Thanks for looking back at the history of 9/11 blogger and your continued work focusing on what happened at the Pentagon. (As I commented before...) Everyone should check out CIT's research on the Pentagon, which is great citizen journalism.
Dear Mr. McKee, the dynamic trio was pretty good in this episode. A point missed with 9/11 blogger is that, whereas the Pentagon discussion had heavy-handed banning, the number of participants (and wanna-be participants) interested in legitimately exploring nuclear and DEW grew to the point where the plug had to be pulled on the forum. Even when promoted purposely with error (which predecessor nuclear premises contained and Dr. Wood's non-conclusions demonstrate), it is sufficient to undermine the established consensus 9/11 theories promoted by the same cabal that you complain about at the Pentagon.
I'm glad that you did not divide this discussion into smaller chunks. Some discussions need to go long.
And for what it is worth, the play-back level of your intro is much higher than the discussion and goes on for too long (1 minutes). Very annoying. I skip.
If I were to give recommendations on alternative theme songs:
The trio has had years to study my work, and failing that, the Boston 9/11 Truth presentation is an excellent opportunity to come up to speed.
Mr. Ruff is a little misguided when he makes "real name" versus "pseudonym" arguments in an attempt to disparage view points of others.
But because it is you, Mr. McKee, and the other duo in your trio also has internet legacy with me, I'd consider turning on my camera for my presentation.
Pun intended, but this is what is going to "nuclear energize" all related 9/11 Truth activism.
Thanks for looking back at the history of 9/11 blogger and your continued work focusing on what happened at the Pentagon. (As I commented before...) Everyone should check out CIT's research on the Pentagon, which is great citizen journalism.
Dear Mr. McKee, the dynamic trio was pretty good in this episode. A point missed with 9/11 blogger is that, whereas the Pentagon discussion had heavy-handed banning, the number of participants (and wanna-be participants) interested in legitimately exploring nuclear and DEW grew to the point where the plug had to be pulled on the forum. Even when promoted purposely with error (which predecessor nuclear premises contained and Dr. Wood's non-conclusions demonstrate), it is sufficient to undermine the established consensus 9/11 theories promoted by the same cabal that you complain about at the Pentagon.
I'm glad that you did not divide this discussion into smaller chunks. Some discussions need to go long.
And for what it is worth, the play-back level of your intro is much higher than the discussion and goes on for too long (1 minutes). Very annoying. I skip.
If I were to give recommendations on alternative theme songs:
Spiro: https://realworldrecords.com/artists/spiro/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2V0z5Ke24E
Joi: https://realworldrecords.com/artists/joi/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FUOAGujsiI
The trio has had years to study my work, and failing that, the Boston 9/11 Truth presentation is an excellent opportunity to come up to speed.
Mr. Ruff is a little misguided when he makes "real name" versus "pseudonym" arguments in an attempt to disparage view points of others.
But because it is you, Mr. McKee, and the other duo in your trio also has internet legacy with me, I'd consider turning on my camera for my presentation.
Pun intended, but this is what is going to "nuclear energize" all related 9/11 Truth activism.
//