What Bush Knew Before Sept. 11

[somebigguy]

From Here: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/05/16/attack/main509294.shtml

President Bush was told in the months before the Sept. 11 attacks that Osama bin Laden's terrorist network might hijack U.S. passenger planes - information which prompted the administration to issue an alert to federal agencies - but not the American public.

CBS News National Security Correspondent David Martin says the warning was in a document called the President's Daily Brief, which is considered to be the single most important document that the U.S. intelligence community turns out. The document did not, however, mention the possibility of planes being flown into buildings.

White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said that while President Bush was told last summer that bin Laden's al Qaeda network might hijack planes, "until the attack took place, I think it's fair to say that no one envisioned that [using planes as suicide bombs] as a possibility."

However, a federal report issued exactly two years before the Sept. 11 attacks contrasts with that statement.

The report, entitled the "Sociology and Psychology of Terrorism: Who Becomes a Terrorist and Why?," warned the executive branch that bin Laden's terrorists might hijack an airliner and dive bomb it into the Pentagon or other government building.

It described the suicide hijacking as one of several possible retribution attacks al Qaeda might seek for the 1998 U.S. airstrike against bin Laden's camps in Afghanistan.

"Suicide bomber(s) belonging to al Qaeda's Martyrdom Battalion could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives (C-4 and semtex) into the Pentagon, the headquarters of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or the White House," the September 1999 report said.

The report was written by the Federal Research Division, an arm of the Library of Congress that provides research for various federal agencies under contracts.

And it's come out that an agent in the FBI's Arizona office also speculated about using planes as weapons, writing in his case notes about Zacarias Moussaoui that Moussaoui seemed like the type of person who was capable of flying an aircraft into the World Trade Center.

It was the observation of an agent taking notes as he thought about his case - an observation whose significance simply did not register at the time.

Separately, the New York Times reports that an FBI agent in Arizona warned his superiors last summer that bin Laden might be sending students to U.S. flight schools.

The FBI failed to make a connection between that warning and the August arrest of Moussaoui - a French citizen of Moroccan descent detained in Minnesota after raising suspicions among his instructors at a flight school where he said he wanted to know how to fly, but not how to land or take off.

Moussaoui has emerged as the lone defendant charged in the aftermath of the attacks, which killed more than 3,000 people in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania. He is charged with conspiring with bin Laden and the 19 suicide hijackers to attack Americans.

FBI Director Robert Mueller has said repeatedly that he wishes the FBI had acted more aggressively in addressing the Arizona and Minnesota leads. Mueller has also said that nothing the FBI possessed before Sept. 11 pointed to the plot.

When hijacked airliners plowed into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and a field in Pennsylvania, Middle Eastern men trained at U.S. flight schools were at the controls.

According to Fleischer, after the information was presented to President Bush in August, the administration put domestic agencies on alert in the summer, just months before the Sept. 11 attacks.

That alert was not announced publicly but Fleischer suggested it may have prompted the hijackers to change their tactics.

"The administration, based on hijackings, notified the appropriate agencies and, I think, that's one of the reasons that you saw that the people who committed the 9-11 attacks used box cutters and plastic knives to get around America's system of protecting against hijackings," he said.

Fleischer did not say which agencies were put on alert and what they did in response.

On Thursday, National security adviser Condoleezza Rice described a series of threats uncovered by intelligence officials, beginning in September of 2000 and reaching a height in the summer of 2001, that dealt mostly with American interests overseas.

Those threats prompted a series of alerts issued by the FBI to law-enforcement agencies and from the Federal Aviation Administration to the nation's airlines and airports, she said. There also were strong warnings to Americans to be careful overseas.

Earlier this month, Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Bob Graham complained that the Justice Department and CIA had not provided congressional investigators with adequate access to documents and witnesses for a probe into intelligence failures related to the Sept. 11 attacks.

Graham said through a spokesman Wednesday that the revelations in the FBI memo mark an important discovery in Congress' investigation into why the FBI, CIA and other U.S. agencies failed to learn of and prevent the Sept. 11 plot.

"It represents a failure to connect the dots," said Graham spokesman Paul Anderson. "This was dismissed rather lightly at FBI headquarters."

On Feb. 6, in his first public comments after the Sept. 11 attacks, CIA Director George Tenet told a congressional hearing that the CIA had seen "spectacular threat reporting about massive casualties against the United States" in the spring and summer last year, but there was no specific information.

A U.S. intelligence official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the CIA had continuously informed policymakers throughout the summer before Sept. 11 that bin Laden and his network might try to harm U.S. interests and discussed a range of possibilities that included hijackings.

"That was among the many things that we talked about all the time as a potential terrorist threat," said the intelligence official. "But when we talked about hijackings, we talked about that in the traditional sense of hijackings, not in the sense of somebody hijacking an aircraft and flying it into a building. We talked about concern about the general noise level about al Qaeda planning and we were trying to figure out what they would do. We never had specifics about time, place, MO (method of operation)."

[Gold9472]

Actual Document
Click Here (http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/pdf-files/Soc_Psych_of_Terrorism.pdf)

[Gold9472]

Nice find!

[Gold9472]

"Al-Qaida’s expected retaliation for the U.S. cruise missile attack against alQaida’s training facilities in Afghanistan on August 20, 1998, could take several forms of terrorist attack in the nation’s capital. Al-Qaida could detonate a Chechen-type building-buster bomb at a federal building. Suicide bomber(s) belonging to al-Qaida’s Martyrdom Battalion could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives (C-4 and semtex) into the Pentagon, the headquarters of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or the White House. Ramzi Yousef had planned to do this against the CIA headquarters."

[Gold9472]

This proves that they thought of it, but it doesn't prove that Bush saw it... does it?

[Gold9472]

Author: Rex A. Hudson
Federal Research Division
Library of Congress
Washington, D.C. 20540–4840
Tel: 202–707–3900
Fax: 202–707–3920
E-Mail: frds@loc.gov
Homepage: http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/

[Gold9472]

I'm gonna call the author...

[Gold9472]

I just sent this email to them...

To whom it may concern,

I have a few questions for the author of this document, Rex A. Hudson. This was written in September 1999.

It is available here:
http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/pdf-files/Soc_Psych_of_Terrorism.pdf

On page 15 of 186, it says the following:

"Suicide bomber(s) belonging to al-Qaida’s Martyrdom Battalion could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives (C-4 and semtex) into the Pentagon, the headquarters of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or the White House."

My questions are, was this document:

1) Known throughout the intelligence community? (Before 9/11)
2) Known to the Congress? (Before 9/11)
3) Known to the Bush Administration? (Before 9/11)
4) Known in particular to ex-National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice? (Before 9/11)
5) Known to the FAA/NORAD? (Before 9/11)
6) Presented to the 9/11 Commission?

Any information you have about public knowledge of this document would be greatly appreciated.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Gold

[somebigguy]

Nice Job Jon!!!

[Gold9472]

Here's the response I got... I'm actually very surprised I got a response at all...

Dear Mr. Gold:

Thank you for your inquiry to the Federal Research Division, the fee-for-service research unit of the Library of Congress. In response to your questions, all of those entities in your list eventually became aware of the report. The report was mounted on the Library of Congress public website on December 14, 2001. It reported the findings of FRD's research of then-current literature written by experts on terrorism, inside and outside government, and was commissioned in June 1999 by the National Intelligence Council (http://www.cia.gov/nic/ (http://www.cia.gov/nic/)) and delivered in September 1999. We do not know, nor have any way of gauging, to what extent each of the listed entities were aware of the report prior to September 11, 2001.

Best wishes,

Robert L. Worden, PhD
Chief, Federal Research Division
Library of Congress ... 101 Independence Ave SE, LA-5282
Washington, DC 20540-4840
Phone: 202-707-3909 ... Fax: 202-707-3920
URL: http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd (http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd)

[dz]

uh huhuh he said mounted.

/beavis

[Gold9472]

From the author...

Dear Mr. Gold,

Thank you for your inquiry and pertinent questions regarding my 1999 study. With regard to the 9/11 Commission, I have yet to come across any evidence that it cited my report. No one from the Commission contacted me about it in general or the origins of the cited scenario in particular.

Sincerely,
Rex Hudson

[Gold9472]

Another letter I sent him...

Mr. Hudson,

I thank you for getting back to me in regards to this. Obviously you understand my reasoning for this inquiry. According to people within the Bush Administration, "no one could have imagined them taking airplanes, and using them as missiles". I've heard that quote countless times, and thanks to your report, I now know that at least someone "imagined" it. Just out of curiousity, do you know if this report was the reason why in November 2000, the Pentagon had drills referred to as MASCAL. Drills which planned for the very event that occurred on 9/11?

Thank you for your time,

Jonathan Gold

His response...

Mr. Gold,

Thank you for the MASCAL reference. Very interesting. I hadn't heard about it. It would be nice to think that they read my 1999 report over at the Pentagon, but I don't know of any connection. It's appropriate that you put "imagined" in quotes. Now, back to work...

Rex Hudson

[dz]

nice job dood, way to be active! glad to see him respond so quickly.

[Gold9472]

Nice "community" effort... SBG found the story, and I did the research...

[somebigguy]

Nice job guys, looks like you raised some eyebrows!!!

[Gold9472]

Nice job guys, looks like you raised some eyebrows!!!

It was your find my friend...

[Gold9472]

bump

[Gold9472]

bump

[Chris]

be careful about what you post at 911blogger.com. dz bans people for simply defending themselves against personal attacks.the other dude,SBG seems a lot more rational.dz bans people like there is no tomorrow.its really getting bad.just thought i would warn you.

[Gold9472]

be careful about what you post at 911blogger.com. dz bans people for simply defending themselves against personal attacks.the other dude,SBG seems a lot more rational.dz bans people like there is no tomorrow.its really getting bad.just thought i would warn you.

He just doesn't like cursing, and thread hijackings...

[dz]

be careful about what you post at 911blogger.com. dz bans people for simply defending themselves against personal attacks.the other dude,SBG seems a lot more rational.dz bans people like there is no tomorrow.its really getting bad.just thought i would warn you.

yeah, that dz guy can be a real dick.

actually, im not a dick, im a pretty damn nice guy, much like SBG, and sometimes Gold.. so i guess i will at least defend myself (:bruce_h4h )lest someone start believing i have alterior motives in moderating my comments.


dz bans people for simply defending themselves against personal attacks.

here is why you were banned (from http://www.haloscan.com/comments/dazinith/114144586599585644 ):

daily complaint, right on time. can you say "typical"?

I spoke with Kucinich yesterday. He said that the human race is being overtaken by space aliens. He is our man. Follow him forever.
douchebag says what?

you act like all you were doing is 'defending yourself', but your provoking him as much as he is provoking you, the difference being that he doesnt randomly call people douchebags..


dz bans people like there is no tomorrow
yeah.. i have banned 4 people in the history of this site, all 4 in the last 30 days.. oh wait, 3 of those bannings were you. so if by 'like there is no tommorrow' you mean banning 2 people in the history of the site (one of them being you 3x) then yes, i guess i do ban people pretty willy-nilly.

and of course, your attacks on me dont do you much good either.. i tried to delete your rants this morning and move on, but rather than move on you decided to turn it into an arguement over me and my 'censorship'.

you know, it is really hard to ban someone like blimp for a solid reason when all he has to do is turn around and point at others calling him names, mocking him, posting messages under his name, or using terms like 'douchebag' in half of their posts.

glad to see you made it here to gold's forum, welcome! :innocent:

[dz]

He just doesn't like cursing, and thread hijackings...

when has that ever stopped you? ;)

[Gold9472]

when has that ever stopped you? ;)

:vl:

[Gold9472]

and sometimes Gold

I just noticed that... kiss my ass.

[dz]

I just noticed that... kiss my ass.

thanks for proving my point mr. nice guy ;)

[Gold9472]

thanks for proving my point mr. nice guy ;)

I was nice enough to allow you to put my banner on your crummy website. :)

[Chris]

i'll just post the dirty laundry here, im too tired to post again. (at least you admit its personal dz, nice touch taking my comments out of context too, and not showing blimps slander, nice touch)

feel free to email me via the contact link on the left with some suggestions if you have some.
dz | Homepage | 03.08.06 - 6:43 pm | #
i suggest you reinstate me, or ban 911blimp, lest you be seen as hypocritical and quick with the censorship(though its a little bit late for that). i have no personal problem with you(other than your heavy handed,irrational tactics as a moderator), but it seems you have one with me.(hence you banning me and not blimp despite the fact that he came at me, yet again)you are quickly gaining a reputation that i would hate to see cast upon the site as a whole, as it is a good resource. im willing to bet SBG is a bit older,and hence wiser than you. the first time you banned me, when i was asking S.King to answer 3 basic questions, SBG came to my defense, and said he didnt know what you were thinking,or why you did it. he also wanted S.King to answer the damn questions.in your latest exploits, SBG again shows he is more rational than you:I'm sorry dude, I don't know what's going on, but I will ask DZ to unbann you. Personally, I would have banned Blimp Pilot long ago, but its not my decision to make unfortunately.
Please keep spreading the word...

you might want to think about putting him in charge of banning people. you obviously let personal feelings get involved with your banning practices.(does blimp pay you? you guys friends? why the double standard exactly? he has broken your "rules" numerous times.)

[Gold9472]

I think it's understood that blimp has mental problems. He's just kinda allowed to hang around.

[Gold9472]

dz doesn't like profanity, instigation, etc... I instigate all the time, but it's only in jest, and people know that. As far as profanity goes, I use some words now and then, but I get passionate every now and then to. He deletes my shit all the time, and I don't give a shit because those are his rules. My rules are you can curse all you want, but be respectful to the other users, and not be trollish.

My two cents.

[Chris]

i have mental problems too, yet i cant hang around? hahaha.seriously though,at least i dont endlessly attack others in the movement like he does.you cant justify dz's banning practices, you just cant. he took my qoutes out of context, i really was just defending myself against blimps slander. this wasnt the first time, yet hes still there, and im gone. clearly its personal for dz. the guy needs to grow up and stop being so childish and vindictive. the thread was basically dead, yet he deletes my response, leaves blimps comments up, and bans me. sound rational? i mean, i know he was a republican,but goddamn, when does it end?

[Chris]

yeah Jon, i dont think it was the cussing(hes a puritan too? jeez), im pretty sure he was just being vindictive. ive seen plenty of people curse on 911blogger, without being banned or anything.

[Gold9472]

i have mental problems too, yet i cant hang around? hahaha.seriously though,at least i dont endlessly attack others in the movement like he does.you cant justify dz's banning practices, you just cant. he took my qoutes out of context, i really was just defending myself against blimps slander. this wasnt the first time, yet hes still there, and im gone. clearly its personal for dz. the guy needs to grow up and stop being so childish and vindictive. the thread was basically dead, yet he deletes my response, leaves blimps comments up, and bans me. sound rational? i mean, i know he was a republican,but goddamn, when does it end?

Dude... I know dz fairly well for never meeting him. I can honestly say that he's an asshole. However, I can also say that he's fair. If you're doing something that bothers him, stop doing it. Right now what you're doing is called "infighting", and that's a no no.

[Chris]

by the way, great thread on Larry Johnson, i couldnt believe how knee-jerk he was when you spoke about 9/11 with him. i always liked what he had to say on most recent issues, but his comments about 9/11 were spoken like a true CIA agent.

[Chris]

i guess thats what happens when you simply try to defend yourself on 911blogger.com huh?

[Chris]

asshole? unfortunately, i have to agree. fair? why is blimp still there? hardy fair.

[Chris]

hardly*(sorry to spam, im done now)

[Gold9472]

yeah Jon, i dont think it was the cussing(hes a puritan too? jeez), im pretty sure he was just being vindictive. ive seen plenty of people curse on 911blogger, without being banned or anything.

He's not a puritan. He curses all the time. There's a time and a place for everything.

See look... I just told Dick Cheney to shut the fuck up (http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8773). Most people wouldn't title a thread that way, but Dick Cheney has a special place in my heart.

I believe telling a murderous, fascist, chicken hawk, defense contractor to shut the fuck up when calling for a new war is appropriate.

Saying fuck for the sake of saying fuck is not.

[Gold9472]

by the way, great thread on Larry Johnson, i couldnt believe how knee-jerk he was when you spoke about 9/11 with him. i always liked what he had to say on most recent issues, but his comments about 9/11 were spoken like a true CIA agent.

Thanks. Supposedly he was going to get me in touch with his friends who saw a plane. Haven't heard from him.

[Gold9472]

i guess thats what happens when you simply try to defend yourself on 911blogger.com huh?

I "defend" myself all the time on blogger... or have in the past... it's all in how you do it.

[Gold9472]

asshole? unfortunately, i have to agree. fair? why is blimp still there? hardy fair.

I was kidding. I told you... blimp is allowed because blimp is blimp. You said so yourself. He's always on time. Maybe he's autistic.

[Chris]

Thanks. Supposedly he was going to get me in touch with his friends who saw a plane. Haven't heard from him.
cant say im surprised by that. his reactions to your 9/11 claims were WAY too knee-jerk for me.to come right out with alien comparisons is shameless and typical as hell.

[Gold9472]

Thanks. Supposedly he was going to get me in touch with his friends who saw a plane. Haven't heard from him.
cant say im surprised by that. his reactions to your 9/11 claims were WAY too knee-jerk for me.to come right out with alien comparisons is shameless and typical as hell.

His reaction was typical, but I don't think it was because he was CIA. His reaction was no different than the majority of people we approach.

[Chris]

looks like someone agrees:

I know it's your blog, dz. So you have the responsibility to judge what is "abusive, offensive, contain profane or racist material, or resort to attacking other users"--if you choose to. I was merely suggesting some other options besides outright censorship.
Anonymous | 03.08.06 - 6:20 pm | # (http://www.haloscan.com/comments/dazinith/114179106841343557/#75592)

Careful though, censorship is a slippery slope. Perhaps you might post your disagreement, or a brief disclaimer, to objectionable remarks instead?
Anonymous | 03.08.06 - 2:30 pm | # (http://www.haloscan.com/comments/dazinith/114179106841343557/#75535)

[dz]

Good lord Chris, you've been one busy guy today! 5 emails to me directly, and a bunch of posts to me here! I guess no one can accuse you of not being dedicated! (or having a life? ;) ) Sorry I took so long to respond, unlike you I apparently have a real job during the day and can't respond to all your two line attacks (which are all baseless).

The crappy thing here is that to respond to your 10+ messages is going to require a freaking outline to layout a real response. I would've probably responded to your emails this evening, but since you decided to move it here (and others may be curious), I'll at least try to give you some decent responses.

Email #1:

i see that 911blimp is still not banned, yet i am. explain that to me please. you cant possibly justify that.

First, I don't have to explain anything to you. Second, did I tell you 911blimp was going to be banned? Finally, just because you think banning you, and not banning 911blimp, can't be justified doesn't mean that I can't justify it.


Email #2 (Responses mixed in):

Do not use the comments to continue arguments with other users from thread to thread
Do not post comments that are abusive, offensive, contain profane or racist material, or resort to attacking other users
Avoid posting any sexual or pornographic material
Use the comments to post useful information and comments, not to direct attacks on other users
Try to respect others who may have differing opinions

Those rules are the best rules ever, what genious pulled them out of his ass?

so your banning blimp now right? your not a liar right?

did i say i was?

Chris wrote:
daily complaint, right on time. can you say "typical"?

Doesn't this show you 'attacking' blimp first? He made a comment, and then you replied to it with an inflamitory comment against him, I thought you were just trying to defend yourself?

but then

"douchebag says what?"

Aw, c'mon, Chris; I thought you were my personal troll.

Seriously, dismissing such blatant disinformation as "douchebag" talk is the sign of someone who has a diminished capacity for disinformation recognition, or else doesn't take this stuff very seriously.

He said that you obviously don't take 9/11 truth very seriously in that your only response was 'douchebag' to some asshat that decided to spam the comments. I guess the 'my personal troll' comment was an inflamitory comment, but seeing as how you were out of line for provoking him in the thread first, and he was simply responding to your simple (childish?) 'douchebag' comment I didnt see how he was really out of line any worse than you were..

you can find more personal attacks by blimp in the able danger thread.

Ill break this one down:

you can find more personal attacks by blimp in the able danger thread.

looks to me like the first attacks were by you, the 3rd comment, where you say: "NL, its constant. the guy cant go into a thread without complaining. its what he does.i dont know if its jealousy, or what it is, but the guy has attacked every single prominent member of the 9/11 truth movement at one time or another.and he will continue to do so in just about every post you see from him.ive learned to just breeze past his posts,bbecuase you know exactly what you are going to get every single time."

I won't say I disagree with you, but you directed this towards him, and he responded with:

Of course, NL's personal attacks pale, in terms of hitting below the belt, compared to Chris', who's tried to impersonate me in this forum. (Chris seems to agree with me that there's something wrong with Weldon's actions, but still can't resist taking a swipe at me anyway. If it's wrong to critically question "prominent" 'leading' people based upon their suspect actions, Chris, then how can you fault the sheeple who still don't get it at all about 9/11?)

He points out that you logged in under his alias and made hateful comments under his name, which is factual, then points out that while you both agree that there is something fishy about Weldon, you still feel the need to attack him for stating his opinion (which you partly agreed with).. i dont see the attack here.. perhaps im missing it, or perhaps because 911blimp is usually 'holier-than-thou' in his posts you took it as an attack.

at which point, you go into your attack mode, posting these two nice comments back to back:

blimp, my problem with you is the fact that you have this elitist air about you. every single post you make HAS to have negative comments or complaints about someone in the movement who isnt doing EXACTLY what you are.you can NEVER give credit where it is due, you can only complain and smear others.its tiring.its one thing to point out disagreements,its another to go into every post like your god and you have the absolute truth.stop with the constant complaining.its annoying as hell. i complain about how Weldon isnt doing nearly enough, and he seems to be playing politics with this issue, but at the same time, at least he is doing SOMETHING other than complaining like a jealous little girl.like i said, i agree Weldons motives are very suspect, hes missed a lot of oppurtunities already, but at least i can appreciate the efforts of some in the movement, while you can only attack EVERYONE in the movement for not having the exact views as you.you are too predictable.now leave my name out of your posts and i will do the same.

one more thing blimp, then im done.do you enjoy WINGTV? they use the same tactics as you, smearing just about everyone in the 9/11 truth movement.i figured you would get along with them. or do they not fit your views 100% either?

You say you are 'only responding to his attacks' and play mr. innocent, but then you drop comments like this and wonder why he wouldn't want to respond to you? which by the way, he didnt do.. he could've responded back to you and kept the shit slinging going, but he didnt.. wonder why?

so to prove it isnt some childish personal thing with you, i suggest you ban blimp lest you be seen as hypocritical and childish.i dont know what you have against me, but the thread was basically dead, all i did was try to respond to him ,and you just HAD to interject with your censorship. it was over, but you just couldnt help yourself, you had to delete my comments(not his of course) and then ban me(not him of course,despite the fact that HE came at ME,again). if you dont mind me asking, how old are you?

Ah, so much hateful assumptions, so little time. My responses are ligned up with your quick one liners, so correlate the response to each of your comments.

I'm not being childish, ill ban blimp if i want, i have nothing against you (other than being a pain in the ass), the threads were done until you insisted on continuing the arguement, your comments were pointless and continuing a pointless arguement, you deserved to be banned after your dickheaded comments to me on the site (you came at him as much as he came at you). i am 26, wanna do IQ tests next?

no offense, but your republican ways are still showing through in your "moderator" practices.

i hunted down my comment i think you are referring to.. i was responding to s.king about how questioning 9/11 is not simply because people hate bush..

thanks for the response, although i would tend to disagree with your assertion that the beliefs of 9/11 stem from an opinion on Bush.. I actually used to be an O'Riely(sp?) freak, and supported both of the current wars.. it wasn't until after I saw how family members of those who died on 9/11 were upset with the administration about not being forthcoming.. after 3 months of research i stopped supporting bush..

When FOX news launched i watched orielly for about 1-2 months while riding my bike.. i 'supported' the war in that i didnt question it, or think it was all based on lies.. the iraq war started March 20, 2003 and i started questioning 9/11 in July, 2003, so i didnt question the iraq war for at most 4 months, and said i 'supported' the war because i wasnt actively against it..

i am a registered independent and i have never voted republican.. i never said i was a republican, or a bush lover (i didnt vote for him either election), just another assumption in your obsession of vilainizing me..


Email #3:
dz--"had to delete a comment in here about jews.."

True, someone unfortunately used "Jew" & "Zionist" as if they were interchangeable terms.

Careful though, censorship is a slippery slope. Perhaps you might post your disagreement, or a brief disclaimer, to objectionable remarks instead?
Anonymous | 03.08.06 - 2:30 pm | #
indeed, it is a slippery slope. too bad your so adept at it. is blimp gone yet? or was that a blatant lie/hypocrisy on your part?

I dont see how me removing a post because of someone making statements about 'evil jews' (paraphrasing) compares at all with you.. and again, did i say that i was banning blimp?


Email #4:

you really shouldnt take out personal vendettas on users of your site by banning them for simply defending themselves.out of the "2 users" you spoke of,you only banned 1. coincidince? oversight? doubt it.

why the hell would i have a 'personal vendetta' against you? just because you and s.king are the only banned users doesn't mean i'm out to get you, it means i dont want you posting on my blog anymore (i figure the 3rd banning was enough).. your reference about '2 users' and only banning one doesn't make any sense, and was probably you misunderstanding my prevous post here to you from last night.. the only 2 users banned ever are you and s.king, but i guess you thought i was referring to 911blimp?


Email #5 (Responses mixed in):
i suggest you reinstate me, or ban 911blimp, lest you be seen as hypocritical and quick with the censorship(though its a little bit late for that).
how is me banning you for a 3rd time 'quick'? I censored your posts the other day very quickly, because i happened to be on the comments the same time you were, and deleted them when i saw them, not because i instantly read every comment within 2 seconds and make a decision to remove a post.. if i did that then your 'douchebag' comment would've been gone instead of still sitting there right now.

i have no personal problem with you(other than your heavy handed,irrational tactics as a moderator), but it seems you have one with me.(hence you banning me and not blimp despite the fact that he came at me, yet again)
I do have a problem with having to deal with you, especially since this is the 3rd time, but at the end of the day i dont really care about whether you are banned or not, or responding to your floods of hateful emails, which is why i am just getting to them now and not wasting my time at work trying to respond to you.

as for why i banned you and not blimp, i think it is pretty obvious from my comments above, but the fact that you had already caused problems twice before and were dissing me on my own website probably didnt help your case. also, blimp has been a commentor on 911blogger about 10x longer than you, and even though i disagree with his usual attitude, he can at least usually keep himself in line.. which probably explains why he never responded to your last 2 comments in the last able danger thread.

you are quickly gaining a reputation that i would hate to see cast upon the site as a whole, as it is a good resource.
really? wow, i would've thought that one of the hundreds of other people who like the site would've emailed me with their concerns, or asked to clarify my positions on moderating the comments.. i didnt realize i was 'gaining a reputation', guess i better stop being such an evil man and having to moderate 1 user.. after all 'its really getting bad' like you said in your first post.. i am just losing control and banning everyone named chris! (oh wait, SBG is named chris and he isnt banned ;) ) seriously, you act like this is the end of the world here.. and why would you think 911blogger was a good resource when it was created and funded by such an evil man!?

im willing to bet SBG is a bit older,and hence wiser than you. the first time you banned me, when i was asking S.King to answer 3 basic questions, SBG came to my defense, and said he didnt know what you were thinking,or why you did it. he also wanted S.King to answer the damn questions.

I dunno SBG, how old are you? If I'm older than you then I'm wiser than you! :P

I'm not surprised he wanted s.king to answer your questions, he (sking) was only interested in circular (waste of time) arguements.. which is why he was banned. it was your insecent flooding of the comments (25% of the comments over 3 days) with back-to-back-to-back one liners directed at him.. there is a saying called 'dont feed the trolls', do some research.

in your latest exploits, SBG again shows he is more rational than you:I'm sorry dude, I don't know what's going on, but I will ask DZ to unbann you. Personally, I would have banned Blimp Pilot long ago, but its not my decision to make unfortunately.

Please keep spreading the word...

I have no issue of banning blimp, and i know that a good bit of people want him to be banned, but despite his cockyness, etc. he has been posting on the site 6+ months easily, and the few times i have contacted him he has been at least civil with me, which is more than i can say for you.. I'm not siding with blimp by banning you, im banning you because you are in general a pain in my ass.. seeing as how you logged in under his account to mock him, and how it appears to me in the threads i saw this week that you made snide comments to him, which he in turn responded to (without needing to call you names, or harass you, like you seem to flourish on).

you might want to think about putting him in charge of banning people. you obviously let personal feelings get involved with your banning practices.(does blimp pay you? you guys friends? why the double standard exactly? he has broken your "rules" numerous times.)

my first thought is that if SBG wants to regulate comments he is more than welcome.. SBG is my equal on 911blogger.com, and i hope he knows that.. any input from him, or any number of others whom I've met over the last year+, are always listened to.. and if they want to have input on who should or shouldn't be banned that is more than fine by me..

(continued)

[dz]

(.. continued)

as for blimp (who you are apparently obsessed with as well).. no, he doesnt pay me (i dont think he has sent in any donations), and i wouldnt consider him my 'friend'.. in fact, several months ago blimp and i went at it via email over a few days.. it got pretty bad, but i didnt ban him for our disagreements, i just got pissed at him, and we havent needed to talk directly via email since.. as for the double standard, feel free to elaborate, same with him 'breaking the rules'.. i think anything that perhaps would be 'breaking the rules' would probably be in response to you, but if he has been posting under other's aliases, or calling people douchebags, or flooding threads with arguements and switching thread to thread then please let me know.. i dont think blimp is a saint BY ANY MEANS, but i dont expect him to be either.. i just expect him to be somewhat reasonable, and i dont think you are.


i have warned people about things a handful of times throughout the last couple months, with people other than you, but usually thats all that happens.. we have users from all different perspectives on the site, people who disagree on the pentagon, peak oil, 'disinfo' in the 9/11 truth movement, but yet in general all of these differing opinions somehow at least get along on the site, and thats all i ask. i do not censor people for their opinions (to some degree for every opinion there is another user with a differing opinion), everyone can voice their opinion, and we do not censor anyones opinion, period. .. but 'censoring' people who cant be civil, always fall back to namecalling, cant post more than 1 sentence at a time, and being a dick to the moderators of the site will be moderated if needed, and not for their opinion, but because of their unreasonable actions.

btw, i was only joking about the 'no life' thing above, but seriously, i you have so much time to waste arguing with people you dont know, emailing me, logging in under other peoples aliases and posting hateful comments, flooding comments with comments to s.king, posting here about how mean i am, etc. etc. then why dont you use that time a bit better? dont you see all that crap is pointless compared to spending your time on useful stuff like writing letters, posting links on other forums, handing out flyers, reading 9/11 related books, etc. etc.?

[Gold9472]

Damn dude... you could have just said, my site, my rules. Follow them, or be banned.

[dz]

Damn dude... you could have just said, my site, my rules. Follow them, or be banned.

nah, that would make too much sense.. i figured wasting a couple hours of my time trying to respond was a much better use of my time than getting some sleep.. ;)

[dz]

actually the reason i responded so thoroughly was because of the outright hateful things he was saying in his emails, which he then decided to bring here.. look over what he emailed to me, he was being a dick, i dont deserve that shit..

[Chris]

you so deserved that shit. you run your site like an angry child. i know your a republican, but thats low even for you.

[Gold9472]

you so deserved that shit. you run your site like an angry child. i know your a republican, but thats low even for you.

I'm not going to pick a side, but be forewarned, dz is my friend.

[dz]

you so deserved that shit. you run your site like an angry child. i know your a republican, but thats low even for you.

wow, i waste 2 hours responding to your emails and you write 3 sentences after a week.. its obvious you didnt even read my response being that you still want to paint me as a republican..

i at least gave you the courtesy of responding to your hateful rants, why not read them?

part 1:
http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showpost.php?p=54298&postcount=45

part 2:
http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showpost.php?p=54299&postcount=46

[somebigguy]

I'm not going to pick a side, but be forewarned, dz is my friend.
Jackass.

[Gold9472]

Jackass.

What... this isn't my fight.

[Gold9472]

You want to argue about 9/11, I might consider it.

[somebigguy]

What... this isn't my fight.
Just buggin ya, you know, thats what I do!!

[Chris]

you gonna ban me too Jon? haha

[Gold9472]

you gonna ban me too Jon? haha

You haven't given me a reason to, but I would if you did. I'm not ban shy. I would drop this if I were you. Let it go.

[Chris]

ok, i'll just go to other sites to warn people about DZs banning practices.

[Gold9472]

ok, i'll just go to other sites to warn people about DZs banning practices.

Alright Chris... You're starting to piss ME off, and I don't get pissed easily. Let it go. If you want to take time out of your day to specifically thrash someone making a GREAT contribution to the movement, then that's your prerogatitive. If you do, you will forever be known as a shill. Do you want to be known as a shill?

[Gold9472]

bump

[AuGmENTor]

I have thought for a while that the Bush regime knew that the possibility existed for terrorists to hijack planes and use them as weapons. There is just too much evidence supporting it for me to believe otherwise. They ALL knew. But we all know that terrorists come in many delicious flavors, including American Cracker. In a manner of speaking, terrorists DID hijack those planes. They are the best funded, most powerful terrorists on earth. The best trick the devil ever pulled was convincing everyone he didn't exist. The terrorists that pulled off 911 are the most powerful, yet never recognized people on this planet. How, when all the documents came out showing that they all knew for a fact that the possibility existed that these guys were looking to turn planes into missles, people did not howl for their blood as a single voice, ALL OF US, is beyond me to this day. I keep waiting for that one thing to happen that will make people wake up and say, "OK, thats it, time to take out country back." But it never does. I mean alot of us are waking up to what they're doing, but it's discouraging to see how few really care. We'll just go kill each other in bars tonight (and driving home from them tomorrow morning) and shooting each other over a fucking video game. I was thinking how silly that whole Chris/DZ rockfight was, when I realized that Chris is the epitome of what I'm talking about. Antilogic. Fact in, nonsense out.

[Gold9472]

I have thought for a while that the Bush regime knew that the possibility existed for terrorists to hijack planes and use them as weapons. There is just too much evidence supporting it for me to believe otherwise. They ALL knew. But we all know that terrorists come in many delicious flavors, including American Cracker. In a manner of speaking, terrorists DID hijack those planes. They are the best funded, most powerful terrorists on earth. The best trick the devil ever pulled was convincing everyone he didn't exist. The terrorists that pulled off 911 are the most powerful, yet never recognized people on this planet. How, when all the documents came out showing that they all knew for a fact that the possibility existed that these guys were looking to turn planes into missles, people did not howl for their blood as a single voice, ALL OF US, is beyond me to this day. I keep waiting for that one thing to happen that will make people wake up and say, "OK, thats it, time to take out country back." But it never does. I mean alot of us are waking up to what they're doing, but it's discouraging to see how few really care. We'll just go kill each other in bars tonight (and driving home from them tomorrow morning) and shooting each other over a fucking video game. I was thinking how silly that whole Chris/DZ rockfight was, when I realized that Chris is the epitome of what I'm talking about. Antilogic. Fact in, nonsense out.

Mr. President, you knew they were in the United States. You were warned by the CIA. You knew in July they were inside the United States. You were told again by briefing officers in August that it was a dire threat. Didn't do anything to harden our border security. Didn't do anything to harden airport security. Didn't do anything to engage local law enforcement. Didn't do anything to round up INS and the consular office, and say we have to shut this down, and didn't warn the American people. What did you do? Nothing so far as we can see.

— Bob Kerrey - 9/11 Commissioner

[Gold9472]

Yeah... yeah... there's very LITTLE doubt they didn't know EXACTLY what was happening.

[AuGmENTor]

Mr. President, you knew they were in the United States. You were warned by the CIA. You knew in July they were inside the United States. You were told again by briefing officers in August that it was a dire threat. Didn't do anything to harden our border security. Didn't do anything to harden airport security. Didn't do anything to engage local law enforcement. Didn't do anything to round up INS and the consular office, and say we have to shut this down, and didn't warn the American people. What did you do? Nothing so far as we can see.

— Bob Kerrey - 9/11 CommissionerAnd yet, from thya quote, no negative repercussions for the man at all? He should be hung for high treason. Low approval rating is the worst thing that's happened to him...

[Gold9472]

And yet, from thya quote, no negative repercussions for the man at all? He should be hung for high treason. Low approval rating is the worst thing that's happened to him...

Well c'mon now... do you think the media covered this?

[AuGmENTor]

I guess I'm just a silly goose. Why do you think it is that for the longest they wouldnt cover it. ANd now, a few years later, they will say things that a few years ago they woudn't touch?

[AuGmENTor]

Except for shit like this?

[Gold9472]

I don't understand your question. Are you asking why would the media not bother to cover MASSIVE stories such as Kerrey's quote? Isn't it obvious by now? The media is corporately owned.

[AuGmENTor]

Yeah, but ALL of it? Are there no major ones tha are not? You'd think big stuff like this would eventually explode, no matter who owns what.

[Gold9472]

You WOULD think...

[PhilosophyGenius]

Mr. President, you knew they were in the United States. You were warned by the CIA. You knew in July they were inside the United States. You were told again by briefing officers in August that it was a dire threat. Didn't do anything to harden our border security. Didn't do anything to harden airport security. Didn't do anything to engage local law enforcement. Didn't do anything to round up INS and the consular office, and say we have to shut this down, and didn't warn the American people. What did you do? Nothing so far as we can see.

— Bob Kerrey - 9/11 Commissioner

pwned