Debate Challenge And Questions For 911blogger, Letter just sent to 911Blogger. Options

[Atomicbomb]

I just sent the following letter to the entire 911Blogger team:


"911Blogger Owners and Moderators,

My name is Adam Ruff. I am a former contributor to 911Blogger and reporter for Unspun Newz http://www.youtube.com/user/unspunnewz?feature=mhum. I would like to ask you all some questions on the record regarding your involvement with 911Blogger and would appreciate your response to them for my upcoming report on 911Blogger and the Citizens Investigation Team (CIT). Please reply back individually or as a group with your thoughts about each question written below the question itself so your responses will not get confused or be misunderstood. Thank you.

Q: Now that such a large number of people have been banned from 911Blogger apparently without violating the site rules and without an explanation do you feel the site is fulfilling it's purpose better today then it was prior to the mass banning? If so can you explain how the site has improved or how the truth movement has benefited from the mass banning?

Q: What is official 911Blogger editorial policy regarding CIT's pentagon evidence and regarding CIT supporters posting on 911Blogger?

Q: What is 911Bloggers official position in regard to censorship and the 1st amendment to the US Constitution? Can you elaborate on that position specifically as it relates to private property rights vs. free speech rights?

Q: In light of the recent endorsements of CIT from Barrie Zwicker http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xu5wzJtSMhc and Dwain Deets http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYGkiYmVUmg , endorsements which were very critical of censorship efforts against CIT within the truth movement, do you feel that it may have been ill advised to take such a harsh stance against CIT yourselves or do you feel as though your stance is justified and correct? Could you explain your answer?

Q: How involved were each of you personally in deciding who would be banned from 911Blogger? Did you make the decisions in each case yourself or was it a committee decision involving all/some of the other moderators as to who would be banned?

Q: Do you contend that those individuals banned without explanation over the last few months were not banned because of their support for CIT but for some other reason? If so why were they banned and how do you explain the large numbers of CIT supporters in the banned group?

Q: Do you consider 911Bloggers efforts to suppress CIT's evidence and purge CIT's supporters from your site to be successful? If so how do you measure that success?

Q: If it should turn out that CIT, Barrie Zwicker, Dwain Deets, and the many CIT supporters purged from 911Blogger were proved correct in their conclusions about the pentagon attack (I.E. the fly over happened, the pole damage was staged, etc) how will you restore 911Bloggers reputation and make up for the tremendous damage that has been done to the truth movement and to it's members who were wrongly silenced?

Q: Are you willing to debate CIT on the subject of the pentagon provided a neutral debate setting, established debate rules, and equal representative teams can be arranged? If not can you tell us why you choose to decline such a debate?

Q: If none of you are willing to answer any of the above questions is there any statement you would like to make on behalf of 911Blogger that you would like me to include in my report?

I look forward to your timely response,

Adam Ruff
Unspun Newz

P.S. I have BCC'd a number of truth movement members on this message in order to keep all this out in the open."


I will post any replies I get here.

[Tamborine man]

Victronix, the new minister for propaganda and gate-keeping at 911 blogger,

is now endeavoring to make PFT into a "third rail" issue!

(Ref. Wikipedia description in J. Gold's post above hers).

What a disgusting woman.


http://911blogger-bans-truth.com/news/2011-01-27/davi...re-him#comments

Cheers

[onesliceshort]

Victronix, the new minister for propaganda and gate-keeping at 911 blogger,

is now endeavoring to make PFT into a "third rail" issue!

(Ref. Wikipedia description in J. Gold's post above hers).

What a disgusting woman.


http://911blogger-bans-truth.com/news/2011-01-27/davi...re-him#comments

Cheers

HI TM,

Jesus H....

Icky Vicky..

"We can only hope no one looks too closely at the 'professional' claims advocated by the Pilots group. Almost every post on their front page amounts to commercial jets not being involved in the attacks -- either they were swapped, flew away from the scene undetected, or were not present at all."

(IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/huh.gif)

Yes, Icky Vicky, we should adhere to the OCT.

Legge the Chemist then gives his "professional" opinion... (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif)

The accusation has always been that CIT/P4T were "thread hijackers" and "disruptors", yet here's a thread entitled "David Ray Griffin's Response to UN Watch's Article: “NGO Says Richard Falk Has “Zero Credibility,” Urges UN Chief to Fire Him” and immediately there is a "softening" of the impact of the subject in the form of a veiled cowardly attack on Griffin just because he has the stones to stick by the logical conclusions he reached regarding P4T and CIT's work.

There is no vigorous "debate" or differing "opinions" which used to make Blogger an interesting visit.
Now the TruthFaction crew have what this site seems to have been originally designed for. Fear to speak your mind, censorship, sycophants, unchallenged disinfo and herding unsuspecting curious individuals over the OCT line, sprinkled with LIHOP innuendo.

RIP 911Blogger or "J.REF Light" as an associate of mine calls it..lol

This post has been edited by onesliceshort: Feb 5 2011, 11:54 AM