About half of the 9/11 websites that claim to have proof about 9/11 complicity promote claims that are not true -- some of these sites are incompetent, a few appear to be promoting nonsense deliberately. Most of the liars make sure to include enough real material to establish their bona fides before lying.

Many websites, publications, books and movies that contain erroneous information about 9/11 complicity issues are well-meaning and merely have been fooled by some of the hoaxes -- but good intentions do not make the claims true.

The REAL evidence that 9/11 was an inside job is hard to find due to loud liars offering phony evidence used to distract (and discredit) 9/11 skeptics. The growing flood of fake claims for complicity is evidence of a sophisticated psychological warfare effort to cover the tracks of the conspiracy.

Blurry photos that magically appear years later, just as the 9/11 truth movement grows in popularity and political influence, are not evidence of what happened. Just because someone says "inside job" does not mean that their theories of what happened, whether well-intentioned or malicious, are proven or even provable. Many, if not most of the people echoing these hoaxes are sincere in their beliefs - but their sincerity doesn't make these claims true, nor does it mitigate the ridicule factor that the hoaxes generate among the majority of the public. The idea that 9/11 was an inside job is a difficult enough point of view to advocate for the majority of people in the United States without making the thesis dependent on blurry images or other fraudulent types of evidence -- it is critical to focus on the claims that are proven beyond reasonable doubt, with the highest quality documented evidence.

A major component of the "inside job" thesis is that 9/11 was at least in part a "false flag" operation, staged by the US government to discredit its opponents in the Middle East in order to provide the pretext to seize the oil fields and impose the "Homeland Security" police state. It would be naive to assume that the "inside job" conspirators were not also conducting false flag operations to persuade the public that 9/11 skeptics were easily debunked in order to hide the actual evidence for complicity.

To paraphrase Rev. Jesse Jackson: "Keep Hoax Alive!"

----------------------

911blogger.com

911blogger apparently started up in mid-spring 2005, and immediately got attention for copying a video of David Ray Griffin's successful lecture in Madison, Wisconsin (which was broadcast on the C-Span network). 911blogger got instant credibility from many sources for this video link, and emails were soon flying across the internet promoting this site as a place to visit for excellent videos. But what else is at this site?

911blogger features prominent links to WingTV (right-wing promoters and personal attacks of 9/11 researchers Michael Ruppert and Jim Hoffman), Karl Schwarz (an unknown, it would seem, but who links to Letsroll911 & Jack Blood, amongst others) as well as featuring the DVDs 'In Plane Site' and 'Loose Change,' which promote the memes of 'No Commercial Jets,' not only at the Pentagon but also at the WTC! 'Team 8' is featured on there, which promotes 'plane swapping,'

 http://mparent7777.blog-city.com/read/1247232.htm
The 9/11 Truth Movement wouldn't even have the David Ray Griffin video had it not been for him. Try focusing on unity, and not who is disinfo and who isn't. Pointing out who is disinformation is disinformation.

The idea that 911blogger was somehow necessary for David Ray Griffin to have made this video is ridiculous. It's a nice touch that the defender of their tactic suggests that 9/11 skeptics should focus on unity (generally a good idea) even though the 911blogger site is promoting fake claims that many 9/11 skeptics are united in thinking are not true.

from a friend of 911blogger:

I have been doing this a VERY long time. One of the things I've learned is that it's more important to focus on the truth, rather than who's right, and who's wrong. The fact of the matter is, there is MORE than enough evidence to reopen the investigation. As a movement, THAT'S what we should be focusing on.

If you make a conscious effort to point out who's "disinfo", then the people who come across your site that may have visited those previous sites, may question the movement in its' entirety, and that's not what we want to happen.

Since my site is affiliated with www.911blogger.com, I would appreciate it if you would take them off of your list. I know the owner, and I KNOW that he's not disinfo. He hasn't been doing this for a very long time, so he's not aware of who's right, and who's wrong. He collects all 9/11 information, and posts it on his site, regardless of where it comes from.

as noted elsewhere, the vacuum cleaner approach is not the same as carefully differentiating the hoaxes from the best information

----------------------

911inplanesite.org
(also mirrored at powerhour.com and policestate21.com)

The film "9/11: In Plane Site" is a slick production that includes most of the red herrings and hoaxes that have distracted the 9/11 Truth Movement. Detailed reviews are at  http://www.oilempire.us/inplanesite.html

This film, released a few months before the 2004 Presidential Election, is a conglomeration of most of the red herrings surrounding the 9/11 truth movement. Nearly every piece of "evidence" in it is wrong, even if the conclusion ("inside job") is correct. "Plane Site" includes hoaxes, misinterpreted evidence, logical leaps unsupported by evidence, and some footage that is almost certainly completely fraudulent. The video clips that can be proven to be authentic are merely those plagiarized from other films, such as the WTC 7 collapse, the firefighter sequence, and the footage from Oklahoma City.

In Plane Site only promotes the "Letsroll911" website (the loudest promoter of the "pod" claim), which means that "In Plane Site" is probably a "Webfairy" production (the video operation that made "new" videos of 9/11 years after the fact).

Perhaps the most revealing aspect of this fake film is that the cover graphic shows the same photo of a Boeing 757 that was posted to the "911truthalliance" list in May 2004 pointing out that the "pod" was merely an illusion. In other words, the manufacturers of "Plane Site" put a photo showing the "pod" is a fake claim on the cover of the DVD -- a bad joke "hidden in plain sight.

----------------------

911review.org

the best analysis is at www.911review.com, authored by the webmaster of www.wtc7.net, widely considered the best "physical evidence" website.

----------------------

911skeptics.blogspot.com

A gossip column supposedly covering the 9/11 Truth Movement, yet it spends as much energy covering the red herrings and the "pod people" sites as the real efforts of those doing work to uncover verifiable evidence and do productive political organizing. This site claims that people who deny the reality of finite oil supplies are "progressive oil researchers" (even though the people referenced know little, if anything about petroleum geology, agriculture, energy, or other related topics), and those who point out that the "pod" claims are bogus are conducting a "smear campaign against 9/11 scientists." It's working hard to promote strange attacks on hard working volunteers, to consider evidence-less theories as somehow equal to carefully documented material, and to promote a variety of snide insults masquerading as a news report. One of its favorite tactics is to pretend that there's a big split among 9/11 skeptics whether 9/11 was allowed to happen or engineered by the Bush / Cheney regime, but the real split is between those seeking to be accurate in their analyses, and those promoting disproved material such as the "pod plane" silliness.

The author of this "blog" apparently co-created the so-called 9/11 Science and Justice Alliance, which is apparently a centralized clearinghouse for 9/11 conspiracy red herrings. This alleged "alliance" created a flyer on 9/11/2004 (archived at cosmicpenguin.org and 911review.org, two sites promoting the "no Pentagon plane" and "pod" hoaxes) that is one of the least readable, most absurd contributions toward 9/11 skepticism -- it is enough to make those who are convinced that 9/11 was an inside job start to support the official claims that it was a surprise attack.

One positive contribution from this site:

In Plane Site
The ongoing success of Dave v. Kleist's video (which received most of his sources from Phil Jayhan's letsroll911.org)

It's useful to learn that the "planesite" film is largely based on the "letsroll" site, which in turn had much of its work performed by the discredited "webfairy" video site. In Plane Site = Let's Roll 911 = The Webfairy

Some of the bogus 9/11 websites, if you trace back their intellectual framework, and in some cases, their "mirror" sites, are probable candidates for being part of the "webfairy" operation (an effort that started by promoting the ludicrous idea that the first 9/11 plane was really a missile masked by a King Kong sized hologram). These "webfairy" type websites proliferated and multiplied (with increasing numbers of allied website domains) through the 2004 election season, which was somewhat effective at dampening down the political impact of the 9/11 truth movement. Their "in plane site" production is much more slick and sophisticated than the easily dismissed "webfairy" site. The latter has only attracted a small handful of supporters, some of whom are probably co-conspirators in the effort to dilute the effectiveness and pollute the message of the 9/11 truth movement.

----------------------

americanfreepress.net

The "American Free Press" is an ultra-right-wing newspaper that also publishes the "Barnes Review," a neo-Nazi holocaust denial publication and website that has praised Hitler as worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize and sells a variety of obnoxious books that pretend the Holocaust did not happen. The so-called AFP has created a number of hoaxes (the "no plane crash in Pennsylvania" claim, possibly the "Building 6 explosion" hoax) and has been promoting others, such as "no plane crash at the Pentagon."

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willis_Carto profile of Willis Carto, famous American neo-Nazi who founded AFP/Barnes

 http://www.barnesreview.org/Nobel_Prize/nobel_prize.html Barnes Review says Hitler deserved the Nobel Peace Prize

 http://squawk.ca/lbo-talk/0304/2395.html report on a neo-nazi conference in Europe that included American Free Press

----------------------

angieon911.com

A site that is long on invective toward nearly everyone who is organizing to expose 9/11, and short on evidence and articles that explain the cover-ups. Perhaps it is merely jealousy, but it is a really petty site that distracts in its gossip-mongering. One creepy article is called "The Creepy Sides of the 911 Truth Movement" -- relentlessly attacking people who work hard for no pay. The author spent considerable time trying to convince the webmaster of this website in March 2004 that hard working volunteers for 9/11 Visibility were really government agents (without even the slightest evidence for the accusation) and that petroleum was not really a finite material and therefore to talk about Peak Oil was to be a shill of the oil companies. However, the "Angie" person showed herself to be remarkably unfamiliar with energy issues, the use of oil in agriculture, the interrelationships of energy, ecology and economy. It is certainly true that there are some "creepy" people infiltrating the 9/11 exposure efforts, but snotty, jealous commentaries that contribute very little to the collective sum of human understanding aren't likely to teach people how to differentiate writing that are carefully constructed from those that are likely disinformation or merely incompetent. Perhaps her inability to recognize the reality of Peak Oil is rooted in a denial that is very convenient to rely upon while living in New York City, a metropolis totally dependent on massive amounts of energy to transport its food over very long distances. In fact, it is hard to find anyone who the author respects -- it is basically a rant that attacks nearly everyone whose efforts seem to get some public support. Worse, it obfuscates on critical points, in particular claiming that the issue of the "wargames" is merely propaganda being "sold" (but refuses to deal with the facts).

----------------------

davesweb.cnchost.com

A newsletter titled "Center for an Informed America" (CIA). The "CIA" offered accurate information about 9/11 complicity immediately after the attacks. In 2004, the "CIA" claimed that Peak Oil is not real, published numerous attacks against Michael Ruppert (without mentioning his research on the 9/11 war games), tried to disrupt planning for the International Inquiry into 9/11 (in San Francisco in March 2004), and has made extra efforts to promote the "no plane hit the Pentagon" claim even while many 9/11 Truth advocates have documented it was just a hoax.

Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 11:32:21 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Victoria Ashley"
Subject: New McGowen Article - More Personal Attacks on 9/11 Researchers Who Disagree
To: sf911truthalliance (at) riseup.net
email excerpt:

I find writing such as this, which includes various forms of personal attacks, to be intentionally divisive and thus damaging, making me to wonder why McGowen thinks that personally attacking 9/11 researchers is a valid method to approach any sort of research, much less taking a movement forward:

- - - -

- "Well, I guess the jig is up. Mr. Salter, it seems, has figured out our diabolical plot."

- "Brian Salter (questionsquestions.net) posted a histrionic denunciation of Pentagon "no-plane" theorists." [defintion of 'histrionic' - (adjective) 1 : deliberately affected : theatrical 2 : of or relating to actors, acting, or the theater Example sentence: The frustrated tourist launched into a histrionic account of his trip, shouting, moaning, waving his arms, and exaggerating every minor problem encountered along the way]

- "Two of the most aggressive of the Tattoo theorists, by the way, are Jim Hoffman and Brian Salter, both of whom were on the other side of the fence, so to speak, until fairly recently. If you have ever known someone who quit smoking and thereafter embarked on a mission to browbeat and berate every other smoker on the planet, then you have a pretty good idea of how the Tattoo theorists operate."

- "The primary strong-arm tactic of the Tattoo theorists . . . "

- "Am I the only one here who is wondering whether Mr. Judge has maybe been watching too many reruns of old Saturday Night Live skits featuring Jon Lovitz. "Yeah, John, that's it ... that's the ticket.""

- "After reviewing Judge's various Pentagon rants' 'Memo to John Judge: lying isn't as easy as it may appear to be.'"

- "Isn't the fact that you choose to ignore his [Judge's] contributions a tacit admission that you know full well that he is lying his ass off?"

- "You would think that if the Pentagon attack theories were the 'straw men' that the Tattoo theorists* claim, then the 'debunkers' would be better prepared to knock those straw men down, and they would devote more print space to doing so. Instead, we find the Pentagon attack being downplayed in a major media attack on the 9-11 skeptics movement -- at the very same time, curiously enough, that a number of 9-11 skeptics have begun aggressively demanding that all "unnecessary speculation" about the Pentagon attack be dropped"
 http://davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr68e.html

*Tatoo theorist: one who claims a plane hit the Pentagon.

- - - -

The issue of 'No Plane at the Pentagon' is a serious one for the movement and trying to turn the issue into a personal one is not only unnecessary and unprofessional in research, it doesn't serve our movement and attempts to divide us. I don't particularly agree with everything John Judge says, but I recognize every researcher's right to make a valid argument and not be called names or made fun of. The research itself is what will eventually bear out the validity of the theory, not the person who presents it. If our movement is to be a serious one, articles like this must be underscored as a way NOT to move forward - present your best research, don't attack our 9/11 community for the purpose of dividing and ridiculing.

[note: this "CIA" newsletter article is completely opposite of reality -- nearly all of the mass media attacks on the 9/11 skeptics have focused on the "no plane" claims in order to ridicule and discredit claims that actually have verifiable evidence -- who benefits from such distortion?]

----------------------

infowars.com

The Alex Jones radio show seems to be an electronic vacuum cleaner that publishes virtually any claim regardless of whether there is real evidence or not. Some of the hoaxes pushed by this show include his claim that Gary Webb was stalked by government agents on his balcony before he was supposedly murdered (in reality: there wasn't a balcony on his house and his family is completely convinced he really did commit suicide).

Other great Jones hoaxes include

* support for key elements of the "planesite" film, his efforts to give them credibility

* promotion of the Stanley Hilton lawsuit (the only named plaintiff bases his legal strategy to sue the Bush administration on his being fired from Nieman Marcus department store for passing out anti-war literature). Mr. Hilton used to be an assistant to Senator Bob Dole.

 http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/january2005/040105defenseshield.htm
9/11 Whispers: Washington Defense Shield Deactivated Due To Wargames?
From Alex Jones's "prison planet" -- is this intentional, or merely republishing nonsense sent by hoaxers?
for REAL information on the wargames, see Mike Ruppert's book "Crossing the Rubicon"

April 27, 2005
 http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2005/270405newfootage.htm
New Flight 175 Footage: No Pod?

'Since other websites and 9/11 truth organizations began talking about the pod, this website has attempted to be balanced and air the views of both sides.'

Nonsense. Infowars was pushing this long after a lot of people proved 1000% this was a hoax. In early May 2004, the 9/11 Truth Alliance list had a photo posted to it by a member that clearly showed the "pod" was a myth, a bad joke - a photo that wound up on the cover of "In Plane Site" (a "coincidence" that the movie's makers not attempted to discuss in their pathetic refutations of the extensive reviews by the 9/11 truth movement -- there is no innocent explanation for that).

Infowars is many things, but "balanced" is not one of them. Perhaps they are merely gullible, incompetent and a patsy for cointelpro disinformation (if they are sincere). People making a couple of mistakes that are corrected is one thing -- but systematically promoting hoaxes and lending credibility to people making up nonsense that is used to discredit us is not acceptable, even if they have nice rhetoric.

It is a common tactic for the government media spin machine to misdirect people's attention by getting them excited about one aspect of an issue, then later bring out evidence to debunk that aspect and thus tarnish the credibility of the entire subject.

How nice to see Jones admit this after years of other people pointing this out, using his website as an example of how this tactic works. One of the straw men used by the Popular Mechanics debunk debuted on Infowars (the claim of the identity of the pilot who might, or might not have, shot down Flight 93 - the plane was shot down, but the only evidence that the named pilot was involved was a collaboration between letsroll911 and infowars - just at the point when many people were pointing out that letsroll911 was basing its extreme claims on apparently photoshopped images).

If Alex Jones had any shame, he'd issue a BIG apology for his role in pushing hoaxes and withdraw from the spotlight. Perhaps he could return to his show after hiring some editors and fact checkers.

While many in the 9/11 truth movement have been snared by one form of disinfo or another, most have been sincerely striving to avoid them.
Does this retraction by the pod people mean that Power Hour will now issue refunds to the people who bought their fake film?

Many analysts fear this is the case with 9/11.

Infowars has been one of the worst examples of promoting fake evidence.

'For example, whatreallyhappened.com and others postulate that the government will eventually release clear footage of Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon. This will then discredit an entire portion of the 9/11 truth movement and the debunkers will have a field day. It is unclear whether the movement could take a blow of this magnitude and not be significantly damaged.'

Does this mean that Alex "I'll print anything" Jones is going to backtrack on the no-planes claims too?

 http://mkane.gnn.tv/users/user.php?bid=5096&r=3

How can Alex Jones say "In every case we trace the peak oil energy crisis crowd back to Big Oil" without naming even one of those cases?

Is Richard Heinberg connected to “Big Oil”? NO. Mike Ruppert? NO.

Of course Matt Simmons is, Colin Campbell, and many of the scientists and geologists publishing information on peak-oil. But what a HUGE, and incorrect, claim by Jones. I’m not suprised.

Jones has already referred to conservation efforts with disdain, such as "The Nightmare Kyoto Protocol," and stating that global warming is a "chicken-little debate of the sky falling" where he says the world is merely on a "natural climate-cycle" of 12,000 years.

Jones comes from a crowd that does not like the theory of evolution. They believe in Creationism. The wrongly-claimed Abiotic origin of oil fits in with this belief system –

THE WORLD IS REALLY YOUNG. THERE WAS NOTHING ON THE PLANET MILLIONS OF YEARS AGO. OIL IS MADE FROM THE MANTLE, NOT ANCIENT FOSSILS. THAT IS PART OF A HUGE CONSPIRACY IN SCIENCE TO ADD SUPPORT TO EVOLUTION AS A VALID THEORY. BUT WE KNOW BETTER, WE HAVE READ GENESIS AND NOTHING CAN SPEAK ABOVE THE HOLY BOOK.

Also it is obvious that Jones is not following the renewable energy boom at all. Goldman Sachs just bought a major wind developer, Military & Intel (including James Woolsey and others) have publicly backed renewable energy in a major way (and the mainstream media has remained eerily silent on this). Yet Jones claims alternative energy is being suppressed right when it is having its biggest boom ever.

Of course there has been suppression of technologies for decades by Big-Oil. No question. That’s because they want to make all the money.

DUH!

And OF COURSE the oil industry is happy to see all of the coverage of peak-oil now. It gives yet another reason for market volatility justifying $55 oil going on up.

That doesn’t mean peak-oil isn’t true. People point to "The Club of Rome" in the 70’s – saying they helped manipulate the oil crisis that happened then for economic gains – and say this is what is happening now. Of course – to a certain degree – there will be (and are) market manipulations. There always has been. But everyone is in a disgusting, and very frightening state of denial, in not recognizing this time around, on top of the economic crisis, there is a geological crisis.

Even if there were "endless oil" that would be TERRIBLE! Global warming would lead to a much more rapid extinction of mankind from Mother Earth.

Oh, but I forgot, according to Alex Jones and the Cato Institute THERE IS NO GLOBAL WARMING!

Everyone should watch out for Alex Jones and Jeff Rense’s spin. Check out what www.rense.com links to as a permanent link on their left tool bar.

Russia Proves ‘Peak Oil’ A Misleading Zionist Scam

FTW warned about this in October of last year when we published Ugo Bardi’s masterpiece ABIOTIC OIL: SCIENCE OR POLITICS

Ugo states:

So, the abiotic oil theory is irrelevant to the debate about peak oil and it would not be worth discussing were it not for its political aspects. If people start with the intention of demonstrating that the concept of “peak oil” was created by a “Zionist conspiracy” or something like that, anything goes. In this case, however, the debate is no longer a scientific one.

Fortunately, as Colin Campbell said, “Oil is ultimately controlled by events in the geological past which are immune to politics.”

----------------------

johnkaminski.com and warfolly.com

John Kaminski, an internet writer who has promoted the "webfairy" claim that the World Trade Center north tower (first to be hit) was attacked by a missile masked by a King Kong sized hologram (which is beyond ridiculous) and praises a leading advocate for Holocaust denial (a websearch for "Kaminski Zundel" will retrieve lots of articles about this). Kaminski's support for the "webfairy" disinformation campaign and for neo-Nazi Holocaust denial advocate Ernst Zundel discredits the 9/11 Truth Movement -- "no planes and no gas chambers?" He has also written "the Fatal Flaw in the Coverup" which claims that:

'We have security camera film at the Pentagon, which surely reveal that no jetliner hit that building, locked away in Ashcroft's vault under the phony aegis of national security. We have all the rubble of the World Trade Center, which surely would have revealed the use of nuclear explosives creating shattered beams in odd places, instantly carted away with no forensic investigation. We have transcripts - but no recordings - of these phony cellphone calls, some from people who may not have even existed.'

Kaminski's summer 2004 articles claimed that the 9/11 movement had fallen apart, accomplished nothing, and that 9/11 skeptics should support the "webfairy" theories that no planes hit the WTC in order to be credible. In reality, acceptance of the basic tenet of the 9/11 truth movement -- that 9/11 was not a surprise attack -- has continued to grow and grow (which is why the disinformation about 9/11 complicity has increased). Fahrenheit 9/11 (a flawed, brilliant film) was shown in packed theaters everywhere. Over six million Deception Dollars are in circulation. More and more people joined the call for a truly independent 9/11 investigation and have made statements of support for the 9/11 truth movement.

Kaminski is one of the voices supposedly part of the 9/11 truth movement attacking the idea that Peak Oil was a primary motivation for US government complicity in 9/11. These efforts are debunked at  http://www.oilempire.us/abiotic.html

Mr. Kaminksi has a website titled "warfolly.com," in which he claims that Michael Ruppert and David Icke are "people who have done their homework." Mr. Ruppert is on record stating that he detests being associated with Mr. Icke in any way, since Mr. Icke's claims that the world is really run by alien reptiles makes the serious research look ridiculous. No planes at the World Trade Center, no gas chambers in the Holocaust, and alien reptiles run the world -- a great way to discredit the 9/11 truth movement.

A February 2005 article - "The Second Wave: New Books, New Groups Fuel Smoldering Resurgence Of 911 Skeptics Movement" - claims to highlight what he calls the "Second Wave" of the 9/11 truth movement -- folks supposedly doing the real work yet most of those highlighted are mixing fake claims with real evidence (ie. Wing TV, listed below).

Perhaps the nastiest part of the article is the smear that Mike Ruppert

"was the prime saboteur of the first wave, ruining the first big 9/11 forum in San Francisco with his oil company propaganda."

You can read the transcript of Mike's main presentation to the 9/11 Inquiry to read for yourself how ridiculous this claim really is.
 http://www.globalpublicmedia.com/transcripts/258
Michael Ruppert at the 9/11 Inquiry

Who benefits from active voices on the internet creating articles to discredit the thesis put forth by Ruppert and many other 9/11 truth activists that a primary reason that 9/11 was allowed to happen was the neo-conservatives preparation for the economic crises of Peak Oil? Kaminski has written a number of articles denying the existence of natural limits to industrial growth, and the claim that mentioning that oil is not infinite is somehow oil company propaganda is even more absurd than the hoaxes about missiles fired at the Twin Towers and the Pentagon on 9/11. It is fascinating that the internet voices attacking Ruppert never mention his book "Crossing the Rubicon" and its amazing accusations about the role of drug money or Cheney's complicity in 9/11 -- it is hard to imagine an innocent, sincere explanation for the oversight.

The "25 best writers on the internet" list is a mix of excellent commentators, journalists and some writers who promote outrageous nonsense.
As the internet becomes a more respected alternative to the corporate media, it is likely that further efforts will continue to be made to encourage the idea that the dissident voices promote hoaxes, not serious investigative journalism. Some people will fall for these kinds of bait, while many more will see the web as the domain of writers who make stuff up that is not true. As is usually the case, the middle ground is where the reality lies -- the web is a powerful alternative medium that is being targetted by mixing real and fake.

From: Leuren Moret
Subject: 25 Best Writers on the Internet

From: "John Kaminski"

here's my list of the ten most important writers on
the Internet.
1. Dahr Jamail
2. Amy Worthington
3. Michel Chossudovsky
4. Webster Tarpley

5. Joe Vialls
6. Dave MacGowan

These two have published a variety of speculations and hoaxes mixed with real information, which makes discerning the truth much more difficult to determine. McGowan's website still flogs the dead, debunked hoax that claims that no plane hit the Pentagon on 9/11 (even though hundreds, if not thousands of people saw it happen and the primary "evidence" for this consists of photoshopped images from anonymous authors).

Perhaps that hoax needs reinforcing as even some of the 9/11 complicity writers who used to believe it now realize it is a fake claim (the REAL issues of complicity are WHERE the Pentagon was hit - the nearly empty part - and WHY the Air Force did not defend its headquarters).

see  http://www.oilempire.us/pentagon.html for a list of sites that have archived over a hundred eyewitness accounts, photos of Boeing parts in the Pentagon rubble, and the probability that remote control technology was used to ensure that that the nearly empty, recently reconstructed sector was hit instead of a more populated part of the building.

7. Chris Floyd
8. Mark Morford

Floyd and Morford are excellent writers who probably would vehemently disagree with much of the material published by the next on this list:

9. Christopher Bollyn

Mr. Bollyn is with the so-called American Free Press, which also publishes the "Barnes Review," a publication that recently claimed that Hitler should have gotten the Nobel Peace Prize and sells a variety of books claiming that Nazi death camps were not actually death camps. Mr. Bollyn has published a variety of hoaxes on the 9/11 complicity issues, including the truly bizarre claim that there wasn't actually a plane crash in Pennsylvania (even though there were eyewitnesses and a several mile long debris field suggesting the plane was really shot down by an air-to-air missile). They do publish enough real material to snare readers -- it is a form of bait.

The author of this list (Mr. Kaminski) is associating some very good analysts with some very bad analysts who promote hoaxes about 9/11 complicity issues and support for Ernst Zundel, a notorious Holocaust Denial advocate. (a websearch for "Kaminski Zundel" will find hundreds of references to Mr. Kaminksi's praise of Mr. Zundel).

It should not be necessary to point out that Israel's genocide of the Palestinians does not justify denying / downplaying the Holocaust, just as the Holocaust does not justify Israel's destruction of the Palestinians.

It is likely that some of the Holocaust Denial voices on the web and in real life are "false flag" operations to boost support for Israeli military aggression. In other words, if the wingnuts claiming that Auschwitz and Treblinka didn't have gas chambers didn't exist, they'd have to be invented to provide cover for Israel's behavior. Who benefits? Those who deny one genocide have no right to complain about another one, since all life is precious regardless of whether they're jewish, christian, muslim or any other flavor of humanity.

 http://www.oilempire.us/holocaust.html

from Jim Hoffman, webmaster of wtc7.net (widely regarded as the best "physical evidence" website examining 9/11) and 911review.com (not org):

'For all I know Chris [Bollyn] is a sincere (despite apparently embracing some amazing Holocaust revisionist views) hardworking investigative reporter. If that's true, however, he doesn't seem to apply a very good critical filter to the information he gathers. For example, he appears to be the source of some of the more deeply ingrained errors in the 9/11 skeptics' literature, such as the Building 6 explosion myth:

 http://911review.com/errors/wtc/b6_explosion.html

and the idea that seismic spikes preceded the collapses:

 http://911review.com/errors/wtc/seismic.html

I recently spoke at an event in Los Angeles: "Solving the 9/11 Crime - A Citizens' Grand Jury", in which Chris was promoting "In Plane Site", and presenting dozens of ideas for which I see no basis in evidence. I was so disturbed at the damage he was doing to the credibility of careful research that I spent half of my talk debunking the more nonsensical ideas he advanced in his talk just before mine.'

- - - - - - - - - - -
Brainwashing in the US
by Ann Pettifer
Dissident Voice
October 7, 2002
 http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Articles/Pettifer_Brainwashing.htm

Besides accusations of conspiracy, there is a new tactic for dealing with Israel's critics: charge them with anti-Semitism. This is the ploy now being used by the President of Harvard, Lawrence Summers, as a small but growing constituency for divestment from Israel has appeared on his campus and others around the country. Summers' shamelessness is best answered by a fellow Jew, the Auschwitz survivor Primo Levi. Thomas Laqueur, reviewing three new books on Levi, calls him "one of the most resonant witnesses to the greatest human disaster of a disastrous age." However, Levi did not think the Jewish catastrophe should be used to justify "what he regarded as Israeli tribalist and aggressive actions in the name of a sacred history of unique suffering." Laqueur, (who is also Jewish) writes that the Israeli invasion (under Ariel Sharon) of Lebanon in 1982 greatly disturbed Primo Levi, "and on the eve of a trip back to Auschwitz, Levi signed a petition, together with other Jewish intellectuals, calling for the withdrawal of Israeli troops and recognition of the rights of all peoples in the region. 'Everyone is someone's Jew' he was quoted as saying in an interview 'and today the Palestinians are the Jews of the Israelis.'"

10. Xymphora
OK, let's expand it to 25.
John Pilger, Henry Makow, Kurt Nimmo, Maureen Farrell, Mike Whitney, Bev Harris, William Blum, Sherman Skolnick, Bob Feldman, Stan Goff, Michael Collins Piper, Paul Levy, Leuren Moret, Dr. Ron Paul, Kevin MacDonald.

Many of these are very good, but there's a couple of traps set up here ...

the best new 9/11 website

The "reopen911.org" site is a mix of real and hoaxes -- it is run by a multimillionaire heir who is promoting a hoax film called "In Plane Site." This "film" is similar to the Karl Rove style discrediting tactic -- take a real conclusion (9/11 was an inside job) and muddy the waters with fake evidence. Rove's media operations are masters at discrediting scandals with seemingly real, but fake evidence, and were probably behind the "Bush AWOL" papers given to CBS before the "election" to discredit the truth that George W Bush went AWOL in the Air National Guard (when they started drug testing).

 http://www.questionsquestions.net/blog/041116walter.html
16 November 2004: Jimmy Walter, a sugar daddy with poison pills
(millionaire promoter of "In Plane Site" at reopen911.org)

5. Controversial Australian journalist Joe Vialls consistently produces the most jaw-dropping analyses of current events on the web, from behind-the-scenes analyses of terror bombings

This guy claimed the bombing in Bali, Indonesia shortly after 9/11 was really a nuke. Mixing fake and real evidence is a great way to discredit the real evidence.

6. Dave MacGowan has written the best single overview of 9/11 and his Center for an Informed America website

Center for an Informed America (CIA) - another bad joke?

The CIA website claims that oil is infinite and pushes the "no plane at the Pentagon" hoax.
See  http://www.oilempire.us/abiotic.html for analysis that points out the "abiotic" claims for oil predate the theory of plate tectonics ...

Sherman Skolnick is the mindboggling, encyclopedic investigator of the nasty underbelly of American history. It is safe to say you'll never be the same after reading Skolnick.  http://www.skolnicksreport.com/

Skolnick's stuff is entertaining, but it is unlikely that all (much?) of it is true. Reader beware.

Bob Feldman is the principal revealer of the Gatekeeper syndrome, one of the most important phenomena in understanding what s really going on with American media.  http://www.questionsquestions.net/feldman/feldman07.html

Unfortunately, Mr. Feldman doesn't seem to have done much new research on this topic in the past year. For newer analyses, see  http://www.oilempire.us/gatekeepers.html

Michael Collins Piper is the author of the best book on the Kennedy

Piper is an editor of the neo-nazi Barnes Review (barnesreview.org) which as mentioned above recently published an article claiming that Adolf Hitler should have gotten the Nobel Peace Prize.
This list is probably a very slick form of propaganda to discredit internet activism that will be picked up and spread around widely, faster than these comments that explain how there are some unpleasant surprises on the list that get in the way of truth and justice.

for better links about the Kennedy assassination, see  http://www.oilempire.us/coup.html and  http://www.oilempire.us/jfk.html

Leuren Moret is the world's foremost chronicler of America's tragic involvement with depleted uranium weapons.
 http://www.sfbayview.com/081804/Depleteduranium081804.shtml

There are many authors and scientists who have been examining these sorts of issues for a much longer period of time, including those who have done primary scientific research.

One group doing organizing on this issue is the Military Toxics Project, reachable at  http://www.miltoxproj.org/

The film "Hidden Wars of Desert Storm" is a good resource for this, too - hiddenwars.org is a website for the film. (It includes an interview with General Schwarzkopf, who said that the military was conducting a wargame simulating Iraq invading Kuwait when the real thing happened, just like the many war games the military and intelligence agencies were doing on the morning of 9/11 that were similar in some ways to the real events - see  http://www.oilempire.us/wargames.html for details.)

See also the Nuclear Information and Resource Service  http://www.nirs.org for links to most of the anti-nuclear and safe energy organizations in the US.

I give you this list as a gift of hope, to show you that it is possible that honest people CAN rule the world, if the rest of us would only listen to the descriptions by these wonderful writers, and try to be as honest as they are.

This is a very cynical comment from an article that mixes writers who do great work with a few people who make up lies.

----------------------

karlschwarz.com

Karl Schwarz, a self-described conservative Christian Republican who now claims opposition to President Bush, is promoting a variety of false claims about 9/11 complicity and unreliable efforts to expose this scandal (such as WingTV).

see also  http://karmakat.typepad.com/picasso_dreams/2004/week42/index.html and  http://karmakat.typepad.com/picasso_dreams/2004/10/breaking_news_t.html#comments

----------------------

letsroll911.org

A website that emerged shortly after the March 2004 International Inquiry into 9/11, its primary thesis is that Flight 175 (which hit the South Tower - the second plane) was a substitute plane for the actual hijacking and that this substitute plane had an anomalous "pod" underneath the wing that fired a missile at the building a split second before impact. The only evidence for this extreme claim (the missile) is a very low quality video clip that looks like it has been digitally altered with Photoshop (or another program). The "pod" is merely a photo of the normal bulge under the plane between the wing and fuselage. This hoax has not been very popular within the 9/11 truth movement, but it has given mainstream media defenders of the official story ammunitiion to discredit all allegations of complicity.

----------------------

Pentagon Strike

A Shockwave film released in late summer 2004 promoting the "no plane at Pentagon" hoax -- the sequel to "In Plane Site?"

A video clip that was posted to numerous sites in late summer 2004 supposedly documents the "no plane" at the Pentagon claims. It was released shortly after "In Plane Site" -- but only focuses on the "no plane at Pentagon" hoax. It is probable that "Pentagon Strike" was the sequel to "Plane Site," since "Plane Site" had so many crackpot claims in it that it encountered considerable opposition in its effort to redefine 9/11. Pentagon Strike is focused solely on the "no plane at Pentagon" hoax, which unfortunately has been treated more seriously.

This film is slick propaganda that avoids most of the evidence, flashes quickly from point to point, distracts the viewer with loud rock music (perhaps a type of "bait" to snare youthful web surfers?), and would not qualify as forensic evidence in any courtroom. It is a form of "disinfotainment."

Pentagon Strike is only a couple minutes long, and a couple megabytes in size - easily downloadable, even without high speed internet. It has been hosted on countless websites (including a few 9/11 truth websites such as 911sharethetruth.com, which promotes books, films and stickers that are a mix of the best sites and the bogus sites). Pentagon Strike has been much more effective at spreading disinformation than In Plane Site. Read the Washington Post's review of this film - which was very effective at discrediting 9/11 truth issues in the national capital area a month before the pseudo-election of 2004.

----------------------

physics911.org

This site contains the science fiction story "Operation Pearl," which theorizes that the passengers on the four planes were all escorted onto Flight 93, perhaps in Harrisburg, PA, and then Flight 93 then was shot down while the other three planes were dumped into the Atlantic. This speculation has numerous logical flaws -- how would the perpetrators have been able to keep all of the passengers from making a cell phone call while being transferred to the other plane? The odds of this being true are about the same as winning the lottery, since this would have made it much less likely to keep the operation secret and compartmentalized to the minimum number of people possible. Physics911 states that they prefer to invent hypotheses and then see if there's evidence that fits their story (although there isn't actually any evidence to support "Operation Pearl"). However, it is more scientific to stick to the best evidence (which is triple checked) and then see what scenario could possibly fit the provable evidence.

Perhaps this story could be a mix of real and bogus to discredit looking at the real. If plane substitution really was performed (which is unlikely, but unprovable without direct access to the FAA and military radar tapes), then floating this story with the obvious falsehood that the passengers were all put onto a single plane makes further consideration of this theory seem ridiculous. It also distracts from more serious evidence that the four planes were hijacked via some form of remote control technology.

Plane Substitution?
The plane substitution thesis is the core of the "physics 911" hypothesis, and it is discussed in two articles by an internet persona called "Woody Box"

Flight 11 - The Twin Flight  http://home.mayn.de/grolo/gfp_fl11.pdf

The Cleveland Airport Mystery  http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=323

There's not any verifiable evidence for these articles -- there needs to be more than mere assertion before adopting these claims as proven. This skepticism is especially necessary, given that the "woodybox" persona has written that the pod story is scientific research. The only "research" underway with the "pod" hoax is a form of psychology research, to see how far this misinformation can be spread by 9/11 skeptics.

"Plane substitution" WAS apparently used in the KAL 007 scandal in 1983.

The KAL 007 scandal involved a 747 merging very close to an NSA spy plane on the USSR border (which formed a single radar blip), and then the 747 headed into Soviet air space. The Russians thought it was the spy plane that entered, but it was merely the passenger plane. It probably wasn't carrying surveillance equipment, but it triggered the Russian air defense system to activate its standard operating procedures, radars, communication systems, etc. -- which were vacuumed up by numerous external platforms, including the Space Shuttle orbiting overhead. See "Shootdown: Flight 007 and the American Connection" by R.W. Johnson and "KAL 007: The Coverup, why the true story has never been told" by David Pearson.

----------------------

rense.com

A site that publishes good material and red herrings. The kindest interpretation is that it desperately needs an editor.

Rense is most useful in seeing what the latest nonsense is from the hoaxers trying to disrupt the 9/11 truth movement. The only question is whether they are consciously part of this campaign, or whether their gullibility allows them to be used by the hoaxers. The fact they prominently link to Holocaust Denial stuff is strong evidence they are consciously part of the problem (Rense has numerous promotions on their main page - as of March 2005 - to neo-nazi Ernst Zundel, one of the heroes of holocaust denial advocates). Rense is also promoting an article claiming that Peak Oil is a "zionist conspiracy" which is part of a propaganda effort to counter growing awareness of Peak Oil through publication of articles claiming that petroleum is "abiotic" and therefore unlimited.

A recent article:

 http://www.rense.com/general58/bogus.htm

is part of the strange attack on Michael Ruppert on the occasion of his book being published. No one seems to have written a direct attack on the contents of "Crossing the Rubicon," although the volume of mud being thrown at Mike has increased substantially. These attacks studiously ignore the substance of the book, and make a variety of distracting claims.

Rense claims that they're working to separate the wheat from the chaff, and get over 1,000 emails per day, making this determination difficult to do at times. Perhaps a good rule to follow is that outlandish claims based on blurry pictures of questionable authenticity that are only sourced to websites should be ignored, not used as the basis to pretend that there's new "news" about the 9/11 investigations. Websites that operate as an electronic vacuum cleaner sucking up all claims without making even a small effort to differentiate facts from rumors, truths from disinformation are not reliable as news sources, even if some of the articles they post are excellent.

from Michael Kane, From the Wilderness

Soon after we published our Ptech series at FTW:
 http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/012005_ptech_pt1.shtml
 http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/012705_ptech_pt2.shtml

Jeff Rense attacked Mike Ruppert - one of the most vicious attacks I've ever seen. Rense put Ruppert's face on the top of his homepage and linked to one after another Ruppert-trashing 'article.'

What's the connection?

In both part 1 & 2 we talked in-depth about the "New Right" marriage between (neo)-Nazis and Islamic extremists. Take a good look at Jeff's site and you will see that it is part of that "New Right" marriage.

Jeff goes out of his way to make Israeli's look like Nazis while defending Nazi supporters like Zundel. Right after we talked in-depth about this "New Right" marriage and its link to 9/11 Mike Ruppert was attacked viciously at his rense.com.

This has nothing to do with Israel being a vicious, cruel, inhumane state just like the U.S. is - we know what Israel is and we don't need Rense, AFP, or Infowars reports to make sense of it.

This has to do with a hidden agenda.

----------------------

reopen911.org

An effort by multi-millionaire Jimmy Walter who suddenly started promoting "In Plane Site" after this "film" received tremendous criticism and scorn from the 9/11 truth movement. His site promotes "planesite" as among the best pieces of work from the independent investigations despite numerous efforts by writers, investigators and activists to educate him about the actual evidence.

It's hard to know whether his motivations are sincere or duplicitous, but either way, the "planesite" film has received a benefactor who has spent considerable money to promote a film that is mostly made up of disproved material that distracts from real evidence. The mainstream media (ie. New York Times) has focused more on Mr. Walter than on investigators who have unearthed verifiable evidence of official complicity.

Walter has spent a couple of million dollars on flamboyant newspaper ads and TV infomercials pushing a mix of disinformation (no plane at Pentagon) and real evidence (the collapse of Building 7). It is a shame that these millions were not spent on supporting the best researchers, websites and activist efforts -- that would have a much more positive outcome.

Due to Walter's large budget, he got a lot of media exposure in the mainstream press -- and performed poorly in the spotlight.

On September 11, 2004, Walter sponsored a large forum in New York titled "Confronting the Evidence." He insisted in putting the main person behind "In Plane Site" on the program despite several diplomatic efforts from sober activists and writers more familiar with the topics that this would be a poor choice. A science editor for a major national publication, who had been impressed with some of the best material of the 9/11 truth movement, was told by Mr. Walter that the twin towers were blown up with nuclear explosives -- and this editor immediately dropped further interest in covering these issues. If Walter was trying to dissuade the media from taking 9/11 truth seriously, then the event was a big success.

Walter's event, by nearly all accounts, was a public relations disaster. Several of the key organizers who worked to make the event happen were fired by Walter and expelled from the auditorium mid-way through the show. The speakers were a mix of very good and really awful -- which makes it hard for ordinary citizens interested in the topics to comprehend what is going on. This event was much lower quality than other major presentations (such as the International Inquiries in San Francisco and Toronto) and logistically bizarre -- a direct contrast to an extremely high quality, professional presentation two days prior (the Citizens Commission on 9/11, with Cynthia McKinney, Kyle Hence, Michael Ruppert, Barrie Zwicker, Indira Singh, John Judge and many others).

In late winter 2005, Walter promised that he was moving to Europe (mission accomplished?), and subsequently announced plans for an international tour to promote his unique views on 9/11. But before moving, he announced that had made 100,000 DVDs of his 9/11/2004 event to distribute as widely as possible (in May 2005, that figure became 250,000 DVDs). If Walter is not working consciously to undermine the 9/11 truth movement, then he is the patsy of the disinformation campaign. His publicist is Ilene Proctor, whose normal clientele consists of minor Hollywood celebrities and pop stars. One of her clients was the lip-synching Milli Vanilli (perhaps Jimmy Walter is the political equivalent of lip-synching?). Ms. Proctor is now distributing David Von Kleist's comments on the March 2005 Popular Mechanics article that focused on the 9/11 hoaxes that Von Kleist promotes. It is likely that Von Kleist, the narrator of "In Plane Site," coached Jimmy Walter on what to say and do about 9/11 issues.

May 2005 update: Walter's seclusion in Europe did not last long. He (or his publicists) arranged a multi-nation tour of 9/11 skeptics to speak on these issues, arranging for some very good authors and experts along with some hoaxers pushing discredited disinformation. One of the good activists was expelled from the tour for complaining about the presence of a writer for one of America's most widespread neo-Nazi newspapers -- a more sensible strategy would have been to expel the neo-Nazi newspaper from the tour, not a New York City based activist seeking justice for the environmental damage caused to human health by rushing to reopen Wall Street when it was not yet safe to do so.

Shortly before Walter's European tour started, reopen911.org was given a substantial overall that massively increased the nuttiness quotient on the site -- the most notorious is now an outrageous suggestion that the Twin Towers were blown up with nukes. Reopen911 now has these claims on its homepage - just in time for the European media to examine what is marketed as the best material from the 9/11 truth movement in the United States.

Were the Twin Towers brought down by a Nuclear Detonation?
Hunter Thompson Killed over explosives evidence.

Mr. Walter should get a special award for the most stupid claim yet uttered by someone pretending to be a 9/11 truth activist for this nonsense.

 http://www.wtceo.org/911TenMillionDollarsandTwelveFootReptilesintheRoyalFamily_000.htm

9/11, Ten Million Dollars and Twelve Foot Reptiles in the Royal Family
By Jenna Orkin

a review of the Jimmy Walter European tour by an almost-participant (who was removed from the speakers list for complaining about the crazy stuff included in it)

a much better event on these topics was held in New York on September 9, 2004 -
video clips from that event can be downloaded at www.911busters.com/911-Commission.html

www.questionsquestions.net/blog/041116walter.html
Jimmy Walter: A sugar daddy with poison pills

The truly serious matter, however, is that Walter has set about promoting some of the most dubious and questionable claims that have emerged of late — many of which are already denounced by a wide range of 9/11 activists as obvious disinfo — and he has also shown himself to be reckless and inaccurate in his handling of the evidence.

Walter is apparently just making stuff up. Or, he has been duped by someone coaching him with bogus info. It might worthwhile to investigate which "9/11 activists" have been working closely with him...

... How much of a fool does one have to be to MAKE GERALD POSNER LOOK GOOD? Even worse, the fact that he is focusing so strongly on the WTC7 issue means that this substantive and powerful part of the 9/11 skeptic's case will be discredited by association with the faulty claims he's promoting alongside it.

I'm willing to believe that he is a well-intentioned "eccentric", but thus far, Jimmy Walter's newfound status as a figurehead of 9/11 skepticism is shaping up to be a disaster. Frankly, there are times when good intentions just aren't enough, and this is one of those times.

----------------------

serendipity.li

The "serendipity" site was probably the first website to claim that the twin towers were demolished (almost immediately after 9/11), and its hosting of a variety of quality information about covert scandals provided considerable credibility to many seeking alternative explanations for 9/11.

But Serendipity also hosts hateful attacks on some of the hardest working 9/11 activists (see  http://serendipity.ptpi.net/wot/fake_opposition.htm for a particularly ugly example), and promotes the webfairy / pod hoaxes.

Their page  http://www.serendipity.li/wtc_other_sites.htm purports to be a comprehensive list of 9/11 pages, yet it is a mix of accurate information and suspect claims. The Serendipity comments about Mike Ruppert's site blatantly misleads the reader:

This has long been regarded as one of the most perceptive sites concerning both 9/11 and peak oil. That Ruppert supports the official lie that 9/11 was an "Al Qaeda" operation should make one wonder.

A simple review of virtually any article at www.fromthewilderness.com quickly exposes Serendipity's claims as false. Why does "Serendipity" promote disinformation about Ruppert's work -- it should make one wonder. Perhaps Serendipity is trying to discourage people from reading Ruppert's book "Crossing the Rubicon," which details Cheney's complicity in 9/11. Who benefits from that outcome?

----------------------

signs-of-the-times.org

A site specializing in fringe material, claiming to expose information about aliens and beings living in other dimensions. While this could theoretically be possible, it could also be a slick means to discredit more sober investigations into actual conspiracies that have real evidence for them.

This site created the slick disinformation film "Pentagon Strike" in the summer of 2004 -- a rock video posted on the internet that flashes quickly from blurry image to blurry image, carefully cherry picking evidence (and omitting crucial context) in support of the "no plane at the Pentagon" hoax. This film, and the fact they claim to communicate with beings in other dimensions, was used by the Washington Post to ridicule David Ray Griffin's book "The New Pearl Harbor" about a month before the November 2004 "election." This smear effort needed this fringe site to make Griffin's book look kooky and ridiculous, since his book was the first 9/11 truth book to reach a somewhat mainstream audience and most of the book is a well-written, sober analysis of the evidence that 9/11 was allowed to happen (and given technical assistance to ensure its success).

 http://www.signs-of-the-times.org/signs/exposing_the_big_con.htm is a nasty example of disinformation smearing Michael Ruppert that would take several pages to refute and correct.

----------------------

thewebfairy.com

the most absurd claim: 9/11 was supposedly done with King Kong sized holograms and missiles, not planes

Perhaps the single most bizarre 9/11 website, it claims that a plane did not hit the north tower of the World Trade Center. Instead, the "webfairy" theorizes that King Kong sized holograms were used to fool bystanders, and missiles were fired at the towers. The fact that the hole in the side of the North Tower is the same size as the cross section of a 767 and even shows the impact of the wings is irrelevant to this incredibly paranoid site.

The fairy godmother of this modus operandi is an internet persona called "webfairy," who claims to be Rosalee Grable, an elderly, poor grandmother in Chicago who somehow has learned how to do sophisticated video analysis and host a very high bandwidth expensive website that hosts more video clips of the 9/11 attacks than any other website. Since the "webfairy" is a befuddled grandmother in Chicago, it makes debunking "her" slightly more difficult psychologically, because who wants to attack a grandmother? Webfairy has spent years creating "new footage" of the 9/11 attacks, even though all of the authenticated video clips were taken that day. Those who are still churning out "new" videos of the 9/11 attacks are almost certainly disinformation, since it is not possible to take any more photos or videos of the event! Debunking the nonsense claims at this site earns the debunkers a steady stream of abuse, but none of this abuse contains any actual evidence to bolster these extremely implausible and illogical claims.

The webfairy's "no planes at the North Tower" claim took advantage of the fact that there is really only one, low quality video publicly available of the North Tower attack. However, the webfairy is easily disproved by the most obvious "physical evidence" - the hole in the side of the North tower is the size of a 767 (see the photo below) The "webfairy" thesis has been of limited utility in discrediting the 9/11 truth movement. It is probable that this wasn't intended to attract supporters, but merely make 9/11 skeptics look silly.

----------------------

Webfairy, Letsroll911 and In Plane Site

At the very least, the Webfairy and Letsroll sites are closely allied, and may be the same operation. Som spam (unsolicited emails) from the pod theorists has stated that the webfairy has done photographic work for the letsroll site. Webfairy and Letsroll are both located in the same community (Chicago), a city without much 9/11 skeptic organizing. Letsroll hosts webfairy's video alteration work on their website. And the newest promotion of these themes -- "In Plane Site" -- directs viewers to only look at the Letsroll website, bypassing the credible investigations based on verifiable evidence and logic.

----------------------

tomflocco.com

TomFlocco.com is a "journalism" site that has promoted a number of good claims about 9/11 complicity and some garbage. It is aggressively promoting "In Plane Site" and a similar film that is essentially the same tripe in a new package:

New..important..now available at TOM FLOCCO.com
Devastating TV Film Evidence Points to 9-11 Treason
Unlitigated Payouts Ignore Obvious and Massive Twin Tower Insurance Fraud
"LOOSE CHANGE" new, explosive 911 evidence
directed, written and narrated by Dylan Avery
"...The best packaged DVD footage for sharing actual TV coverage and interviews shown only once during WTC / Pentagon attacks--evidence strangely removed from repeat broadcasts ...striking visual and narrative analysis--shown frame by frame --pointing to government-linked mass murder and a new Pearl Harbor." Tom Flocco

----------------------

tvnewslies.org

TV News Lies is a site that is mixing together the 9/11 hoaxes with the best productions from the 9/11 truth movement. They paid to be on the eighth edition of the Deception Dollar, promote the fake film "In Plane Site" along with work by Mike Ruppert (even though they are aware that Ruppert wants nothing to do with that fake film) and is promoting a sequel to "Plane Site" called "Loose Change" -- made by the same folks who did the video work for Plane Site.

'The tvnewslies.com piece sandwiches the demolition claim between the zero- evidence-based claim that the towers were not hit by commercial jetliners, and the claim that the Pentagon was not hit by a 757 (using photos in which foam spray obscures the 90-foot expanse of breached walls). This is one of the most effective methods for discrediting an idea, hiding it in plain sight, contextualized as nonsense.'
-Jim

----------------------

Wing TV

A shoddy effort to discredit Michael Ruppert's work while ignoring the information in "Crossing the Rubicon"

 http://www.fromthewilderness.com/10questions.shtml Michael Ruppert refutes some of the sleaziest attacks from Wing TV.

 http://911review.com/wingtv/markup/hoffman.html Jim Hoffman refutes deceptive attacks from "Wing TV"

The pseudonymous author of "Wing TV" is also the author of a self-published book called "Christ Killers." Wing TV's format and content is so laughable that it is worth ignoring, but a small handful of "9/11 activists" have seized upon this material as gospel truth.

See also:
 http://www.oilempire.us/bogus.html#list

 http://www.oilempire.us/bogus.html