Wednesday, December 31, 7000

Permanent Top Post by JM Talboo and Steve W.



By JM Talboo and Steve W.

http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2008/10/debunking-myths-on-conspiracy-theories.htmlMany people subconsciously make the mistake of only seeing the issues concerning 9/11 in black and white, as opposed to shades of gray. This is known as the black-or-white fallacy. In this case, the false dilemma is: 9/11 was either carried out by Al-Qaeda or it was "an inside job."

Just because the evidence suggests that rogue elements of US and other international intelligence agencies were involved doesn't mean bin Laden and Al-Qaeda hijackers weren't involved.

In the fight to uncover the truth about 9/11 we must contend with individuals and groups that distort, omit and lie about important details in order to defend the official narrative - the 911 truth Debunkers.

 

The NORAD-stand-down, various whistleblowers, and physical evidence centered around the destruction of the 3 World Trade Center Buildings in New York, make a strong case that the attacks involved substantial inside help.


We might be wrong about where we suspect this all leads, but the "debunkers" are wrong when many essentially argue that it's acceptable for 70% of 9/11 family members questions to have never been answered by the 9/11 Commission. So of course, most have no qualms about promises made to 9/11 family members being broken by the Commission to investigate all whistleblower claims, which a substantial amount of the public find highly-suspicious at minimum, with many regarding the evidence as suggestive of complicity to varied degrees.

The below link proves that many thousands of family members want a new investigation. Likely the amount of people killed that day is outnumbered by these 9/11 victim's family members.


[On the left side (above) is a video of WTC 7 collapsing. On the right side is a video of a controlled demolition.]


And it stands to reason, that these ilk feel the lack of air defense story is above scrutiny to the point that secrecy and rewards are warranted. So what if this tale consists of 3, or some contend 4, mutually contradictory versions of events and admitted lies. It makes perfect sense that the top officials from NORAD and the FAA received promotions, as opposed to having to provide documents with data that would prove that the jet fight fighters were acceptably responsive, given the past response time averages.


Unsurprisingly, they hate even the best of the "Loose Change" films, but loose ends are no biggie.

The Washington Post reported on August 2, 2006 that:
Suspicion of wrongdoing ran so deep that the 10-member commission, in a secret meeting at the end of its tenure in summer 2004, debated referring the matter to the Justice Department for criminal investigation, according to several commission sources... "We to this day don't know why NORAD [the North American Aerospace Command] told us what they told us," said Thomas H. Kean, the former New Jersey Republican governor who led the commission. 'It was just so far from the truth. . . . It's one of those loose ends that never got tied."
So, if 9/11 didn't have an inside element, what's to stop such a scenario from taking place in the future when we get investigations that have attributes like these? 

It is therefore the purpose of this website to rebut the hollow claims of the so-called 911 truth 'Debunkers' and clarify what is known about the attacks for the benefit of those following the debate and also for the largely uninformed public.

Sorry that we don't allow any comments, but if you wish to communicate any thoughts you have about the published material please contact us here. Ad hominems will be ignored, but well-formed rebuttals may be addressed (and that is a subjective matter) provided we have not refuted the points therein numerous times on this blog already.

FAIR USE NOTICE

National Security Notice via Washington's Blog:

We are NOT calling for the overthrow of the government. In fact, we are calling for the reinstatement of our government. We are not calling for lawlessness. We are calling for an end to lawlessness and lack of accountability and a return to the rule of law. Rather than trying to subvert the constitution, we are calling for its enforcement. We are patriotic Americans born and raised in this country. [Four foreign countries also represented here at DTD]. We love the U.S. We don't seek to destroy or attack America ... we seek to restore her to strength, prosperity, liberty and respect. We don't support or like Al Qaeda, the Taliban or any supporting groups. We think they are all disgusting. The nation's top legal scholars say that draconian security laws which violate the Constitution should not apply to Americans. Should you attempt to shut down this site or harass its authors, you are anti-liberty, anti-justice, anti-American ... and undermining America's national security.

Friday, April 3, 2015

Hit piece documentary: The 9/11 Truth movement in Sweden – ENGLISH SUBTITLES

Click Pic to Enlarge
vaken.se

A TV-program from 2010 (hit-piece) made by Swedish TV4 about The 9/11 Truth movement in Sweden and also in other parts of the world. TV4:s approach and agenda was to demonize all 9/11-truthers and slandering all interested in 9/11 by portraying them in this TV-program as ”anti-semitic” and ”a threat to democracy”. People watching this program will instantly recognize this unethical approach towards investigating a very serious issue like the 9/11 attacks.

Vaken.se strives to bring forth information that regular mainstream media usually neglects or minimizes its importance. We long for a more transparent news coverage with a broader view, which in its turn leads to a more open and free society. Vaken.se has been active for 10+ years and is now one of Swedens largest alternative media outlets with 70.000–100.000 unique visitors per month and about 10.000.00+ page hits.

For more information on Vaken.se read: VAKEN.SE – FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS.
If you are an architect or engineer, please sign the petition at Architects and Engineers For 9/11 Truth.
To contact us, please use this form and we’ll get back to you as soon as possible.

Please take a second and LIKE our Facebook page. We appreciate it!



Related:

WTC 7 Info & Building 7 Petition

Thursday, April 2, 2015

We Were Lied To About 9/11 - Episode 25 - Jonathan Kay

Published on Mar 30, 2015

Jonathan Kay is a Canadian journalist. He is the editor-in-chief of The Walrus and former comment pages editor, columnist and blogger for the Toronto-based Canadian daily newspaper National Post. He is also a book author and editor, a public speaker, and a regular contributor to Commentary Magazine and the New York Post. His freelance articles have been published in a variety of US publications including Newsweek, The New Yorker, Salon.com, The New Republic, Harper's Magazine, the Los Angeles Times, The Weekly Standard, The Literary Review of Canada, The National Interest and The New York Times. Books he has written are “The Volunteer: A Canadian's Secret Life in the Mossad” which was co-written by Michael Ross, and Among The Truthers.



Related:

Debunking Jonathan Kay, his book Among the Truthers, and Other 'Debunkers'

'Debunker' Related Excerpts from and Review of '9/11 Truther The Fight for Peace, Justice and Accountability' by Jon Gold

Monday, March 2, 2015

A Disgraced Forum Tested One Last Time


Ziggi Zugam is testing the remnants of the disgraced forum that once belonged to JREF, to see if anyone there can provide scientific support for NIST´s collapse initation theory for Building 7. The frontman of this forum, Skeptic Magazine writer Reverend Chris Mohr has been notified and encouraged to carefully observe the behavior and alleged knowledge of his forum buddies.

Interested readers are encouraged to observe this debate, and see if NIST´s story is as utterly unscientific and wrong as suspected. In addition, it should be interesting for "people on the fence" to discover how little scrutiny NIST´s story has received on this supposed forum of hard-core skeptics, or in other words, see how pseudo-skeptics have managed to bury the problems under the rug for more than 6 years. Yes, NIST´s final report on Building 7 was published in 2008.

It has been predicted that the prominent defenders of NIST on this forum will find excuses to avoid the discussion, and that their troll friends will attempt to bury the discussion with BS, in an effort to divert attention.