About that site, "911myths.com"...

[wildbilln864]

Who Is 911myths.com?

IP Lookup results: look up "http://911myths.com"
orgName--Everyone's Internet(EVRY)
390 Benmar
Suite 200
Houston, Tx. 77060
reg.--2004-02-06
updated--2005-12-16
RTech Name-- Randy Williams
ph #--[phone]
yahoo search results for "everyone's internet EVRY"
http://letsroll911.org/ipw-web/bulletin/bb/viewtopic.php?t=5172&highlight=
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/05/339205.shtml

[greyl]

1. Do you realize what you posted?

Please tell me what you think that means.

[wildbilln864]

2. snips

snip/

Fortunately for us, these malefactors are stupid lamers who barely know how to type. Like the Leesburg Mafia of Halliburton fame, they're alot more effective when they're up close and personal, breaking someone's legs. This new breed of hacker belongs to the world of corporate enforcers hired by corporations like Chiquita Brands and KBR, and their style fits the Republican mold of silencing all voices but theirs. Their history goes back at least has far as the attempt by Jerry Ford to veto the Freedom of Information Act: it became law when congress over-rode his veto. Before him, Richard Nixon became impatient when the CIA couldn't readily come up for bagmen to suit his self-serving political purposes. Cowboy Bush has topped them all - and has tried to make rampant lawlessnes the law of the land, by allowing the "intelligence" agencies to hire criminals off the street for domestic spying operations.

[KJF]

3. It's registered through a proxy

No big deal. I've e-mailed him a couple of times and he's perfectly polite. People should be entitled to disagree with us without being called paid government agents. Perhaps more revealing is what isn't there than what is - I'm still waiting for an article about the NSA intercepts of the hijackers' calls from the States.

[Artdyst]

4. Of course they should be entitled to disagree without being called or

(automatically) labelled "paid government agents" -- or "Conspiracy Theorists" or "Tin-foil Hatters", or "paid shills" etc..

[greyl]

5. Yes, but the OP doesn't get that info correct.

Please note: the owner of the domain name is specified in the "registrant" field.
In most cases, the Registrar is not the owner of domain names listed in this database.


Registrant:
Domains by Proxy, Inc.

Registered through: www.dynonames.com
Domain Name: 911MYTHS.COM

Domain servers in listed order:
NS01.DH2.NET
NS02.DH2.NET


For complete domain details go to:
http://who.securepaynet.net/whoischeck.aspx?Domain=911MYTHS.COM&prog_id=dynonames

_________________________________________

Registrant:
Domains by Proxy, Inc.

DomainsByProxy.com
15111 N. Hayden Rd., Ste 160, PMB 353
Scottsdale, Arizona 85260
United States

Registered through: www.dynonames.com
Domain Name: 911MYTHS.COM
Created on: 13-Jan-05
Expires on: 13-Jan-07
Last Updated on: 01-Dec-05

Administrative Contact:
Private, Registration [e-mail]
Domains by Proxy, Inc.
DomainsByProxy.com
15111 N. Hayden Rd., Ste 160, PMB 353
Scottsdale, Arizona 85260
United States
[phone]

Technical Contact:
Private, Registration [e-mail]
Domains by Proxy, Inc.
DomainsByProxy.com
15111 N. Hayden Rd., Ste 160, PMB 353
Scottsdale, Arizona 85260
United States
[phone]

www.whois.net

Mike is in the UK.

Could the attacks have been assisted in advance by people within the US? I’m neutral on this. There was plenty of information flying around, so we have two alternatives: a) they didn’t put the pieces together in time, or b) they knew but did nothing about it. I currently see insufficient evidence to form an opinion either way.

So why not mention this on the site? Well, now I have, but there’s really nothing here to justify making it into a topic. As I just said about being selective, ideally I’d like the topics here to a) include some information you don’t often read anywhere else, and b) make a point that’s significant, stands at least a chance of changing someone’s mind. Yet another page on “Rice said we couldn’t imagine this kind of attack but look, they could” really doesn’t cut it, either way.

Does that make me biased? Not really; the same rule means I’m probably not going to do an overall “this is why the WTC collapsed due to fire”, as I said above, or similar points in the other direction. They also wouldn’t be original, and there’s no chance of me making points that are any more significant than anyone else.

Maybe the best way to think of it is like this: I’m not saying this site covers everything, it’s not here to provide a complete overview of 9/11, really it’s not for beginners who don’t know the main claims at all. I’m deliberately addressing individual points, the fine detail if you like, where I think I might have something to say -- and, more or less, that’s all.

"Pah! Plainly you're just a shill/ Government stooge/ neo-con/ psyops site."

Yawn. Yes, I've heard that before, usually because it's much easier to smear people than dealing with the points they're making. But hey, if you believe that, then run along now, it's fine with me. There are plenty of other 9/11 sites that will tell you what you want to hear, and never even think of challenging any of your views..


www.911myths.com/html/site_faq.html

[Sinti]

6. My "PeerGuardian" program won't let me open the page

There be a lot of IPs blocked by it - for various nefarious reasons. :shrug:

You can get your own if you're paranoid like me.

Linky:

http://phoenixlabs.org/pg2/

[greyl]

7. Works here with all lists enabled.

What makes you think PeerGuardian is blocking it?
What does your list manager block?