Traitor Kos
Left Gatekeeper: (noun) Someone who pretends to be liberal or progressive in order to achieve credibility and a following among those holding views considered liberal or progressive. They then use their influence to discourage discussion or consideration of any information or ideas damaging to the ruling class, such as the truth about 9/11, thus drawing an artificial line that people will avoid crossing and controlling discussion of things that actually matter and could disrupt the status quo. Examples: Noam Chomsky, Arianna Huffington, Michael Moore, Amy Goodman, and of course, the Daily Kos.
From the Daily Kos FAQ:
Controversial 9/11 Diaries
DailyKos accepts that the 9/11 attacks were perpetrated by agents of Al-Qaeda. It is forbidden to write diaries that:
- refer to claims that American, British, Israeli, or any government assisted in the attacks
- refer to claims that the airplanes that crashed into the WTC and Pentagon were not the cause of the damage to those buildings or their subsequent collapse
- Authoring or recommending these diaries may result in banning from Daily Kos.
So who the hell is this guy who likes to tell people what they can and can't write about?
Markos Moulitsas Zúniga (born September 11 , 1971 ), often known by his username and former military moniker "Kos", is the founder and main author of Daily Kos , a left-wing weblog focusing on progressive, liberal, and Democratic Party politics. Moulitsas currently resides in Berkeley , California , with his wife and son. Moulitsas was born in Chicago , Illinois to a Salvadoran mother and Greek father, and grew up in El Salvador . (Following Latin American custom, his last name is actually "Moulitsas", not "Zúniga".) His family moved back to the United States in 1980 due to the Salvadoran civil war . He served in the U.S. Army from 1989 through 1992 ; while stationed in Germany, and after missing "by a hair" deployment to the Gulf War, he changed his political affiliation from Republican to Democrat . He has described the military as "perhaps the ideal society -- we worked hard but the Army took care of us in return." [1]
So, let's see what goes on on this "left-wing liberal progressive" site...
Since you said that the collapse of Building 7 is easy to refute, I'd love ot hear your refutation. As far as I know, there is still no explanation of how Building 7 collapsed. But we do have, on the record, the lease holder (Larry Silverstein) of Building 7 admitting on television that WTC 7 was "pulled" (e.g. demolished.
by The Bulldog Manifesto on Tue Jun 20, 2006 at 02:51:28 PM PDT
- Recommended by: BobzCat , bobbobgirl
I think you missed the whole point of the diary, didn't you?
Lying can never save us from another lie - Vaclav Havel
by Muwarr90 on Tue Jun 20, 2006 at 02:54:19 PM PDT
[ Parent ]
Building 7 collapsed because it was hit by debris from two other really big adjacent buildings that collapsed. The debris weakened the structural integrity and started the building on fire. After burning for most of the day it collapsed.
Larry Silverstein did say pulled, but explained that he meant pull out the firefighters. So he did not admit anything. For what its worth, "pull" is also not a demolition term. If anyone says otherwise, they are lying.
If a building that size was to be taken down by a controlled demolitiion, it would take have taken thousands of hours of work by many people, and a huge amount of explosives. Both the explosives and the demolition people installing the explosives were notably missing before 9/11.
Sure, the internet is full of conspiracy nuts and marginal academics who think it was an inside job. And yeah, it is kind of wierd that the whole building came down at the same time. And I know, NIST is still trying to figure out exactly what happened. But to think that the sum of this is evidence that there was controlled demolition of Building 7 is just embarassing. You would really have to be a total moron or completely deluded to believe that.
This garbage has already been given way too much airtime on DailyKos. Get some real evidence and then I'm sure the ban will be lifted. Get one single structural engineer on board and then I will write a diary begging Markos to reconsider. But if someone wants to talk about Stephen Jones or Loose Change or some other shit that has been discussed too many times, take it somewhere else.
Tämä Mia Dolan on ihan hirveä (That Mia Dolan is just awful)
by Mia Dolan on Tue Jun 20, 2006 at 03:36:38 PM PDT
[ Parent ]
Recommended by: RunawayRose , bobbobgirl
..for supplying facts, and keeping a cool head.
by Ahianne on Tue Jun 20, 2006 at 04:45:36 PM PDT
[ Parent ]
Needless to say that when someone lies so much then gets praised by others for the lie, something fishy is going on.
See the Kos thought police in more online action:
http://www.thin-king.com/Daily Kos The One Question That Won't Go Away.mht
http://www.thin-king.com/Daily Kos The 9-11 Attack Dog Movement.mht
http://www.thin-king.com/Daily Kos Attention 9-11 Conspiracy Theorists.mht
On this last page, note in particular the lies being told about the construction of the towers--pure disinformation, 100% criminal, and condoned by Kos himself.
Finally, see what Air America's Mike Malloy thinks of Kos' decision to ban all discussion on 9/11 that does not back the official Bush/PNAC/Silverstein line:
http://media.putfile.com/Mike-Malloy-6-19-2006
Do you know what an accessory after the fact is? I think Kos knows!
posted by 911truthnc at 6:30 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home