about specific things… for ecample: how the building contents were turned into "nano-dust" and other fictional concepts that even some reasonable people believe.

It appears to me that you like to play devils' advocate on a lot of issues Ningen, and that's fine with me. In fact, it is something that we should all do.

Keenan's picture

You're clever but deceptive, Arabesque

Your statement that "I agree that people shouldn't really name call for YOUR beliefs, and you will notice that I did not engage in this behavior at 911blogger" is bull shit. You have implied many times on 911b that people who criticized Jon Gold - one of the most obvious disinfo operatives ever in the history of the 9/11 Blogsphere - and those who didn't buy what they considered your circular and dishonest arguments regarding the Pentagon Big Boeing theory were disinfo agents. Your last comment to me on 911b, titled "Keenan Doublethink" was an outrageously inflammatory posting full of misrepresentations of my positions and contained baseless Jon Gold-style accusations about me along with big stinking smoke-screens, such as this statement:

"Now let's take a moment to see what you have contributed to this site... well it looks like there is nothing... no blogs... and you spend time going around accusing people of being agents? Did you know that this is one of the very same tactics that agents employ? I suppose it's just a coincidence that you have contributed nothing to this site except mostly for accusations and insults..."

Such a pathetic and worn out attempt to divert the conversation away from the real issues ALA Jon Gold (did you take lessons from him?). The vast majority of my comments at 911b were not accusations and insults, as you claim. You simply constructed a falshood that was not at all representative of my history of comments at 911b. However, I, like other people, were not shy about yelling out whenever we saw many high profile emperors on 911b were without clothes, and I have no regrets for that. In fact, I'm now sorry I didn't get a few more punches in before the LIHOP disinfo gang turned 911b into a Stalinist Ministry of Truth.

I'm not going to bother with any of your other false arguments because I've seen that no matter how many times people deconstruct your arguments on 911b, you keep repeating the same ones over and over in your attempt to bog people down having to re-hash the same things over and over again to you.

Arabesque, I think you will find that people on this forum are, on average, a bit more sophisticated than at 911b, so if you think you can play the same games here you will not get very far with people. So, I don't know what your plans are with us all here, but I for one have no more patience with you.

arabesque's picture

So much...

To say so little.

You are certainly welcome to your opinion about me, but don't think that I give a crap about it.

You are the one going around throwing FALSE accusations at people (while not even contributing a single blog at 911blogger). You act like COINTELPRO, since you fit the profile--someone who PRETENDS to be a supporter of the movement, but who instead justs hurls accusations and makes false claims at people, and sticks to arguing over ONLY the most divisive issues that many activists DISAGREE on. That's classic third level of disinformation--you should read my paper again, but it looks like you've mastered the ad-hominem.

You sir, are either a liar, or an idiot--and quite frankly I suspect both.

You are welcome to your fantasy world, but don't expect me to join it any time soon.

No offense, but I'd rather spend my time at a forum like Scholars for 9/11 truth and justice, where morons like yourself do not reside.

Annoymouse's picture

why does it matter if he

why does it matter if he contributed a blog or not? ive been going to 911blogger.com for YEARS and never once submitted a blog. does that make me any less of a "member"? and who made you and Albanese the "deciders" of what is and isnt disinformation? i guess thats one way to shoot down accusations that come your way.......

Annoymouse's picture


many if not most of the Scholars members(that are on record about it) dont think that FLight 77 hit the pentagon. are they "morons" too?

Big_D's picture

The thing about the Pentagon controversy...

for me anyway, and the reason I remain neutral on the subject, is the eye witness factor. I can't see trying to argue that the pentagon eyewitnesses are lying while pointing to all the eye witnesses to explosives at the WTC. We educated truther's can have great discussions around the differing opinions / theories regarding the believability of certain witnesses or even the merits of some of the differing theories as to what did happen at the pentagon. I just don't think arguing for no plane at the pentagon while recruiting amongst the sheep is good strategy. Now pointing out all the problems with the 'official theory', while remaining neutral, is different.

Flight 93, in my opinion, is a much bigger smoking gun. That's why is was shrouded, right from the start, in the mythical 'heroic passenger' tales. And we know how untouchable such tactical myths can be.

gretavo's picture

hey, Harley Guy was an eyewitness

to the destruction of the towers as a result of structural failure because the fires were just too intense. isn't it possible, maybe even probable given the inconsistent and contradictory eyewitness testimony at the Pentagon that perhaps by using a fly over timed with a locally placed explosive many people may truly believe they saw a jet crash into the Pentagon? And that some people are just lying about what they saw? I assume people here have read DRG's take on the subject in D9/11D--I found it pretty convincing...

larry horse's picture

i don't like david ray griffin

for many reasons. #1 being his exclusion of Israel/Mossad. red flag. his book intro was written by a cfr member (yeah, a little alex jones skepticism never hurt). anyway, if this dude is so fucking brilliant, he could've figured out that the mossad blew up the towers!

Jpass's picture

Sure about Mossad?

I haven't really looked into the Mossad. I know the basics but you seem so sure and I would just request you make a blog and outline the case mentioning only the strongest evidence that makes you so sure.

larry horse's picture

yes, i'm sure

who else could pull that shit off, film it, celebrate it, lie about it, be interrogated by the FBI, go home and lie to their mommies. they're straight up bitches! fuck them!

Jpass's picture

pretty storng case...

The dancing Israeli's is interesting. I'm more looking for evidence of who actually had access and resources to wire one of the 3 buildings. Say...wtc7..

gretavo's picture

my question is

how could silverstein NOT have been involved? and if he wasn't, why is he playing along? you would have to believe that silverstein became a strip club owning billionaire twister of right wing Israeli terrorists' arms like Sharon and Netanyahu by being a wilting flower. ha! ha ha ha haaah haha! no, really? no need to speculate--every investigation into arson and insurance fraud starts with? yep--the OWNER an the beneficiary of the insurance. sorry, but was he ever investigated and tehrefore cleared of wrongdoing? no? why not?

Big_D's picture

Yes, the educated discussion I referred to.

My point is, if I were to be interviewed on the street tomorrow on my opinion about the pentagon I would not feel it imperative to mention the fact that I don't believe the alleged plane never crashed there. Unless specifically asked.

I haven't read d911d yet but I'm sure DRG came to the best conclusion based on the available evidence. I completely agree with the fly over, explosive distractions theory. I also believe a smaller aircraft or missile was used. But I'll let the sleep walkers sort out the details for themselves, the problem is getting them to look.

arabesque's picture

You mean scholars for 9/11 truth and justice right?

"many if not most of the Scholars members(that are on record about it) dont think that FLight 77 hit the pentagon. are they "morons" too?"


Go figure--they quote Jim Hoffman and Pentagonresarch. That's a site some of you should familiarize yourself with.

Apologies for my last comments. I don't mean to to STOOP to the classless level of someone like Keenan, and for that I apologize. I'm perfectly aware there are a lot of smart people who disagree on the Pentagon. But according to Keenan's logic, Scholars for 9/11 truth and justice are AGENTS of the government.

What pissed me off was the fact that this guy has somehow has the intelligence to use a keyboard--but accuses ME of calling people agents for disagreeing about the Pentagon (I have NEVER done that), when it's HIM, that is doing this.

Now what do you call that?

And for the record, since WHEN does arguing the government REMOTELY CONTROLLED a plane into the Pentagon constitute supporting their position? Doesn't that mean.... inside job? Apparently--not to some people.

larry horse's picture

you're dancing on thin ice,

arabesque. rehashing arguments that no one bought at your garage sale over at apt911b is pretty lame.

arabesque's picture

TV Fakery versus Pentagon Fakery

I guess everyone is entitled to thinking that the same government who can't even fake a list of HIJACKERS properly, would somehow waste the effort to:

Fake Hundreds of eyewitness statements without any compelling contradictory testimony (i.e. a truck bomb, missile, etc. hit the Pentagon)
Fake Plane parts
Fake a Ridiculous Loop for seemingly no reason but to make the pilot look like a genius
Fake a plane strike after planning over 15 War Games to make it POSSIBLE to crash planes into buildings
Fake Light Pole Damage in broad daylight next to a HIGHWAY less that 500 FEET away from the Pentagon
Fake a damage pattern inside of the Pentagon consistent with the light pole Damage
Fake a hole that approximates the FUSELAGE of a 757 plane, and approximate wingspan on the first floor (look at the composite-not out of context photos). The small hole is loose change era-disinfo.

When they could just fly a plane into a building using remote control and make the "hijackers" look guilty.

Not to mention, change the NORAD timeline 3 times--even the 9/11 commission report claimed that NORAD was LYING for Christ's sake, and said that charges might need to be in order. But who cares about that when we can argue no-planes and ignore that evidence!

You know, TV Fakery at the WTC hypothesis, is not that different than the Pentagon Fakery Hypothesis. Both rely on A LOT of FAKERY--and I'm not talking about the TV variety.

gretavo's picture

see, you can't complain

that people reply to you with snark when you post snarky things like this instead of an actual argument. the whole "the government can't properly fake a hijacker list" argument is similar to the government can't properly respond to Katrina, etc. so how could they pull this off.

so just to illustrate, and to perhaps salvage this exchange, you say for example why would they fake a ridiculous loop.... who said they faked this? can you explain to everyone who doesn't know where the evidence for the ridiculous loop came from?

Keenan's picture

Oh good, does that mean you're leaving?

"No offense, but I'd rather spend my time at a forum like Scholars for 9/11 truth and justice, where morons like yourself do not reside."

I hope that means you're going away, Arabesque. Bye bye, don't let the digital door hit you on the fanny on the way out...say hello to your mentor and fellow agent Mr. Jim Hoffman for me...

Lazlo Toth's picture

It is a matter of trust

A poster over at the 9/11 Censored Blog quoted a post with a one liner attached:

"Many of those unhappy with the announcement will just stop visiting here after a while."

They apparently don't seem to care very much.

I then posted my last comment there:

It is not that they don't care. It is now a case of they don't trust anymore. How do we know that this site has not been finally co-opted by intelligence agencies that want to divide and conquer us. The spectre of censorship and lame-o excuses about server space for text content and "hate speech" are looking very shady indeed, and it is also interesting when one of the near constant "disruptive influences" and possible "provocateurs" seems to be part of the management team here, and you know who I am talking about. My spidey sense tells me something is very wrong here. PLEASE CANCEL MY ACCOUNT HERE IMMEDIATELY, and I would appreciate it if you would not forward my email address to your government handlers. Thanks, and good luck containing the 9/11 Truth Movement, kids....

They may take their time now to post and approve comments, but I tell you, my account was cancelled IMMEDIATELY. Jon Gold and his sayanim friends probably high-fived all the ops in the bunker. They are having a great night now. It is pretty sad though how 9/11 Truth gets censored by people who supposedly want to find the truth. Historically though, none of this should really surprise anyone. They must protect the graven idol of Israel at all costs.

Big_D's picture

You need one more choice in your poll.

"Who gives a rats ass what they do with comments at 911blogger."

Because we've now seen both of their 'faces'. as far as you getting banned from here goes, you made your bed, now sleep in it. I will admit I know nothing about the 'no-plane' theory. right off the bat it smacked of a provocateur tactic to discredit important 911 research & keep 'newbies' from taking 911 truth seriously.

Although, the latter may still hold true, I now also see it for the smoke & mirrors tactic it was in favor of real Shills not unlike Gold & Albanese. (You don't know how many times I wanted to scream "Shill!" at those fucks, but out of respect for 911b I bit my tongue. as best I could anyway.)

Annoymouse's picture

Another 'No Free Speech Zone' Shill Site

Maybe you people can't see how ridiculous this place is, but I sure can.

"You're COINTELPRO!" "No ... YOU'RE COINTELPRO!" Well yer nothing but a dis-info agent." ..."No it is obvious that you are projecting you COINTELPRO agent!"

On and on and on with this Goldie garbage. You people are a disgrace, a waste of time doing nothing but undermining other peoples worthwhile efforts. Killtown is worth more than all of you put together.


Jpass's picture

You fail to recognize...

That 9/11 Blogger initiated an outrageous censorship policy on comments. Of course this new site is going to start off with long-time users venting their frustrations and suspicious experiences with 9/11Blogger.com. THe actions almost confirm many suspicions I had about 'top tier' bloggers at that site.

Also, I don't see you commenting on any of the less divisive posts I and others have made on this web site.

gretavo's picture

ha! now the no-planers are defending jon gold

by saying what a waste of time it is to call him out for his BS. precious. and quite telling. don't worry natasha, if you have valid points to make they will be approved. even if you don't they will probably be approved, unless you make a habit of it and prove yourself to be the disruptor we suspect you of being...

Annoymouse's picture

Unbelievable Lunacy!

"I will admit I know nothing about the 'no-plane' theory." - Big_D

After admitting you know nothing about it you then condemn it anyway. Well tsk tsk.

If the above isn't bad enough. You are all choking to death on the fog of war over here, and doing nothing but harm to us all.

"You're COINTELPRO!" .... "No 'you're' COINTELPRO!" .... "No way .. gasp ... obviously you are 'both' disinfo agents!" .. cough cough .... "DISINFO AGENT!" ... choke ... "shill" .... gasp wheeze ... "agent" ... cough ..... "infiltrator" ....

Of course they had to ban Killtown for being hypocrite intolerant. No way could he fit in here.


Jpass's picture

If you can't see...

I think Killtown was banned for disrupting and being a prick, not discussing his theories.

Personally, I can't comment on 'no planes / tv fakery'. I lean towards..."totaly disinfo waste of time" but I guess I could be wrong.

Regardless, it's not my focus and (just a hunch here) not the focus of anyone else administrating this web site.

Keenan's picture

Killtown was not banned for his views

He was banned for contributing nothing but noise to this forum, even after being asked politely to stop. This is not a day care center, we are not obligated to put up with immature toddlers who have parenting issues.

Ningen, for instance, is a wtc no-planer, I believe. Yet he hasn't been banned here. Probably because he contributes something useful to the discussions and doesn't act like an assclown. Just my educated guess (I don't make the decisions about banning, etc.).

Lemonhoko's picture

Mi dos peso's

Ive seen Killtown around and even heard his recent debate with the LC boys on radio. My read on him is this. He starts his presense with his theories. He knows it is controversial so he "baits" the community into first discussing the facts and non facts of the no plane theory, then starts personal attacks on the people that oppose his views. He can not submit his view just once but is determined to shove it down your throat.
I viewed his material a few months ago, I wasnt impressed so I never commented on it. This is actually the first post I made concerning Killtown any where on the net.
At 911B, I tend to just skip his posts and read the following ones. If you havent noticed by now, his game is very repetitive. Im betting a few of the posters that have registered could be Killtown. Either that or he has a cult of no planers following him around to all the blog sites he frequents. It doesnt take a 20 year detective to read through some of these games that people play on the net..after awhile it becomes real apparant.
I could care either way if he was banned or not because I wont let him bait me into an argument that has no impact to what ever I do or think.
(Well, I guess the forum will look cleaner without his repetitive hype, so I guess the ban was ok ;))
I have also seen Ningen post at 911B. I dont always agree with him/her, but I do feel he does a good job on posting his thoughts in a civil manner and doesnt attack people for disagreeing. Much more mature attitude and someone I dont mind being in a community with at this point.


The 11th Day of Every Month

gretavo's picture

for sure

and I will take all responsibility (and credit!) for banning Killtown. I too am of the opinion that anyone with any views (again, within reason--no violent or hateful speech) so long as it is clear that the person holding those views is not a one-trick pony. I also reserve the right to give my opinion as to what even the civil no-planers are up to, which I will do again here...

The no-planers are part of the blatant disinfo crowd. There goal is not to convert anyone to their silliness, quite the opposite--it is to see that uninformed people have the worst possible view of the movement. Layer 1 disinfo if you will.

They provide a "natural" foil then for the subtle disinfo--the LIHOP limited hangout crowd that makes a habit of railing against them in order to look like they are the defenders of the "real truth".

Now that 911B has cracked down on free speech, the idea is to have the noplaners come here so that WE and not THEY (the subtle disinfo crowd) have to watse our time dealing with them. Don't worry though, I for one don't plan to waste much time on them--I do so for now because it is very instructive as to the tactics being used by the perps and their volunteer(?) army of defenders.

Anyone here into fractal geometry and the concept of self-similarity? It's the way that in nature certain patterns, like coastlines for example, tend to look similar at different levels of magnification. A head of broccoli is another example--each little part that makes up the whole looks like the whole. My point? The entire 9/11 lie and its coverup are similarly self-similar.

United We Stand! we were told after 9/11, though we did no such thing. Now the perps' defenders tell us to Stop Being Divisive! Get the picture? The appeal to unity relies on human's natural desire to be part of a group and not a "lone wolf". How else would a small elite control groups of people who outnumber them, if not by encouraging those masses to all act the same, not stray from the script, etc.? The irony is that they appeal to unity while at the same time employing their own divide and conquer efforts--see, they don't care that we're divided, they just want to control the divisions to their advantage, while making the masses feel that in fact they are, or at least should be united, that anyone straying from the script of acceptable discourse is dangerous, like a cancer, and must be ignored, or failing that, eliminated.

So I end this comment not with a threat to ban anyone but with a big Fuck You! to the no-planers AND their counterparts, the limited hangout LIHOP shills. That was F-U-C-K-Y-O-U in case you missed it. No, that is not a call for unity--not at all. It's a call to action--the endgame has started and quite frankly I like our chances.

Lazlo Toth's picture

Fractal Geometry

RT Gretavo man,
I used to work in scientific publishing, with my specialty being fractal geometry an non-linear dynamical systems mathematics, Very enlightening stuff.

gretavo's picture

i like the pretty pictures

of things like the mandelbrot set... my interest tends to be where patterns can be used to understand human society and culture similar to how we use them to understand weather.... never have been much of an academic so it's mostly just vague ideas gleaned from some of the more interesting books/authors in the pop science section... :)

Big_D's picture

Well, Natasha, to come down to your level of intellectual...

understanding; if you love killtown so much why don't you go marry him! LOL.

Seriously though, the 'no planes hit the WTC' theory is a waste of time & effort. I don't mind 'scientific discussion', but I'm not into circle jerks, thanks anyway.

Annoymouse's picture

Change for the better?

You now have pre-approved posts here, and yet still personal attacks petty sophistry and juvenile posturing remains the norm.

Killtown was banned merely for his theories obviously. For still this place is awash with foolish uncivil behavior, and really Killtown did nothing to offend by pointing this out earlier.

This place makes all 911 investigators look foolish, and so please do us all favor and close this place. That is unless of course that is your true purpose here.


Annoymouse's picture


"understanding; if you love killtown so much why don't you go marry him! LOL."

Big_D, one question. Just one.

Are you in second grade?

-Lord Tsukasa

casseia's picture

Completely bored by the Killtown brigade?

I've had about enough. Speak now, fellow registered users, or I'm going to start deleting these annoymouse posts when I see them.

portland_planehugger's picture

Completely bored by this forum

Let me get this straight, banning someone for talking about being banned? Or is it for asserting theories that are outside the norm? Which is it? I cannot figure out why exactly Killtown was banned.

I find it interesting that such blatant censorship and hypocrisy occur in these kinds of forums. Society marginalizes us for rejecting the official version of 911, and we therefore seek other, open minded individuals to share our thoughts. When our theories differ, are we automatically chastised and banned? What happened to the tenets this country was founded on? The first amendment doesn’t apply here?

Hateful rhetoric is clearly not only practiced here, but encouraged. Belittling and attacking people is childish and limits everyone involved. It benefits no one and nothing is gained.

I cannot seem to reconcile how this forum states that “Our desired goal is a provocative and informative resource for those who feel that the issue of 9/11 merits serious and thought-provoking discussion and debate,” yet qualifies this with the ubiquitous insinuation of as long as we agree with your opinion.

In addition to banning, ridiculing and debasing one member of the community, you continue and post yet another “serious and thought-provoking” discussion topic: “I happen to think that the Loose Change Boys are limited hangout shills. I realize that's not a popular position to take but it's what i think. they seem more caught up with being famous and popular than with the actual cause of 9/11 truth. I like to mock them because I think they do more than people realize to hold back the cause of truth.” And tell me, what have you done, other than moderate this pathetic forum, to further “the cause of truth?” Apparently by being condescending and immature; by openly attacking anyone in the movement you are furthering “the cause of truth.” How can this forum be taken seriously with this kind of rhetoric?

So again, why was Killtown banned? Although my answer to him is that being banned from this forum is not only a joke, but more importantly a gift.

And no, I didn’t miss the very clever “F-U-C-K-Y-O-U.” Nicely done.

“The peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is, that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error.” ~John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, 1859

casseia's picture


Okay, let's recap:

Killtown applies for membership. He is approved. He goes on and on about the "haters" at 911B. He is told, gee, that's sad. He goes on and on about the haters. He is told, you probably have more interesting things to discuss, why don't you discuss them? More and more about the haters. He is blocked. All of his friends come by to dis this site and praise Killtown.

Did you notice what didn't happen? There was no discussion of any of Killtown's research. Sorry, but this is just blatant and boring disruption. I really expected better and the only reason I'm even responding is because I feel a sense of responsibility, having answered positively when asked for my opinion about Killtown registering.

Get over it. Post about something else, because we're done with this topic.

BTW, portland_planehugger, I approved your membership, too, because you've never been disruptive on the local list you joined. If this forum is boring you then by all means move on to greener pastures!

portland_planehugger's picture

A sense of responsibility

Sequentially, it appears as though this happened very quickly, not over some great length of time. At what point, precisely could any of his research been asserted? I appreciate outlining your reasoning, in particularly in that (I’m assuming) it was not due to the no-plane theory, but rather for going “on and on about the haters?” Or because of the theory were you waiting for an excuse to ban him to present itself?

It makes no sense to me, and I will get over it, once I can fully understand it. There are posts all over this site ridiculing people, yet when someone is seeking an empathetic ear, so to speak, they are banned.

My intent here is to point out the blatant hypocrisy, nothing more.

Lemonhoko's picture


For banning a disruptor you want to point out hypocrisy?

I call BULLSHIT on your motives and the insinuative attitude towards the banning of killtown.

You keep asking the same question and between your questions, you fling barbs at this community and admins, all while justifying your actions as rightious.

I dont think anyone here OWES you an explanation. Its very clear whats going on. Take 20 minutes and start at the top of this blog and work down one thread at a time. If you still dont get it, then your AGENDA here is clear or you cant comprehend english.

One more time for pity- killtown was banned for being disruptive. He has a proven history of this action all over the internet.


The 11th Day of Every Month

portland_planehugger's picture

My agenda...

No one owes me an explanation, true. However, what I wanted to know specifically was why someone was banned and labeled as a "disruptor" when it is obviously "the cool" thing to do here. I wanted to know if it was something Killtown said here or if it was because of something he said or did outside of this site. And now thanks to your accomplished prose I know: "One more time for pity- killtown was banned for being disruptive. He has a proven history of this action all over the internet."

And now I am left, empty, trying sooo hard to come up with something witty to top your "I call BULLSHIT" insult... and I just can't...

gretavo's picture

PP, are you here only to defend KT?

that seems to be the case... if so, it indicates that you are not here in good faith. did you have any intention when you signed up to actually contribute anything other than disruption and bitching and moaning about how unfair we are?

gretavo's picture

if i may...

one reason this blog exists in the first place is because of the hypocrisy on 911bloger. it was perfectly OK over there to mock and ridicule anyone who the group consensus found to have established beyond reasonable doubt there insincerity. classic examples are jim (uncle) Fetzer and Judy (jetson) Wood.

when even mild criticism was made of certain site pets like Jon Gold, though, suddenly civility "mattered". I was one of the people who after being betrayed by Fetzer decided that mocking him was justified and in fact helpful because if we didn't do it then our opponents WOULD and make us look like we couldn't tell the difference between sound reasoning and speculative crap.

Lemonhoko's picture

Good point RT

gretavo posts:

"when even mild criticism was made of certain site pets like Jon Gold, though, suddenly civility "mattered"."

I couldnt agree with you more. I said something negative about the LC3 trailer at 911B and got jumped on and voted down hard. I think you were the only one to voice your support in what I was saying RT. And basically I wasnt critising the movie, but the fact that we didnt need another 911 movie that targets the pockets of Truthers.
Loosechange was phenomenal when it was free on the internet. Charging Hollywood fares from the base of this movemment, just didnt sit well for me.
Woops, off topic again. I do that alot >/


The 11th Day of Every Month

Annoymouse's picture

"...betrayed by Fetzer."??

You have a bad habit of dropping little barbs and then not backing them up with anything. If you feel Fetzer wronged you in some way, let's hear about it. Otherwise keep it to yourself.

I first realized something was very wrong over at 911B when they outright banned Prof. Fetzer from posting. They also heaped ridicule on Prof. Wood without ever bothering to actually examine what she was saying. Sadly, it seems you defend the actions of 911B!

When I and others started revealing some of Prof. Wood's findings over there, and started reaching some open minds, they effectively shut the site down, and they will no longer post anything from me. If there is an ounce of sincerity in your assertion that this site will not practice the same hypocricy as 911B, then I ak you, please don't go down that same road.

gretavo's picture

space beams and dustification is 100% shillery

Judy Wood's site is a joke. The videos of the spire "dustifying" was the last straw for me. By using a lo-res version they pretend that what is observed is a steel structure becoming dust. In fact in hi-res versions it is clear the spire is falling while leaving behind a trail of dust. the fact that when these issues were raised none of you Fetzer/Wood supporters had anything to say about them says it all.

If anyone wants to waste their time proving to themselves whether I'm right about those two they are welcome to. I don't plan to waste any more of my time on people like that. One strike and you're out in my book. Fetzer and Wood are no better than any of the perps' apologists. Period.

To any and all disinfo shills who come here to try to stir up trouble, go ahead and waste your time--you're failing big time!

Annoymouse's picture

"high-res version"?

If there is a high-res version that shows what you describe, I would certainly like to see it. Can you provide a link? (I think I know the answer, but you never know).

I don't know when or where "these issues were raised", as you state. I didn't see them.

You haven't answered my question about how Prof. Fetzer, "betrayed" you. Gee, why am I not surprised.

Apparently you think I am a "disinfo shill", or is this just the name you call anyone you happen to disagree with? I don't understand this animosity to an idea (dustification). If it is so nutty, why not show the world why it could not be the explanation. I know that is harder work than just throwing around invective, but it doesn't get us any closer to the truth of what happened. ( For now, I am assuming you are interested in the truth -- at least you haven't censored me yet).

[casseia approved this anonypost]

gretavo's picture

nope, not going to waste my time

if anyone wants to verify it they will benefit from doing the legwork themselves. then when they see the hi res version they will feel just as I did when months ago I wasted time giving Judy Wood the benefit of the doubt.

larry horse's picture

how many months

did jetson's spacebeam theory take to fall through the cracks? for me, it never held water. haha, two cliches in one stupid post. match that barbeque-esque. mmm...

Annoymouse's picture

I'm just wondering...

why you don't answer any of Chander's questions? Or provide him the link he asked for? To tell you the truth it looks like he called your bluff.

Annoymouse's picture

Wow Thanks for your input

Wow Thanks for your input and giving kill clown this much attention, he is laughing all the way to his distraction cave. I do like the discourse though it helps everyone to get to the truth I just don't care for the drama.

911 blogger was a better sight with all you gals and guys there

RT is fair Like dz was in the beginning but dz caved into pressure and left and were is he now? in the truth movement? does he not care? what is rep real name whats his background? I haven't been booted yet but I feel a lot comfortable here then I do at 911 blogger

gretavo's picture

dz was good while he lasted...

and sorry, but I did ban Killtown.  I'm not trying to be the free
speech saint to a disruptor...  anyway thanks for the kind words,
we're trying to make this a fun place, i guess if we ever became as
popular as 911b we might have problems with that, but then again i see
no reason for having this become party central.  just a nice
alternative to keep the big boys honest!

Jpass's picture

911blogger back at it...

I guess they've re-enstated the comment moderation policy.

I posted a commented to GW's blog about Barry Zwicker writing the article about dealing with disinformation.

Since the comment is in line to get approved, maybe someone here can answer my question....

Anyone know why Barry Zwicker would anonymously write an article about dealing with disinformation and then a few days later  they would 'release' the name of the author?

Were you all waiting in suspense wondering who wrote this article? The mysetery has been solved... 



casseia's picture

That was my guess, too

We should've had a pool.

I haven't tried to post so far today, but as of yesterday, I wasn't moderated.  I'm wondering if you somehow got yerself "flagged for moderation" -- they threatened to do that to "troublemakers" (ooooh...).  I think if you submit a notarized affidavit indicating that you now believe the the ISI transfer is of paramount importance in investigating 9/11, and that you have 100% confidence in the sources associated with it, they'll probably unflag you.  Not.


So, what I will be watching is whether it looks like you know who has also been re-moderated -- ie, no real-time repartee.   

Jpass's picture

Mod this bitches

Hmm...hope that is not the case. If they've put my in the moderated bin without contacting me EVER about anything...bad or good...I would say that is an alarming development over at 911thoughtsuppressionblogger.com. I'm not surprised

The entire moderating comments bullshit is strange to me. I don't see the need for it and yet the community is apparently 'fed up with...." or something.  Maybe I just don't particpate enough.

If they are pulling this sort of selective modding, we'll have to get a contingent accepted into the mod-bin and atleast give them something to do with their time.

Chris's picture

have they ever contacted

have they ever contacted you? even when you contact them first? in my experience, only SBG(and dz when he was there) had the decency to get back to me when i would e-mail. to answer casseia, you know who attacked me out of nowhere, smeared me as a racist and told the mods to "wake the fuck up" or something so i dont think hes in danger of getting his comments moderated any time soon.

Jpass's picture

dz did

i e-mailed dz and a few weeks later he responded. never had to contact anyone else.

I contacted him because some shadball used my real name in a blog response to that Omar Saiid Sheikh blog that I did way back. I dont keep my name hidden but it was a strange tone like he went out of his way to refer to me in full name instead of Jpass as I have written for years.

Jpass's picture

so are your commentes modded at 911bloggercontroller.com

I can't get comments in anywhere. Are you guys comments being scanned before insertion?

Big_D's picture


At least my last comment went straight through. I have a feeling Goldie the lap dog's gonna be crying foul by the end of the day. LOL

Jpass's picture

wtf then, I am being selectivly moderated?

jeez. none of my comments went through for the last 3 days.

Yea I'm following that WHO IS? thread. I never wouild have imagined that Jon Gold has an issue with physical evidence.

This is not a physical evidence investigation!

It's the ISI god damit!


Jpass's picture

Take the time to moderate my comments...

I'm surprised SBG has the time to moderate my comments but doesn't have the time to shoot me an e-mail to explain the situation at all.

Apparently, myself, Jon Gold, and another fellow whos name could not be recalled are now being selectivly moderated.

Let's see....

Blog moderation? Comment Moderation? Selective Comment Moderation?

The fact that this site (911blogger.com) moderates every single blog post and selectivly moderates certain users with no explanation to them or their visitors is some shady shit..uh huh.

Jon Gold's posts rarely get any discussion unless someone disputes his information. Only when the much needed antagonist comes along is there any head way made on any of the issues he presents, which are important to dispute or accept.  Otherwise his shit has two comments like this one...

"Jon Gold, you are awesome! You work so hard!"

Wtf is that? Way to dive right into the research!

They are restricting debate on issues of importance. They are restricting specific issues all together for all we know.

Which blogs don't make it? Which comments don't make? Are these guys anonymous?

Should anonymous moderators be in charge of such a seemingly important 9/11 Truth operation?

They moderate the damn blogs for crying out loud. Moderate Killtown's blog not mine...wtf? 

Anyone who has spent time studying the information about ISI and all that noise are 'arguing too much' about it. Yea, don't dispute anything. If you disagree...shut your shit hole and don't rock the boat.

The way it was put to me was like this:

"I fought so hard to get un-moderated comments back. Please relax on the arguing" 

The guy morphs himself into the resident punching bag...and now there is seletive moderation on 9/11 Blogger? 

Maybe I'll just send private 'fuck you' messages to my 911blogger controller.

If you ever enstate blog moderation here, at least have the decency to create a dump of all moderated content.

inside's picture

gold's "who is" thread is

gold's "who is" thread is now gone, of course he was getting his ass handed to him...

Jpass's picture

mysteriously absent

I was mysteriously absent from that crap heap of links to the biggest copy n' paste job you've ever seen.

I'm all about the truth you know...but this 9/11blogger can't be anymore shady then this. I'm sure the answer is, as usual..."we are soooo busy and doing our best FOR YOU...please don't argue".

I just had a brilliant idea.

Don't MODERATE THE DEBATE and you won't be busy!

Jpass's picture

Hears some shady shit for you....

Unless I missed it before that "Who Is?" blog was pulled from history.....here is one of my comments that got nixed...not word for word but good enough.

"hey jon Im not trying to be argumentative but none of the links you provide have working source links. You really should provide source links if you want people to take this information seriously.

(NYTIMES 2002) doesn't cut it for me"

That was not allowed.

So, one of my main concerns with Jon Gold's 9/11 Truth movement manifested itself when he posted an article by Paul Thompson called "The true culprits of 9/11" or something like that.

My main contention was that almost 70% of the source links in there article were broken. Then we are left with some shady Times Of India article as the only source.

Fitting that today....almost one year later....my comments about sources goes missing into the mod-bin.

Oh well...what are you gonna do?

Annoymouse's picture

9/11 blogger voting comments comprimised

There seems to be some teamwork going on over there between Arabesque, Ms. Col Klink & Gold to try to push everything toward LIHOP. They appear to be having some success. I can't understand how the mod's are allowing Col. Klink to mess with the voting numbers like she is?

Annoymouse's picture


inside: "gold's "who is" thread is now gone, of course he was getting his ass handed to him..."

Well, he probably edited it so it goes truh moderation again..?
All the other 'Who is' fog-and-smoke pages are still there , so why nix that one?
Its not like his ass wasnt handed to him in the other ones too...

Hm, maybe he is editing it to add Zakheim, Silverstein, etc etc... ? :)


Chris's picture

yep, the coward got smashed

yep, the coward got smashed and took his ball and ran home again. so fucking pathetic. i would LOVE to hear the excuse for why he deleted this one. oh, and my comments are now moderated too. fuck you Arabesque, you fucking toolbag.

Jpass's picture

shade balls

I sent SBG an e-mail asking whether he thought moderating someone's comments without a warning, without an explanation, without showing the community..."this is why this happens"...is shady or not...

He doesn't think anything they do is shady. Anonymous people moderating all content posted to 9/11 blogger is shady

It's not like I'm sitting here with evidence these guys work for the ISI...I'm just saying...the topic at hand is one that should be presented in the most trusting and transparent way possible.

911 Truth is about fighting secrecy. 911Blogger.com promotes secrecy and suspicion. 


Chris's picture

i cant argue with that. its

i cant argue with that. its pretty sad whats happened to a once great resource. as far as SBG goes, i dont know whats up with him now. he used to be the only one that showed common courtesy. and he told me that since he was the one who fought to bring back un-moderated comments that its up to him to make sure  things dont"get out of hand". i guess defending myself against that fucking tool Arabesque constitutes getting "out of hand" now. ive always liked SBG but hes starting to turn into GW and Rep with all the unnecessary moderation and censorship. not a good sign. 911blogger was already well on its way to dying, now it seems it has no chance of rehabing itself. and whats this i hear about Col. Jenny manipulating point totals? is this true?

Jpass's picture

could be the same guys for all we know

Maybe SBG is really Jon Gold? Jon is big. Jon is a guy.

Have you ever talked to or met any of the three anonymous moderators of the 911 Truth Debate?

If I were to appoint myself as the anonymous, self appointed moderator of the 911 Truth Debate I would probably make it seem less of a shady seeming operation.

Chris's picture

haha, no, i doubt they are

haha, no, i doubt they are the same person. though Gold seems to be a de facto moderator or whatever you wanna call it with the history of double standards that have gone on there concerning him. if they are the same person i would have to say that Jon is one of the greatest actors ive ever met because SBG has always been pretty rational and respectful until now. i really dont know what his deal is here. nothing was getting out of hand and there was no reason to do this and im quite frankly surprised that its SBG and not GW or Rep doing this. did he tell you why you were being moderated? im still waiting for him to get back to me. im pretty sure ive seen pictures of both dz and SBG but have never met them in person. ive basically always had a good rapport with them both online. ive never even seen GW or Reprehensor nor do i know who they are in real life or what their names really are. they've pretty much always failed to answer my e-mails, particularly since Rep went off the deep end and banned me for some stupid shit(i think i accused the mods of voting me down. Jon told the mods to "wake the fuck up" but i guess thats ok......) and was rebuked a day or 2 later by sbg. i think GW and Rep have always disliked me because i dont take the golden boys bullshit. i cant argue with you, the mods at blogger certaintly breed suspicion with their actions.

casseia's picture

Hey, I started a new blog thread for this topic...

because this one is getting unwieldy, and I hate it when that happens.  I'm also going to invite Erin S. Myers over (dunno whether he would want to) to discuss what's up with that Amerika Uber Alles thread -- since it seem to be under an extreme form of down-vote thuggery.