Extraordinary Evidence!

“Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”
… well it is here now!

Founder of the Daily Kos, Markos Moulitsas Zúniga, supports his blog policy about Controversial Diary Topics  by declaring, “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.”  Netroots Nation, having the same world view as its founder, has undoubtedly also adopted this unconscionable policy. 

In fact, the organization, Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth says exactly the same thing.  They have over 1,700 architect and engineer petition signers, verified and vetted professionals (real professionals, see their names … view their professional statements … read them all),  who believe that engineering reports must be free of incomplete and unsupportable analysis because fraudulent engineering reports are an affront to the building design and engineering professions.  They have signed a petition that reads as follows:

The AE911Truth Petition:
Please Take Notice That:

On Behalf of the People of the United States of America, the undersigned Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth and affiliates hereby petition for, and demand, a truly independent investigation with subpoena power in order to uncover the full truth surrounding the events of 9/11/01 – specifically the collapse of the World Trade Center Towers and Building 7. We believe there is sufficient doubt about the official story to justify re-opening the 9/11 investigation. The new investigation must include a full inquiry into the possible use of explosives that might have been the actual cause of the destruction of the World Trade Center Twin Towers and Building 7.

From the Daily Kos dkosopedia entry entitled, Controversial Diary Topics  we have the following (edited) entry:

Controversial Diary Topics

Diaries on certain topics are likely to generate angry responses. Most of these topics fall under the general heading of “conspiracy theories”, e.g., “JFK was killed by Martians”. The rule for posting such diaries is “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”. The more extreme the claim, the higher the burden of proof that commenters will demand. If you can’t provide evidence to back up your claim, it is best not to post the diary. This guideline also applies to recommending extraordinary-claims diaries. If a diary makes an extreme claim with little or no evidence to back up that claim, it shouldn’t be recommended, no matter what that claim is.


Some people have been confused by the above discussion. Let me make it perfectly plain. Diaries advancing ‘Conspiracy Theories’ are subject to ridicule and derision from the community at the very least. Repeat offenders can and will be banned. Yes, this does include ‘controlled demolition’ of WTC 7.

Here is what kos has to say-

The conspiracists by kosFri Jul 08, 2005

Today I did something I’ve never done before (not even during the Fraudster mess), and wish I’d never had to do.

I made a mass banning of people perpetuating a series of bizarre, off-the-wall, unsupported and frankly embarrassing conspiracy theories.

I have a high tolerance level for material I deem appropriate for this site, but one thing I REFUSE to allow is bullshit conspiracy theories. You know the ones — Bush and Blair conspired to bomb London in order to take the heat off their respective political problems. I can’t imagine what fucking world these people live in, but it sure ain’t the Reality Based Community.

So I banned these people, and those that have been recommending diaries like it. And I will continue to do so until the purge is complete, and make no mistake — this is a purge.

This is a reality-based community. Those who wish to live outside it should find a new home. This isn’t it.


It’s telling that I have NEVER done something like this before. Because this has been an extreme situation. This isn’t about disagreeing with what people are saying. If that was the case, everyone would’ve been banned by now. The myth of the “echo chamber” is just that. A myth.

But as for warnings, well, this has been my warning. I wanted it clear that I was serious, and I think that has come through. I am reinstating those who ask to be reinstated. But the message has been sent.

But, what about Freedom of Speech?

Doesn’t the First Amendment give me the right to talk about whatever I want here?

No. Daily Kos is owned by kos. The servers are his. He pays the bandwidth charges. He makes the rules; we are here as his guests. If he decides tomorrow that anyone not posting in iambic pentameter will be banned, your options are either to brush up on your poetry skills or find/start another forum.

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:

  1. refer to claims that American, British, Israeli, or any government assisted in the attacks
  2. 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.

On July 08, 2005, when Markos wrote this policy for the DailyKos, the state of understanding  about the destruction of the three  World Center Skyscrapers was quite different that today.  Here is what has happened:

July 2005  Markos establishes DailyKos Policy (Note the official reports are not out yet)
2006 NIST Publishes the NCSTAR reports on the twin towers
2006 Richard Gage, a practicing architects and designs steel framed structures first hears about the collapse of WTC Building 7 and founds Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth to demand a real investigation.
2006 NIST releases the NCSTAR draft reports on destruction of the World Trade Center Building 7.  A question by a high school physics teachers requires NIST to admit free-fall acceleration for eight stories
2007 NIST releases the NCSTAR draft reports on destruction of the World Trade Center Building 7 which describes the free-fall, but does not explain how it could happen.
2009 Peer reviewed analysis of red-gray chips in the WTC dust provides evidence (remains unchallenged today) of active thermitic material (a highly engineered incendiary).
2012 With many intervening documents, AE911Truth releases the final edition of the documentary “9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out.”  In which 40 highly credentialed experts describe how the NIST explanation of the twin Towers and Building 7 cannot be correct.
June 2012
(We are hopeful)
DailyKos rescinds its rule prohibiting the discussion of controlled demolition at the World Trade Center.


Comments are closed.