Thursday, March 21, 2013

New White House WTC 7 Petition



A huge collection of other online activism links can be found here.

Jon Gold’s Official 9/11 Justice Start Up Kit

Thursday, July 26, 2012

Here is the 9/11 Report. I suggest you read it, and ask others to read it to understand the “official account.”

Then I suggest you ask people to watch the companion DVD “In Their Own Words: The Untold Stories Of The 9/11 Families“…

Then I suggest you ask people to you watch then former Rep. Cynthia McKinney chair the 9/11 Omission Hearings that took place not two months after the release of the 9/11 Report in New York City on 9/9/2004…

Then I suggest you ask people to watch then Rep. Cynthia McKinney’s 9/11 Congressional Briefing held in Washington D.C. on 7/22/2005…

Then I suggest you recommend the “Complete 9/11 Timeline” to get people started…

Then I suggest you recommend this series of movies I made called “What’s Being Covered Up?“…

Here is what I call the “Gail Sheehy Collection.” She is the reporter that reported on the “Jersey Girls” as they were doing their thing. It is essential reading…

Then I suggest you recommend the report on the inadequacies of the 9/11 Commission’s Report compiled by 9/11 Family Members Lorie Van Auken and Mindy Kleinberg…

Then I suggest you show people this list of unanswered questions compiled by the 9/11 Family Steering Committee…

Then I suggest you ask people to read the different letters sent out over the years by the September Eleventh Advocates…

Then I suggest you show the archived statements of the 9/11 Family Steering Committee that took place during the Commission and after…

Then I suggest you ask people to read the FSC’s testimony before the 9/11 Commission. Especially Mindy Kleinberg, and Kristen Breitweiser…

Here is an archive I made a few years ago called the “Who Is? Archives“…

Here is something several “veterans” for this cause wrote to better help activists

Then, if all of that fails to motivate people to fight for justice, you can show them my article, “The Facts Speak For Themselves“…

Good luck!

- Jon Gold



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

9/11 Debate: Jon Gold Vs. Pat Curley

Luke's Change: an Inside Job

Published on Mar 16, 2013

An examination of some questionable events and circumstances leading up to the destruction of the Death Star, through the eyes of an amateur investigative journalist within the Star Wars galaxy. The focus is mainly on the connections between the people who created and operated the Death Star and those responsible for destroying it. For those who don't care for the obvious, this is a satirical spoof of the 9/11 truther video Loose Change.

I think that video is hilarious, but there are things that can actually be learned about 9/11 by examining Star Wars.

This video was broke at first, but I found this expanded version of it.

Darth Vader and the New World Order - Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith mirrors reality

Wednesday, March 20, 2013

R.I.P Jane Pollicino, 1953 -- 2013: 9/11 Widow Took Courageous Stand for 9/11 Families and AE911Truth

Published on Mar 15, 2013
9/11 widow Jane Pollicino, a passionate supporter of AE911Truth, passed away on February 21 after suffering a stroke, according to Newsday.

Her husband, Steve Pollicino, died in the North Tower of the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001. Her husband's remains were never found.

Jane was an active member of NYC CAN, joining over 100 family members of 9/11 victims and first responders who stand side by side with the 1,700 Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth in calling for a real 9/11 investigation.

In 2009, she helped deliver a petition signed by over 80,000 New Yorkers to the New York City Council in an effort to begin a new 9/11 inquiry.

In 2011, she took part in the second TV ad by the Remember Building 7 campaign, in which 9/11 victims' family members joined architects and engineers in questioning the destruction of WTC Building Seven.

Most recently, Jane took a leading role in educating the public about 9/11 by appearing in our latest documentaries, 9/11: Explosive Evidence -- Experts Speak Out and Architects & Engineers: Solving the Mystery of WTC 7. She spoke in the most touching manner of losing her husband on 9/11, and asked why there has yet to be a real scientific investigation into what took his life and the lives of thousands of other victims. In the film, she pleads for real answers to questions such as, "Why is there no trace of more than 1,100 people?"

She also gave speeches at several major 9/11 Truth events, including the Investigate Building 7 conference in Connecticut in 2011 and the New York City premiere of Experts Speak Out in June 2012. In addition, she spent her last few years giving tours of Ground Zero to visitors at the 9/11 Tribute Center.

AE911Truth founder and CEO Richard Gage, AIA, notes, "Along with courageous 9/11 family member Bob McIlvaine, Jane was one of the most dedicated and consistent supporters of the critically important work we are doing here at AE911Truth on behalf of the 9/11 Truth movement. Her starring role at the beginning and end of Experts Speak Out is a haunting plea for justice that I hope will grip and move the hearts of all who have the good grace to see this film."
Her moving words at the film's conclusion will be a lasting memory to us all:

"The country owns this. We were all victims. We all should want answers. It's not just ours... It's not just mine. We all lost something that day."

R.I.P. Jane ..our thoughts are with your family at this time.


Dearly Departed, Jane Pollicino, 59, spoke out for 9/11 families

March 3, 2013

"Jane Pollicino, 59, of Plainview, who became a prominent voice for families of 9/11 victims after she lost her husband in the Twin Towers attack, died Feb. 21. She suffered a stroke while on vacation with her family in Cancun, Mexico.

Pollicino was a homemaker when her husband, Steve, a corporate bond trader and vice president at Cantor Fitzgerald, was killed on Sept. 11, 2001. Her children,..."

Jane was a featured speaker in Architects & Engineers For 9/11 Truth's: Explosive Evidence EXPERTS SPEAK OUT and will be missed,

Long Island NewsDay

Jane Pollicino Interview NYC CAN Update 911 Family Member Speaks Out

Remember Building 7, Hartford, Conn. Part 5 - 3/26/11 - 911 Family Member Jane Pollicino

PBS - Colorado broadcasts 9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out (2012 documentary) (featured at 54min 16sec)


Please sign this petition that Pollicino was helping to spearhead.


Thousands Of Victims' Family Members Believe 9/11 Was An Inside Job

9/11 Families Ask: What Happened to the Third Building That Collapsed in the WTC Attacks?

"The Jersey Girls" support AE911Truth efforts

Video of this event co-sponsored by Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth

Scholars and Family Members Submit Request for Correction to 9/11 NIST Report

We, the undersigned Families, First Responders and Survivors of September 11 raise our voice with those from across our country and around the world in support of NYC CAN and the establishment of an independent, impartial subpoena powered investigation into the events surrounding the September 11 attacks on our nation.

Respected Leaders and Families Launch 9/11 Truth Statement Demanding Deeper Investigation into the Events of 9/11

9/11 Family Member Patty Casazza: Government Knew Exact Date and Exact Target

9/11 Family Member "I Get Used As A Sacred Cow"

Monday, March 18, 2013


I have created this note as a way to quickly look back at debunker claims and how they don't hold water.

This is one of the best sites that debunks the debunkers.....



Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory

9/11 The Myth and The Reality - David Ray Griffin

Debunking 9/11 Debunking - Let's Get Empirical - Pt.1 of 9

The 9/11 Commission Report: A 571-Page Lie
115 lies and omissions from the 9/11 report.


Debunking the REAL 9/11 Myths: Why Popular Mechanics Can't Face Up to Reality

Part 1: 

Part 2: 

Part 3: 

Part 4: 

Part 5: 

Part 6: 

Part 7: 

Part 8: 
“Footage That Kills 9/11 Conspiracy Theories” Actually Validates Them
9/11 Theories: Expert vs. Expert

Richard Gage

9/11 Debunker Gets His Ass Handed To Him By Richard Gage - 20/07/2009

9/11 Truth Debate - Richard Gage vs. Ron Craig
We have all seen Richard Gage do this experiment with Cardboard boxes. Many people knock him for it but I praise him for trying to explain it to the American idiots that just don't get it.


Here is the same video of a debunker mocking Richard.



Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report

The 9/11 Lies Are Out There: Editor's Notes
Debunking 9/11 Myths - Popular Mechanics - YouTube
Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up to the Facts
Popular Mechanics Attacks Its "9/11 LIES" Straw Man

Debunking Popular Mechanics' 9/11 Lies

Popular Mechanics Debunked:
9/11 Debate: Loose Change vs. Popular Mechanics
Part 1:
How To Destroy a 9/11 Truther
The Popular Mechanics 9/11 IQ Test
9/11 Pentagon plane two stories below ground says Benjamin Chertoff of Popular Mechanics

"The plane itself was buried I believe it was two stories down underneath the A B C and down to the E rings of the Pentagon and it was compressed to a large extent to a smaller space... but they found the plane." Benjamin Chertoff
‘Official’ 9/11 propaganda embraced by truthers who say that a plane hit the Pentagon
Davin Coburn Interview

This interview was awesome!!!

The fact that a "publishing company" was allowed to see information on 9/11 that has been withheld from the general public is mind boggling. Also, Popular mechanics has refused to do anymore open debates about 9/11. I wonder why? Popular Mechanics has been debunked over and over again but yet their "story" is being spread as the truth.
Popular Mechanics Refuse To Discuss 9/11 Flight Data, Refusal Recorded Over The Phone

Audio link:
Remember Building 7 on NY1 News (James Meigs)

Popular Mechanics James Meigs admits black boxes found and studied
WTC 7 Collapse Explanation
"NIST investigators believe a combination of intense fire and severe structural damage contributed to the collapse, though assigning the exact proportion requires more research. But NIST’s analysis suggests the fall of WTC 7 was an example of “progressive collapse,” a process in which the failure of parts of a structure ultimately creates strains that cause the entire building to come down. Videos of the fall of WTC 7 show cracks, or “kinks,” in the building’s facade just before the two penthouses disappeared into the structure, one after the other. The entire building fell in on itself, with the slumping east side of the structure pulling down the west side in a diagonal collapse." ~ Popular Mechanics. March 2005. Pg 77, first paragraph.

Read the last line..... "diagonal collapse" lol


9/11: A Conspiracy Theory

9/11 Is the LitmusTest

How To Destroy a 9/11 Truther

9/11 Physics: "You Can't Use Common Sense"

9 11 Debunking for Dummies

Public Service Announcement: Conspiracy Theorist

Shit Conspiracy Theorists Say

Asch's Conformity

5 Monkeys


Model Replica of the WTC on 9/11 - Part 1 of 2

Why Towers Did not Collapse (PROOF)
Ho, Ho, Ho! 9/11 Was An Inside Job!

9/11 Conspiracy Theories 'Ridiculous,' Al Qaeda Says (ONION)



The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual
position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that
position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern:

Person A has position X.
Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
Person B attacks position Y.
Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a
position simply does not constitute an attack on the position itself. One might as
well expect an attack on a poor drawing of a person to hurt the person.

Example of a Straw Man:

Prof. Jones: "The university just cut our yearly budget by $10,000."
Prof. Smith: "What are we going to do?"
Prof. Brown: "I think we should eliminate one of the teaching assistant positions.
That would take care of it."
Prof. Jones: "We could reduce our scheduled raises instead."
Prof. Brown: " I can't understand why you want to bleed us dry like that, Jones."


Argumentum Ad Hominem

"Argumentum ad Hominem (abusive and circumstantial): the fallacy of attacking the
character or circumstances of an individual who is advancing a statement or an
argument instead of trying to disprove the truth of the statement or the soundness of
the argument. Often the argument is characterized simply as a personal attack."

Ad Hominem

An Ad-Hominem is NOT an argument. It's a personal attack.

What is a logical fallacy?

"A "fallacy" is a mistake, and a "logical" fallacy is a mistake in reasoning. There
are, of course, other types of mistake than mistakes in reasoning. For instance,
factual mistakes are sometimes referred to as "fallacies". However, the Fallacy Files
is specifically concerned, not with factual errors, but with logical ones.

In logic, the term "fallacy" is used in two related, but distinct ways. For example:

"Argumentum ad Hominem is a fallacy."
"Your argument is a fallacy."
In 1, what is called a "fallacy" is a type of argument, so that a "fallacy" in this
sense is a type of mistaken reasoning. In 2, it is a specific argument that is said
to be a "fallacy", so that in this sense a "fallacy" is an argument which uses bad


Fallacy: Red Herring
"Description of Red Herring

A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to
divert attention from the original issue. The basic idea is to "win" an argument by
leading attention away from the argument and to another topic. This sort of
"reasoning" has the following form:

Topic A is under discussion.
Topic B is introduced under the guise of being relevant to topic A (when topic B is
actually not relevant to topic A).
Topic A is abandoned.
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because merely changing the topic of
discussion hardly counts as an argument against a claim."

This is the feeling of uncomfortable tension which comes from holding two conflicting
thoughts in the mind at the same time.
Dissonance increases with:

The importance of the subject to us.
How strongly the dissonant thoughts conflict.
Our inability to rationalize and explain away the conflict.

Dissonance is often strong when we believe something about ourselves and then do
something against that belief. If I believe I am good but do something bad, then the
discomfort I feel as a result is cognitive dissonance.

The theory of cognitive dissonance

Cognitive dissonance

Cognitive Dissonance Theory

A Lesson In Cognitive Dissonance

What is Occam's Razor?

"when you have two competing theories which make exactly the same predictions, the
one that is simpler is the better."

"The simplest explanation for some phenomenon is more likely to be accurate than more
complicated explanations."

"If you have two equally likely solutions to a problem, pick the simplest."

"The explanation requiring the fewest assumptions is most likely to be correct."

Occam's Razor does not follow the scientific approach and believes demonstrations and
Experiments are not necessary.
Here is a post you will see from a typical debunker.

What Truthers Do:
1) Deceive - Misrepresent the claims of 9/11 Researchers into "Strawman" issues that
are easily knocked down.
2) Dodge - Try to avoid or ignore any 9/11 evidence that they can not explain.
3) Deny - Refuse to acknowledge any irrefutable evidence given is relevant to the
9/11 argument.
4) Discredit - Use any possible ad hominem accusation to ruin the credibility of the
9/11 experts.
5) Repeat - Repeat the same conspiracy theories and regurgitated talking points.
6) Pretend - Pretend they understand physics, are structural engineers, architects
and whatever else so others believe them.
7) Get mad - Get mad at those who dont believe their delusions and resort to calling
them shills and controlled operatives.

My reply to this, I can use the same list for debunktards.