Instant Karma: network that called truthers ‘hate mongers’ goes bust


Sun News rise of extremism

Sun set: Coren and his pals loved to remind us how afraid we should be of Muslims.

 

By Craig McKee

Canada’s Sun News Network – often referred to as “Fox News North” – will not be calling 9/11 researchers delusional purveyors of hate speech anymore.

That is because the racist, Islamaphobic, fear-mongering network that loved to ridicule “conspiracy theorists” closed its doors for good earlier this month when it became clear that it would never become financially viable and that it would never be embraced by the Canadian public.

Quebecor Media, the media chain that owns the network, had hoped that Sun’s far-right perspective would find favor with the Conservative government of Stephen Harper. This, they hoped, would lead to the cable channel being made a mandatory part of standard cable packages, forcing viewers to pay for it whether they wanted it or not. This would have made it very profitable even if no one was watching. Fortunately for all Canadians, this effort failed.

Readers of Truth and Shadows may remember that Sun News host Michael Coren called Richard Gage of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth and all truthers anti-Semitic hate mongers in back-to-back reports in March 2014. He also stated that all those who challenge the official story of 9/11 are essentially mentally ill losers.

I filed two complaints with the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (an association of private broadcasters) against Coren, but both were rejected without being put before the Council’s tribunal. The head of the council told me in a phone interview that Coren’s comments were “not unduly aggressive.” This decision affirmed the right of the Sun News Network to call someone who is in the public eye just about anything they want – whether there is a shred of proof to support it or not.

After the news of Sun’s demise broke, a satirical web site, The Beaverton, posted a humorous piece stating that the on-air hosts at Sun News have announced a reversal of their earlier opposition to employment insurance. And then this update from The Beaverton:

“Since the downfall of The Sun News Network, conservative commentator Ezra Levant has announced that he will launch The Rebel, an online media network, from his living room as soon as he can get his dam cats out of the shot.”

Now that I would watch.

100 comments

  1. Adding to the evidence I posted in my initial post…Here is evidence connecting CGI to Quebecor…

    “Quebecor Media, the media chain that owns the network, had hoped that Sun’s far-right perspective would find favor with the Conservative government of Stephen Harper.”

    “Quebecor Media Inc. is a broadcasting, communications and publishing company which operates various subsidiaries:

    Sun Media (newspapers) (includes the former Osprey Media)
    TVA Group (broadcasting, publishing & production)
    Vidéotron (cable television and internet service provider)
    Canoe Inc. (internet websites including Canoe.ca/Canoe.com portal and Archambault.ca)
    MediaPages (print and online directories)
    TVA Publishing Inc. (largest magazine publishing company in Quebec)
    Quebecor Media Book Group (book publishing companies)
    Archambault stores (books, music and video)
    Distribution Select (distributor of CDs and videos)
    Le SuperClub Vidéotron (Movie rental stores)
    Nurun Inc. (interactive agency)

    Corporate governance[edit]

    Current members of the board of directors of Quebecor Inc. are:[6] Françoise Bertrand, Jean La Couture, Sylvie Lalande, Pierre Laurin, A. Michel Lavigne, Geneviève Marcon, Brian Mulroney, and Normand Provost.

    Mulroney is to become chair of the board effective June 2014 while Laurin is to become vice-chairman and Pierre Dion, CEO.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebecor

    “CGI Announces that David L. Johnston Will Resign from its Board of Directors”

    http://www.cgi.com/en/cgi-announces-david-johnston-resign-board-directors

    “Mulroney inquiry link could hinder GG contender David Johnston’s hopes

    …chosen by Stephen Harper to write what proved to be constraining terms of reference for Justice Jeffrey Oliphant’s probe of the former Prime Minister’s relationship with Karlheinz Schreiber.”

    http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2010/06/03/travers_mulroney_inquiry_link_could_hinder_gg_contender_david_johnstons_hopes.html

    “Donald Hébert
    Digital Senior Advisor & Project Manager
    Montreal, Canada Area – Internet
    Current Videotron – CGI

    Vidéotron | CGI
    Senior Advisor & Project Manager, Videotron.com Program
    Vidéotron | CGI
    February 2014 – Present (1 year 1 month)Quebec, Canada CGI

    Senior Consultant, Digital & Multichannel Solutions
    CGI
    January 2010 – Present (5 years 2 months)Quebec, Canada”

    https://ca.linkedin.com/in/donaldhebert

    “Vidéotron GP is a Canadian integrated telecommunications company active in cable television, interative multimedia development, video on demand, cable telephony, wireless communication and Internet access services. Owned by QUEBECOR, the company primarily serves Quebec, as well as the francophone communities of New Brunswick and some parts of Eastern Ontario.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vidéotron

    “Serge Dells
    Vice President, Business Engineering, Canada at CGI
    Montreal, Canada AreaInformation Technology and Services

    Previous – Videotron, CGI”

    https://ca.linkedin.com/pub/serge-delisle/3/788/258

    To view much more evidence… http://www.thekellymarierichardcase.com

  2. Hey that is good news that Sun News sputtered out! Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch knuckle dragging pithicoids!

    “Do I make myself clear?”~hickory dickory Dockery … well no actually…
    It is really hard to tell if he is speaking second-person – third-person – first-person – or epistolary omniprescient non-person. Perhaps all of the above and none of the below.
    I would guess he is speaking in the unreliable-narrative-voice-juvenile mode.

    He’s certainly had a belly full a smelly full of twisted fisted screaming sometimes not dreaming but should fall and nod on his keyboard hitting send in some obscure trance delude and delightful.
    In every dream home a fart-ache … stenchacoid rex?

    “There but for the demons go I” in the melody of the larks tongue in bible black.
    \\][//

      1. “Pithicoid” is an outdated term from ‘Physical Anthropology’ … “Pithecanthropus erectus” (Java Man).
        Since Humans are now considered a member of the Anthropoid Ape family, the lexicon has changed quite a bit from the early days.

        “Well I’ll be a monkey’s uncle!!”
        \\][//

  3. To the Sun News Network I say don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out! As to Ken Doc dictatorship I compiled a few sayings about censorship which I would like him to see. If only I were not censored I suppose I could post them on his FB page. Alas the irony of it all.

    You know I was thinking about the 9/11 truth movements biggest obstacles we have faced and you know what popped into my head immediately? Censorship!
    ———————————————————————————————————–

    Books won’t stay banned. They won’t burn. Ideas won’t go to jail. In the long run of history the censor and the inquisitor have always lost. The only sure weapon against bad ideas is better ideas. A. Whitney Griswold

    Restriction on free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us. William O. Douglas

    All censorships exist to prevent any one from challenging current conceptions and existing institutions. George Bernard Shaw

    Censorship is like an appendix. When inert, it is useless; when active it is extremely dangerous. Maurice Edelman

    I look upon those who would deny others the right to urge and argue their position, however irksome and pernicious they may seem, as intellectual and moral cowards.
    William E. Borah

    Without free speech no search for truth is possible; without free speech, no discovery of truth is useful. Charles Bradlaugh

    Norma Fox Mazur added:
    …where once I went to my writing without a backward glance, now I sometimes have to consciously clear my mind of those shadowy censorious presences. That’s bad for me as a writer, bad for you as a reader. Censorship is crippling, negating, stifling. It should be unthinkable in a country like ours. Readers deserve to pick their own books. Writers need the freedom of their minds. That’s all we writers have, anyway: our minds and imaginations. To allow the censors even the tiniest space in there with us can only lead to dullness, imitation, and mediocrity.

    Censorship represents a tyranny over the mind, said Thomas Jefferson–a view shared by founders of our nation–and is harmful wherever it occurs.
    ———————————————————————————————————

    And now a few quotes from some famous (infamous) censors:
    ———————————————————————————————————

    Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas. – Joseph Stalin

    Everyone imposes his own system as far as his army can reach. – Joseph Stalin

    It is the absolute right of the State to supervise the formation of public opinion. – Joseph Goebbels

    1. Nah, Id’ say still the old bottom-line pocket-book issue. Common sense and dignity has always been on short ration on the planet of terror.
      \\][//

  4. Craig, you are so much more intelligent than Dockery and Collins that it’s like you’re from another planet. Sort of like a PhD trying to explain his dissertation to kindergarteners. They won’t be able to understand it, and that will hurt their pride and make them angry. They then direct their childish, irrational anger at you. (Assuming that Dockery and Collilns are sincere. It is possible they are not.)

    Unfortunately bad ideas can spread like a virus when people adopt them just because everyone else has. It’s classic mob psychology.

    This is what has happened with this “divisive” meme, which is based on two false assumptions.

    1) Honest debate is harmful and does not lead to truth.

    The reason free speech was once enshrined in the US Constitution is that it has been shown to lead to greater truth, not less. When opposing ideas can joust and wrestle with each other in a fair fight, the truth has a good chance of prevailing. When certain points of view are forbidden, oppressive conformity prevails.

    2) We know for a fact who is a sincere truther and who is an infiltrator.

    This “divisive” meme is based on the assumption that anyone is truther, just because they say they are, regardless of what kind of baloney they put forward. So for us to criticize alleged truthers Frank Legge or Kevin Ryan makes us “divisive,” not matter how much these clowns deserve it.
    Cass Sunstein warned us that we would be “cognitively infiltrated” and that has obviously happened. To fail to exercise discernment about the ideas put forward by so-called truthers is to open ourselves to domination by those infiltrators, who have a strong incentive to minimize the most incriminating evidence, at least until the guilty parties are dead.

    The most incriminating evidence shows that the Pentagon faked a plane crash on their own property and the media covered it up. No surprise that all the disinformation specialists focus their attention denying this.

    All of these:

    Dockery’s Facebook group
    The 9/11 Consensus Panel
    The Toronto Hearings
    9/11 Blogger
    Journal of 9/11 Studies
    the self-named “scientific” wing of the truth movement (Legge, Cole, Chandler, Ryan, Hoffman)

    have tried to minimize the evidence of a faked plane crash at the Pentagon.

    When you see intelligent people working in concert to promote impossible theories like the one that says that a 757 hit the Pentagon, you do have to wonder about their motivations.

    1. “When you see intelligent people working in concert to promote impossible theories like the one that says that a 757 hit the Pentagon, you do have to wonder about their motivations.”
      ~Sheila

      “And I do.” ~’Tangerine’ ~Led Zeppelin
      \\][//

    2. Note: The formatting of my above comment isn’t as it was when I wrote it. In particular, I meant “All of these:” to be on its own line, which changes the meaning.

    3. @Sheila “Unfortunately bad ideas can spread like a virus when people adopt them just because everyone else has. It’s classic mob psychology.” You should consider that that might be true and think where it might apply.

      1. Holy sputter butter Splatman! If it isn’t Agent Wright is his flight to the Nebber Nebber Land of scrimshaw doodling’s and hooting ululations in tune to the Scoundrel Boogie.
        Shake that money maker her Duncenhiemer.
        \\][//

        1. @hybridrogue1 “The Nebber Nebber Land of scrimshaw doodling’s and hooting ululations” At least I have your address now.

    4. Thanks for saying that, Sheila, although I deal with criticism much better than I do compliments. But I will say that the discourse on this site is (usually) very strong. Although I’m embarrassed that we missed the story about the thermite tipped Gabriel 3 made from holograms and flown by the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man. Or was it Santa?

      You are right on in your analysis of why the “divisive” meme is based on false assumptions. I wonder if we got a hundred or so people to jump on Facebook claiming the Earth is actually flat – would that lead people to say that we can’t be sure either way, and it’s best that we just concentrate on things we all agree on.

  5. One thing I am convinced of is that the Internet isn’t going to save the world.

    It is just going to illustrate yet again, the steady state constant of human nature. And ne’er the twain shall meet, & very few Mark Twain’s shall we meet. But a whole lotta sheep that bleat, “come take my coat, come eat my meat!”
    \\][//

    1. We will all be pleased to know that torture isn’t torture anymore “because of the absence of any specific intent to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering” [YOO..Who?]…..which means any of us lucky enough to strap dick or george or unca donald to our kitchen tables, we can pour water up their noses until near drowning 80 times without fear of prosecution as long as we do not intend severe physical/mental pain or suffering….Just thought I’d tell you that while we are here.[is that another definition of ‘exceptionalism’?]

      1. Javoul der Fremo!
        Exceptionally exceptional with the added ism-sauce of the Bernays flavor, and close encounters of the anal-probe-kind. Surely Spielbergesque in production and parascope.
        \\][//

  6. This is a follow up comment regarding the Facebook situation.

    First of all, I want to make it clear that I tried my damnedest, about a month+ ago, to reach out to both Ken D. and Amanda S., even offering them my phone number and Skype handle so we could talk in person about various 9/11 truth movement issues. I did this because I know that reaching out voice to voice can sometimes be more effective in communicating than text on a screen. I made it clear to both of them that this offer was sincere, and not an attempt to shove my Pentagon view down their throats, though part of my intent was to reason with them on this issue. (This occurred after I had had a lapse of patience with Amanda around November or so, and was harsh-toned in my reaction to an ignorant comment by Amanda [where she thought that ONE (and only one) eyewitness contradicted the official flight path]. She was hurt and blocked me immediately; a couple months later Ken convinced her to unblock me so I could write her and apologize.) Both Ken and Amanda said they’d be willing to dialogue with me “very soon,” but just needed to find the right day and time first.

    However, these conversations never occurred. In fact, rather bizarrely, after Amanda accepted my apology and agreed to later talk, a few days later she re-blocked me.

    Then, two days shy of a month ago, Craig’s last article at this blog was published. When Ken had his meltdown, he apparently decided that anyone who is a friend of Craig’s is no friend of his, because he blocked me personally as well as banned me from his 911TM page, for apparently no reason other than my close association with Craig and my strong stand on the Pentagon evidence.

    High school schoolyard mentality. “If you’re gonna be friends with him then I’m not gonna be friends with you.”

    As I mentioned in the last comment thread, myself as well as Craig are admins at another rapidly-growing group called 911questions, whose chief administrator is a guy called Sebastien Menard, in Montreal, same city as Craig. They’ve met in person and Craig has very positive feelings for Seb and the 911Q project.

    Seb is definitely on our side re the Pentagon, so with the three of us in an administrative position, the tone of the group regarding that subject should be far, far better, and less toxic. People poisonous to the discussion will be removed or at least not allowed to comment on certain threads.

    1. I feel really good about this group also. I have been an admin there for a few months but without getting very involved. But I will do so more and more, especially with you on board, Adam. As I write this, you and I are involved in a Pentagon discussion on 9/11 Questions. We actually have someone disagreeing with us about whether a plane crashed and yet it is (so far) respectful. It can be done.

      1. Yes. I held the naysayer Ray to task about the flight path. For him it’s all about the scraps of debris on the lawn. He cites the photos as evidence a plane did hit, but denounces as not credible the idea that it could have been planted. I believe that’s called a double standard? But he’s been unable to answer the thorny issue of NoC. When his response was that “CIT created a disinfo video,” I challenged him to prove it, and then he shut up, or at least steered the conversation to another direction (whether entire governments or clandestine teams are responsible for a false flag).

        It’s refreshing to get many comments into that thread and not have a lead admin like Ken Doc pop in after 100 comments, saying “See? Another triple digit Pentagon thread where everyone is arguing endlessly. Proof this topic divides us.” Yes, refreshing indeed.

        1. Sounds like Ray K. from Holland. He is a big backer of Mike Collins and he is totally invested in the large jetliner hit the building theory/canard.

          1. That’s the one. I also got into a discussion with a guy named Raymond Reines on 911 Questions. While Ray Kraaijenhagen thinks the bits of metal on the Pentagon lawn proves a plane crash, Reines (he left 911 Questions after I challenged him) thinks that video showing a plane in the sky after the event is proof that it had to have shot a missile at the building. Same first name, same ridiculous logic.

  7. There is one thing I’d like to mention, and might as well mention publicly, since I can’t message them privately: Ken and Amanda are both members of 911Questions; as admins, Craig and I can see their postings to the page; however, since those two have Craig and I blocked, we can not add comments to such threads.

    This means they could make a posting that we would wish to challenge, but can’t.

    This is not acceptable.

    So Ken and Amanda (I know you’re lurking at this page), you MUST unblock both myself and Craig McKee, as he and I are admins. If not, you will be shown the door at 911questions. Lead admin Seb Menard is on board with us in this regard and I know he has privately contacted at least one of you about this.

    And before you accuse me of intensifying any factionalism, let me remind you that I tried to reach out with open arms, but you apparently weren’t interested.

    Seb/myself/Craig are not wanting to remove either of you, Ken and Amanda, but you have a choice to make. It’s either unblock Craig and I, or no longer be a member of 911questions.

    1. So Adam S do you mean to tell me that Ken and Amanda want to have their voices heard on the blog you and Craig are admins of while keeping both of you gagged on their blog? Hmm seems a bit unfair to me but then what do I know?

      Have I mentioned yet how much I dislike censors?

        1. This affair as you have described it shows plainly that there are grounds for banning that go beyond the issues of censorship. The disingenuous stand that Ken and Amanda as actually one of them censoring the actual moderators, giving you no voice to even warn them of their potential liability to being banned.

          Now it can be sure that they will now use this as another excuse to make accusation against you for being unfair, turning the whole issue on its head again, as seems to be their initial strategy for controlling their FB page in a Stalinesque manner.

          Obviously you do have the opportunity to explain all of this on your own FB Page. I hope others from the other page will take a look to see what the story really is.
          \\][//

        2. Yes, but only after Ken was given the option of unblocking Adam and me. He refused to do that, so it was his choice. We gave him a lot more consideration than he gave me, Adam S., Adam R., Michael Cook, and Sheila Casey.

  8. Dockery: It’s very possible and most likely that a plane did hit the Pentagon…… the problem is no one has seen it.

    That’s the most off-the-fence I’ve seen him get on the issue. I read into this as: “I would LOVE to support the plane-impact position, but my own polls show that 85-90% don’t believe that, and I can’t afford to take the heat from my own group.”

    I can guarantee you that if, say, 55% of his poll respondents answered that they did indeed lean toward a plane crash, then he would promote Frank Legge et al with the utmost of enthusiasm.

    In fact, while I admit I’m employing my imagination here, I can picture Ken privately messaging someone like Legge or Chandler or Cole and saying “Bro, I WISH I could publicly support your side but my own polls show differently so I don’t want to go there. But THANKS for all your careful research.”

    Can anyone else imagine that?

    1. Obviously Dockery is playing to his audience, not looking for the truth. This “consensus” bullshit raises it’s little piggy head again. “Oink! Oink!!”
      \\][//

  9. I predict nothing but a stone wall of silence from Ken Doc from now on. I have to say though that the group is of no use if people cannot even discuss the evidence and disagree with Ken Doc (why does that name remind me of Pol Pot so much now?) without getting booted with no warning? Ken should just lay out all his opinions and just tell the group that the discussion is over since my opinions are correct and there is no point in discussing it any further. If you disagree with me I will shoot you in the face (figuratively speaking of course) to silence you. MY RULE IS ABSOLUTE!

    1. This whole thing reminds me very much of the “Stalinist Purge” by Rob Kall, of all of us posting there who were pointing out that Obama was an obvious Wall Street Boy, and would be nothing but a continuation of the George Bush Jr Regime. Exactly what Amerika got.

      This purge is what led to COTO, the blog I worked with for about 5 years, until it was infiltrated by a mole, who chumped all the regulars there, causing a fracture in the group, leading to my departure.

      All of this was very fortuitous for me, as I then began to seriously develop HR1blog, which has been most satisfying personally.

      Now Adam Syed and Craig have benefited in much the same way by starting their own FB branch, due to a similar Stalinist Purge!
      \\][//

      1. Well, we didn’t start the 911Q group, Seb Menard did. And he’s been at it for about a year now, slowly building members. Craig has been an admin there for awhile now but is only now starting to get active with the group. I volunteered to be an admin as well, and there you go.

        I’ve so far removed one individual who was cluttering up a Pentagon thread with disinfo nonsense.

          1. Yes it certainly is. And all 5 of us admins are firmly of the understanding that no plane hit the Pentagon. That should make it relatively painless to keep it a breath of fresh air.

    2. I don’t expect to hear anything from him either. But that is a real indictment of him as a person and as a moderator. If he can’t at least acknowledge that what Collins did was wrong then I have no respect for him. Incidentally, I came across the original post by Collins that tipped me off about what he was doing. I hadn’t been able to find it but now I have. It was on the AE911Truth Facebook page attached to an announcement of me being interviewed on Andy Steele’s 9/11 Free Fall radio show. Collins protested that he had not called me a no-planer but I now have the proof that he did just t”hat.

      Collins wrote about me: “He’s one of the well known misinformation spreaders who seeks to push his own speculation and assumptions, and promotes the nonsensical ‘no plane’ theory…….”

    1. Things get more and more delightful on the Facebook page discussed above. The lies of Mike Collins and Ken Dockery have not been corrected, and the insults go on as before. Others are banned but not Collins. The latest is that he says he is deliberately acting like a debunker to help others hone their truther skills. He calls it “truther boot camp.”

      “People should be glad they have a place where they can get insight and advice, without worrying about being embarrassed.”

      I’ve never run into anyone so supremely unaware of irony. Yes, if you’re going to be called a retard or a fucking idiot, it’s great to have a place where that can happen without you being embarrassed – in this case in front of the group’s 40,000 members.

      “If you post something, and an admin challenges you on it, and you can’t defend your own post without insulting someone, imagine what will happen when you get debunked in public by someone who is actually against you??”

      So that’s the point of 9/11 forums, to prepare us all to handle those hundreds of debunker debates that are always happening in public. How are things going since Dockery outlawed insults and negativity? Here is an assortment of Collins’s lively descriptive terms from a recent thread:

      Fool, fucking retard, child, idiot, stupid, degenerate leech on society, dumbass sheep (he means truthers, of course), and simple-minded teenagers who get their information from blogs (whatever you do, don’t trust blogs!).

      And the always reliable: “lol let me guess, you live with your parents and never had a real job before, don’t pay taxes and don’t understand reality.”

      Thanks Ken for cleaning things up over there.

      1. It doesn’t matter how much you call Mike Collins out on his bullshit, Craig. Mike will always be Ken’s “bro” and Amanda’s “bud” and even “bestie,” and nothing you do or say can tear them apart!!!

        1. I keep getting “new post” notifications for this article in my inbox. Has anyone else who gets those notifications noticed that they keep coming? I haven’t been able to figure out how to stop this from happening.

      2. So it has naturally degenerated into a cess pit of Stalinist selective censorship over there at Ken Doc’s place huh? Sad to see another potentially good place for 9/11 truth go down the crapper the same way 911Blahhhger did. It is embarrassing for those who run the place although some of them are just willfully blind about why they should be embarrassed.

        You know I posted some sayings about censors further up but I want to add a saying of my own:

        Censors are both moral cowards and tyrants wrapped in one package. – Adam Ruff

  10. 9/11 Truth Infiltration History: John Albanese

    Craig,

    Mike Collins’ antic of playing devil’s advocate in order to strengthen peoples’ debate skills sets of my alarm bells big time, mainly because of my longevity in this cause and memory of similar situations from many years back. It’s not often that I publicly state that I think someone’s definitely an agent, but one such individual was man named John Albanese,visible about a decade ago in the early Loose Change days. He became well known for making a film called “Everybody’s Gotta Learn Sometime.” It followed on the coattails of Loose Change and gained traction in 2006. It was very LIHOPpy, focusing on “ignored warnings” and the like.

    Albanese even made an appearance on Fox News, where he said: “My… [practically bites tongue from saying “job”]…I… I basically focus on studying the cultural phenomenon of this movement, and why it exists.” [1]

    (Not to discover the truth about 9/11, but to study the cultural phenomenon of the movement? Red flag anyone?)

    He spoke at many 9/11 events around the 5th anniversary, and was asked why he hadn’t included CD in his film and what his stance was on the demolition issue. He explained at 911blogger:

    “Despite my lack of expertise on this subject, it would appear that my audience demands that I publicly take a position on controlled demolition.

    For years I have explained to my 9/11 compatriots that I am agnostic on the issue. Possessing no advanced degrees in physics or structural engineering, I never felt that my opinions were relevant. And while I might document historical events associated with 9/11 in my films, the job of expressing opinions on the issue of complex and catastrophic building failures, physics and engineering, was simply not within the realm of my particular area of expertise, therefore rendering my opinions on the matter as insignificant and in many respects inappropriate.”

    [2]

    Albanese then goes on to explain why he had finally accepted that the buildings were controlled demolition. Albanese wrote the above quoted article in August 2006. So, he’s on the record in August 2006 as supporting controlled demolition.

    It is important to remember that this was all just before AE911Truth launched, so the question of areas of expertise of those claiming controlled demolition was a major talking point used by debunkers.

    But in November of that same year, Albanese complained about those who emphasize controlled demolition so much. Notice his misspelling of “expertise” with a “z.”

    the pro-CD meme can be……
    …..so oppresive that is eclipses all other research.

    i myself have been accused of censoring CD by the tvFakery folk – as if their research even comes CLOSE to the evidence associated with CD.

    i myself have been accused of being a shill or infiltrator simply because i produced a film that (gasp) focuses on a different line of research

    and when you see people with no technical expertize in an area – sooooo passionate about their beliefs – yet without the technical skills or language or expertize to defend their position…..

    they simply do not understand that this is almost the perfect definition of a tin-foil hat conspiracy theorist.

    ultimately i decided in favor of CD based on what some of the EXPERTS have said. ultimately it was the conservation of momentum – and the pulverizing of the building’s contents – that got me.

    but – i almost feel like there is this “fundamentalist” approach to the movement now where people feel like we all must advocate or push the same evidence.

    i may believe in CD – but – i am also mature enough to understand my own limitations. i am not a structural engineer or physicist – and i will not PRETEND to be.

    CD is STILL the one subject that the media most often uses to make us look silly.

    gee – i wonder why?

    meanwhile, we have whistleblowers and gag orders and known lies and distortions and unanswered questions that we could DEMAND be answered. people could be Subpoenaed!!!

    [3]

    So, here he’s still undeniably supporting CD, but just that he wishes other aspects of 9/11 were promoted more as well. Fine. But…

    Also around the same period, that November, Albanese did EXACTLY what Mike Collins is currently doing at Facebook, except in 2006 at 911blogger, Albanese did it anonymously – and sloppily. In those days, you could post comments as an anonymous guest user, as well as have a registered account.

    It was around this time that the truth movement discovered the video of the firefighters testifying to the “molten steel running down the channel rails like lava” video.

    So in the comments of a blog entry discussing this, Albanese posted anonymously arguing against thermite and in favor of the idea that the molten metal could have been the result of a “natural exothermic reaction.”

    Not only is the writing style the same largely, but there’s also the misspelling “expertize” again.

    Just curious, what exactly was the thermite used for? Cutting the columns to bring down the tower in a synchronized fashion?

    Does anyone know if there is any evidence of the existence of a a thermite canister that could cut sideways through a vertical column??

    This link:

    itep.ws/pdf/FOI_Rapport.pdf

    indicates that thermite could be used to burn sideways to cut small holes, but does anyone have any evidence of the existence of this technology being used to cut through massive vertical towers?

    Just for the record I think its great that a forum like this exists that allows someone like me to learn from your collective expertize on this subject.

    Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 11/18/2006 – 5:36pm.

    [4]

    And again:

    Spraying water on large steel/iron fires in contained areas can create exothermic reactions yielding hydrogen and large amounts of heat.

    I remember in high school breaking the water molecule down into hydrogen and oxygen and ENERGY.

    but i could be wrong. i really respectfully submit these issues in the spirit of friendship and respect for your expertize.

    [5]

    An astute truther “casseia” responded:

    “Expertize”
    Hey, John Albanese, if this is you, you really need to get some help.

    If you’re a troll, you definitely win the evil troll of the week award.

    Would you like to explain why you are misspelling “expertise” with a z?

    Submitted by casseia on Sat, 11/18/2006 – 8:40pm.

    Casseia also concludes from Albanonymous’ comments:

    You clearly didn’t read his paper and his FAQ.
    So I’m done.

    [6]

    I’m not sure that Albanese ever admitted under his name that he’d been anonymously playing Devil’s Advocate; maybe he did and I’m just too tired to find it right now. But in addition to the misspelling of ‘expertise’ with a ‘z,’ the writing styles are too similar.

    The Real Clincher

    But, the real clincher of all is that years later, sometime in the 2010-11 period, on Facebook, Albanese was full blown anti-controlled demolition. I was sent this screen shot and I’m not sure what group it was from, but here it is:

    So, in sum: we had a person who around the 5th anniversary was making LIHOP movies and infiltrating forums debating controlled demolition anonymously while publicly (a) supporting it, but that (b) it’s too over-emphasized. Then years later, he takes a crap on CD in front of a FB audience that was likely broader than the 911blogger audience in 2006.

    How do we know that Mike Collins is not also doing the same thing, anonymously or under different names, at other places out on the WWW?

    We don’t, and Albanese’s history and actions are not proof that Collins is an agent (I feel 100% sure Albanese was) but what it should tell us is clear:

    Be VERY VERY VERY wary of anyone who claims they’re acting like a debunker “for our good” so we can refine our debate skills.

    They’re likely doing it for no reason other than to suck our time.

    SOURCES

    [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3SbjhdPRa0
    [2] 911blogger.com/news/2006-08-29/confessions-controlled-demolition-convert
    [3] 911blogger.com/news/2006-10-24/why-dont-people-john-judge#comment-83421
    [4] 911blogger.com/news/2006-11-18/steve-watson-importance-molten-metal-video#comment-90079
    [5] 911blogger.com/news/2006-11-18/steve-watson-importance-molten-metal-video#comment-90148
    [6] 911blogger.com/news/2006-11-18/steve-watson-importance-molten-metal-video#comment-90106

    1. I think 9/11 trolls do what they do not only to waste our time but also and perhaps more importantly to make us feel hopeless and defeated and to wear us out.

  11. ART & ARTIST by Otto Rank

    The Artist, much like the individual generally, is a cultural phenomenon. The individual’s Art must begin and be articulated as a historical genre. At the same time Artists often attempt to reach beyond genre, i.e. beyond their cultural condition

    Rank articulates the impossibility of escaping socio-cultural domination, epistemological doubt, and ontological terror, in our corporal form. Hence human beings escape into speculation into non-corporal form, via the process of creation, play, and the pleasure of the aesthetic as a latent promise of, or possibility for, immortality.

    http://www.ottorank.com/

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Rank

    Art and Artist: Creative Urge and Personality Development

    Art and Artist: Creative Urge and Personality Development

    Buy from Amazon

    \\][//

    1. My question is are we going to do anything other than discuss these issues? Almost all of Craig’s articles are really a call to action aren’t they? Are they not bringing to our attention something that is wrong in the world that calls for action on our part? But when are we going to act? When is enough enough? What does it take for us to move from bloggers to active participants in the change we want to see in the world? When am I actually going to carry out my promise to do that video expose’ of Ken Doc’s little tyranny? When are any of us going to act rather than simply describing the temperature of the water we are boiling in? For me at least it is time to start putting up or shutting up and I hope that is the time it is for most of you too. In that spirit I would like to interview for my video a few people who post here for my video expose’ of not only Ken Doc’s dictatorship but of 911Blahhger and in some respects all the blogs out there run by petty dictators who have no respect for free speech.

      I would like to interview or get a short audio/video clip from the following people for this project:

      Craig McKee
      Adam Syed
      Willy Whitten
      Sheila Casey
      Barrie Zwicker

      It should be a simple matter of doing a brief video/audio recording yourself answering the following three questions and then sending the files to me:

      1. What is your opinion of internet censorship such as that described in Craig McKee’s article?
      2. How would you make it better and freer if you ran Ken Doc’s page or 911Blahhger?
      3. What if anything else would you like to add? (be creative here folks)

      Obviously Craig question number one is answered by your article but a synopses on video would make for a much better and more powerful presentation. My friend Greg told me something about making videos that has always stuck with me. He said remember Adam video is all about the visuals. In music it is all about the sound in writing it is all about the words but for a video to be great it has to get across the message in pictures.

      1. Adam, I’d be willing to do this. I’d have to figure out where to get, or borrow, a video camera for this. I doubt my phone could produce good enough quality. Any suggestions?

        And I agree with you about taking action. This is something I think a lot about. One of the things I’m thinking about now is whether to run as an independent in the Canadian federal election. It appears there won’t be a formal 9/11 party but rather a loose group of independents who have their views about 9/11 and the war on terror in common. We would have the backing of Rethink 9/11.

        1. Craig even a video from your cell phone or a laptop webcam would be fine. If the resolution is low I will just shrink the window you are in on the screen to compensate. The audio is really what matters but visuals are important too. I can make it visually appealing though even if I have only a low resolution video of you saying what you want to say. I will put other things on the screen such as your website or such as quotations from people you mention in your comments or any number of other things. So don’t worry about the resolution of the video and don’t make it a hassle for yourself either. An audio recording and a picture of yourself is fine too.

    1. Greg, what I don’t get is why the move to FB, when Craig had this T&S blog running full throttle and getting strong response? It’s like he parked his super charged hot rod, got out and got on the subway.
      \\][//

      1. HR1,

        I for one am only involved on FB for a limited time. I hate facebook and I especially hate the arrogant asshole CEO who laughs at how he cooperates with the NSA and who knows who else and sells us all out. I am only there right now in response to one of the mods from Ken Doc’s dictatorship. I much prefer T+S to facespook but I missed a lot of things that were going on by not being on FB at all such as the issue Craig wrote about for example. So I reluctantly put up a basic profile again on FB so I could view those conversations. FB is shit though I agree with you.

      2. Will you participate in my video project described above Willy? Let me know. I understand if you do not want to or don’t have time.

        1. Adam Le Ruffian,

          I don’t have a video camera. I don’t have a video camera in my cell phone. I don’t have a webcam… Lowtech’s at the wheel here .. Lol
          \\][//

          1. if you have a laptop I can tell you how to do an audio recording or I can just call you and record the phone conversation. Either way is fine.

            1. No Adam, I am on a desktop pc.
              My mics and input device are all in storage, This new computer is 64 bit and will not work with my former 32 bit sound software.
              \\][//

                1. Mr Ruff,
                  You have my email address. Simply write to me for my phone number.
                  We can have a phone conversation, and you can add whatever imagery you think applicable to the conversation.
                  \\][//

      3. I have not moved to Facebook. I am one of 6 admins on one page, and sometimes I get involved in discussions, especially about the Pentagon. I can do more than one thing at the same time. I am currently working hard on new Truth and Shadows posts (one is finished but awaiting one element, and the other is being worked on now).

  12. By the way I am now blocked by Dany Carmady for speaking up on the FB post where she was talking about me LOL. So now I cannot see or comment on the thread which is about me. How ironic and sad really. I did discover that Dany is not the victim she claims to be though. She is playing dumb about what the issue really is for one and on the other hand she is using the excuse that her internet is too expensive to watch national security alert yet during that thread she says a new friend sent her a long video which she watched and enjoyed very much. So what is the truth? Who knows but I do know that there are not very many internet service providers left solvent on the planet that charge extra for downloading and watching youtube videos. Since most do not charge extra the ones that do if they in fact still exist would be driven out of business everywhere except where they maintain a monopoly. Since Dany lives in Brisbane I sincerely doubt her internet provider is the only one available in such a populous city. Anyway maybe she is trapped and cannot get a decent connection and her story she told me is true that her internet bill was over $300 last month. If that is true then how is it that this month she can watch a long video from her new FB friend without apparently any concern about her internet bill?

    Dany also chastises me for not contributing much on FB well after our long conversation in which I told her I don’t do my activism on FB and I don’t like FB. So she is definitely playing both sides on at least two issues here and behaving very deceptively in my opinion. Playing dumb about the real issue of CENSORSHIP is wearing thin since Craig, Adam Syed, and myself have explained it at length to her very clearly and yet she still feigns ignorance.

    I personally now think Dany is dishonest where as before I gave her the benefit of the doubt. Once you see the conversation I had with her and look at the current thread you will see the clear two faced nature of Dany Carmady. She seems perfectly willing to support the censorship of anyone and has no remorse whatsoever about it. She also plays the wounded duck quite well by constantly reminding everyone that she is a volunteer and works full time and has a son etc etc. Well does being a volunteer absolve her of mistreatment of others? Does the fact she works hard mean it is OK to stuff a gag in peoples mouth? Is it OK because she is a mom to defend Ken Doc’s indefensible actions?

    Dany went ape shit (sorry I cant think of another term to describe her reaction better) at the time of night I sent my message to her offering to give Ken Doc or her a chance to comment on my upcoming video. Well Dany I had no idea you have an alarm right next to you while you sleep that goes off any time someone posts a message to you on FB. Personally I don’t get FB messages or e-mails until I turn on my computer. I certainly do not get alerts every time FB sends out a spam message nor would I if one of your 40,000 group members sent a message. I also did not know what time zone Brisbane is in compared to California where I live so I had no idea it was the middle of your night. Sorry Dany but I recommend you simply turn off alerts while you sleep so that doesn’t happen again.

    Here again is a re-print of one of the 25 rules of disinformation that Dany might want to read over:

    9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues with denial they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.

  13. How come Adam Syed and ,I think, Craig McKee have removed people from their Facebook ‘911 Questions’ page, because they didn’t agree with their opinions. Is that censorship?

    1. No it isn’t because they both contacted those people and told them they had to unblock them so they could fulfill their moderating function. Those people refused to remove their blocks on Craig and Adam so they had no option but to remove them. It was their option they choose it not Adam and Craig.

    2. I notice you are always right there to try and stir up shit at the slightest opportunity A.Wright and yet you are not banned from T+S are you?

      1. @hybridgorue1 There isn’t censorship of what I say from Craig McKee, which I appreciate. There is a lot of personal abuse and derogatory comments though, in which you lead the way.

        1. “There is a lot of personal abuse and derogatory comments though, in which you lead the way.”

          And justly so dear little piggy.

          More oinks more bucks for the piggy’s bank. Aye?
          \\][//

    3. To whom are you referring? Adam R. is correct about Ken Dockery and Amanda Sedell being banned because they refused to unblock Adam S. and me. We agreed that this would not be allowed. An admin should always be able to see and comment on anything posted on their page. A couple of others have been banned as well for very specific reasons. When someone clearly discusses in bad faith, that is they do not acknowledge points that are made proving them wrong about something, and they keep moving the goalposts so that the discussion becomes circular, then they have to be removed. I prefer to err on the side of openness, but there are times when one insincere person can ruin a whole thread if not a whole page.

      1. @Craig McKee Adam Syed said he had removed someone and there have been a number of people removed , so who are they can I ask?

    1. Perhaps they were abusive of others? Perhaps they made threats? I don’t know what the specific situation was with each of these unnamed people but I know Craig and Adam go out of their way to be fair and reasonable. Go ask them on that page if you think it was censorship.

      A.Wright you are just like this character as far as I am concerned: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-Y6YfDBmh8

    2. A. Wright, do you think it’s acceptable to ban someone when they are obviously being dishonest and employing the various disinformation techniques that Adam R. referred to? I don’t believe in censorship, but there are times when it is clear someone is jerking you around on purposed to destroy a discussion. If you want to point to a particular example, we could discuss it. If not, there’s no point.

    1. Go ask someone else your stupid questions. Try someone who knows what happened and isn’t disgusted by you to the point where they don’t even want to speak to you via text. Oh and actually make a point with your posts that might help.

  14. War, the State, media PR, “Reality”… it has all been contrived, which means it’s absolutely trivial.
    \\][//

  15. Dear Craig and Adam,

    If you could believe that I am saying this with a lot of affection and admiration for both of you:

    This Facebook venture of yours is nothing but a waste of time, energy and intellect. I really can’t make sense of why you both would want to swim in the muddy swamp called Facebook.

    1. Lilaleo,

      I really don’t want to participate on FB at all because you are right it is a totally compromised venue. The CEO of FB is a monster who cooperates with the NSA for God’s sake so I totally agree with you about participating there. I really don’t participate there much at all and the little I do is to wish friends and family happy birth day etc. Rarely I will post something or comment on a good post. I work mostly here or on the streets talking to people directly. For me at least this is a larger issue of freedom of speech and how dangerous mass psychology can be with a petty tyrant leading them. If you think about what Ken Doc and 911Blogger are really doing by suppressing the pentagon evidence you will discover that they are literally suppressing the truth itself about the 9/11 mass murder. They are literally helping the perps get away with the crime. They even admit they don’t fully grasp the pentagon evidence yet they are willing to stifle the discussion on the grounds that it is too divisive. The irony is that it is only divisive because they don’t grasp the evidence in the first place. They don’t grasp it because they won’t have the discussion.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s