New York City activist

September 9, 2009

Reply to “Patrick from Cincinnati”

Filed under: 9/11,9/11 Truth,New York City — Diane @ 10:14 pm

I posted a comment on the “Screw Loose Change” blog calling attention to my post about “Screw Loose Change” dissing the NYC-CAN.

I got some rather rude replies which I won’t discuss, except to mention that Pat Curley needs to remind his fans again to clean up their “potty mouth,” as he and/or James have put it in the past.

Now to some more substantive replies, by one “Patrick from Cincinnati”:


“Screw Loose Change” dissing the NYC-CAN ballot initiative

Filed under: 9/11,9/11 Truth,Jersey Girls,Les Jamieson,New York City — Diane @ 4:09 am

Screw Loose Change has been pouring scorn (here
and here) on NYC-CAN’s ballot initiative. The SLC folks assume that the NYC government’s legal challenges are valid and irrefutable, and that we stupid “troofers” just didn’t even bother to look at the election law, or hire a lawyer.


September 8, 2009

On “conspiracy theory” and democracy — Important P.S. to “To debunkers”

I wrote “To debunkers” last night, shortly before going to bed. This morning I realize I left out something very, very important.


Draft of pamphlet, part 2

I posted Part 1 earlier. Here is Part 2:


To “debunkers”

Soon I’ll be soliciting feedback from a few 9/11 “debunkers,” as well as people in the 9/11 Truth movement, regarding my draft pamphlet.

But first, here’s a little about me and my more general point of view, and the evolution of my views on 9/11. I’ll also say a little about my views on “conspiracy theories” and what I call grand conspiracy ideology.


Draft of pamphlet, part 1, revised version

Filed under: 9/11,9/11 Truth,CIA,foreknowledge,George Bush,Jersey Girls — Diane @ 1:52 am

In response to some feedback I got in the Truth Action forum, here’s my revised version of Part 1 of the pamphlet:


About the warnings

The draft of my pamphlet mentions the Bush administration’s lack of response to the warnings. The standard “debunker” response to this point is to say that the warnings weren’t specific enough to be actionable.


September 7, 2009

Interesting stuff in the Truth Action forum

In July, I participated for a while in the Truth Action forum. Alas, I thereby used up some time I might have otherwise had for deeper research into 9/11 itself. But I ran across a bunch of interesting threads pertaining not just to 9/11 but also to other issues as well, including some of my concerns about the 9/11 Truth movement.

Looking back again now at some of those threads ….


Draft of pamphlet

Filed under: 9/11,9/11 Truth,CIA,Jersey Girls,NORAD — Diane @ 6:10 am

Back in July, I had hoped to be able to spend lots of time researching 9/11 in time to write a well-researched pamphlet to distribute in the vicinity of this year’s major 9/11 anniversary events sponsored by local 9/11 Truth groups. Alas, I was then swamped with work and other things, so I did not have a chance to do the desired research. So, I’ll just have to write the pamphlet based on what I already know. Here’s my draft of the first half of the pamphlet. (I’ll post the second half later today or tomorrow.)


July 16, 2009

The force exerted by the falling part?

In the Truth Action forum, “Truthmover” posted Looking beyond the hype – Bilderberg docs on Wikileaks. Truthmover’s take on these documents is entirely sane — no “New World Order” scaremongering, just a reasonable interest in knowing what the rich and powerful are up to.

But then “dicktater” chimed in with quotes from David Icke and links to sites such as “Conspiracy Central.” Several of us objected.

Eventually “dicktater” responded with a totally off-topic post about WTC demolition claims, apparently in an effort to claim that I am more of a “kook” than David Icke because I’m not inclined to believe in the WTC demolition hypotheses. I’ve decided to respond here, rather than in the Truth Action forum itself, (1) to avoid further derailing the thread, and (2) because I’m not sure whether YT would welcome debate about WTC demolition theories in the Truth Action forum.


July 14, 2009

Preliminary reply to “nanothermite”

In reply to my post Back from a long hiatus, “nanothermite” wrote:

Now, Diane, I thought you claimed in the past to be scientific or that using a scientific approach was the way forward. How can you claim to be a 9/11 truth activist for a few years and thoroughly familiarize yourself with the scientific evidence of controlled demolition

I’ve pointed out for a long time that a lot of the more popular presentations of this evidence, including Richard Gage’s, are either mistaken or incomplete on various points. See, for example, my post Demolition of WTC: Let’s not overstate the case, please, written back in November 2007.

At the time I wrote that post, I nevertheless believed that a few of the popular arguments for WTC demolition were very strong, including: (1) the almost straight-down nature of the collapse of WTC 7, and (2) the iron-rich spherules as evidence of thermite.


July 13, 2009

JREF: Alleged death threats from 9/11 Truth activists

Filed under: 9/11 Truth,reply - JREF — Diane @ 3:21 am

Catching up on 9/11-related stuff that I’ve been taking a break from for a while, I come across the following in the JREF forum: “We will kill 9/11 CT skeptics after 9/11 Truth comes out.”. The thread is full of claims like, “9/11 truthers believe that only they should be allowed to kill people in furtherance of a political agenda.”


July 12, 2009

Back from a long hiatus

Hi! I’ve been away for a long time

I’ve been busy with other things over the past year, such as a new job. Also, my views and priorities have changed somewhat. But, over the next few weeks, I will now take the time to post updates on my views, and to do some further research.


June 15, 2008

The Reflecting Pool

Filed under: 9/11,9/11 Truth — Diane @ 11:00 pm

I just now came across the following press release: The Reflecting Pool, 9/11 Investigative Drama, Premieres in New York City at Pioneer Theater July 11 2008. I found out about it: here on Democratic Underground.

I’ll have more to say about it after I see it.

June 13, 2008

Dennis Kucinich’s articles of impeachment of President George W. Bush

In recent comments, Gregory called attention to Dennis Kucinich’s recent articles of impeachment of President George W Bush. Here is a link to those articles of impeachment.


May 9, 2008

To 9/11 Truth activists in NYC, from “metamars”

Filed under: 9/11 Truth — Diane @ 2:11 pm

On a private message board, I’ve been asked by “metamars” (an online 9/11 Truth activist) to call the attention of some folks in NYC to metamars’s ressponse to a post by Jon Gold on 911blogger, in which Jon Gold asked for suggestions on how to make the 911 ballot initiative happen.

May 8, 2008

To psikeyhackr: Belated replies to comments of yours

To psikeyhackr:

I just now replied, belatedly, to the following comments of yours:


No-planes theories and DEW/”Star wars beam” theories

In the comment thread following my post “Star Wars beam” / DEW theories, I see that the discussion has turned toward no-planes theories. That’s another topic I like to confine to threads dealing with just that topic. I suppose we now need a thread in which both DEW and no-planes theories can be discussed. So, I’ll copy those comments below and delete them from their original thread.


May 6, 2008

realitydesign’s “bigger picture”

Filed under: 9/11 Truth — Diane @ 11:47 am

In a comment here, realitydesign wrote:

I think the bigger picture here is that the idea that countries are operating in their own best interest is an obsolete notion for those in the elite circles that call the shots about what is really going on worldwide. Therefore, from the nationalist(citizen) perspective- it seems like there are all these bizarre alliances and innappropriate relationships going on but that’s because we are living decades behind these networks in terms of our ‘political’ thinking/understanding. They have toally different agendas and they are being executed.

It’s tricky though because the high rollers use tools from different sheds and that sends people like us chasing our tales. For example, I believe the CIA and Mossad was involved in 911 (among others ISI, probably M16). But does that mean it was an Israeli/American thing? No, the tools that were used fit the job- that’s all.


May 5, 2008

9/11 – The Saudi connection?

The two aspects of 9/11 I now think are most worth looking into further are:

  1. Statements by whistleblowers such as Sibel Edmonds. (See various links in my April 21 post U.S. government foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks.)
  2. The relationship between the U.S. government and Saudi Arabia.


May 3, 2008

“Star Wars beam” / DEW theories

Filed under: 9/11,9/11 Truth,DEW / "Star wars" beam theories — Diane @ 8:00 pm

In the comments beneath my post 9/11 Truth movement goals and strategy?, a thread has started concerning Judy Wood’s “Star Wars beam” / DEW theories. I’ve decided to move that topic to a separate thread, to which it will be confined from henceforth. Below, I will copy the relevant comments. I’ll then delete the originals.

April 22, 2008

9/11 Truth movement goals and strategy?

Filed under: 9/11,9/11 Truth — Diane @ 1:49 pm

In a comment here, in reply to my post U.S. government foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks, realitydesign wrote:

Many of the these warnings and subsequent lies are so well documented that it demonstrates how powerless/sloth we really are against/within this system. … As far as I’m concerned foreknowledge has been adaquately demonstrated. Paul Thompson and others have already done this work.

It would be a lot more ’shocking’ to prove CD or as the pilots are doing- impossible flight paths with respect to their reported trajectories- things like this would cause more of a reaction imo- to those oceans of people that are still asleep.


April 21, 2008

U.S. government foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks?

Filed under: 9/11,9/11 Truth,CIA,FBI,Saudi Arabia — Diane @ 10:45 pm

As I’ve said in the past two posts, what I personally find suspicious about 9/11 is not the story of the hijackers, but rather the claim that the attack could not have been prevented.

It seems to me that the FBI and the CIA had no good excuse not to have known about the plot in advance, in detail, given that the plot had been hatched way back in 1995 or so, and given that the FBI and the CIA had indeed been spying on al-Qaeda for lo these many years, except that the FBI sometimes refused, for no good reason, to follow up on obvious leads.

April 18, 2008

No-hijacker theories (to realitydesign)

Filed under: 9/11,9/11 Truth,no-hijacker theories — Diane @ 1:04 pm

In my recent post My current views on 9/11 – brief summary, I wrote:

I’m an activist against religion-based bigotry, but I strongly disagree with the idea that, in order to oppose anti-Muslim bigotry, one must deny that there were any live human hijackers on 9/11. There is not enough evidence for the pure “MIHOP” view (see What is your HOP level? Ten 9/11 paradigms by Nicholas Levis), whereas there is, alas, plenty of evidence that there were indeed live human hijackers on 9/11, although one may legitimately question some of the specifics.

We then got into a discussion about Hani Hanjour’s flying skills or lack thereof. In this comment, I also pointed out that there are some difficulties with the remote-controlled planes idea.

April 13, 2008

My current views on 9/11 – brief summary

Since July of last year, I’ve spent quite a bit of time studying various arguments and counterarguments about what happened on 9/11. Below is a brief summary of my current thoughts.

Next Page »

Create a free website or blog at