CBDunkerson I hope this comment on my own talk page is not considered intervention I see I ve been unblocked I did not mean to suggest that MONGO was purposely inserting information as part of his job The only reason I said I would not be surprised is because this has been going on for a while now and Wikipedia has not stopped it What else am I to think Although I admit to not being familiar with Wikipedia s procedures Still that comment by me is nothing compared to what MONGO s been getting away with Also just noticed this btw Wikipedia is supposed to be NPOV which is why MONGO should steer clear of the 9 11 pages An examination of the exchanges between MONGO and myself here is a good example MONGO seems content with personal attacks who cares how many misguided folks there are His comments are clearly ad hominem personal attacks towards me and many others The following from this page shows he s content with namecalling as well I removed an external link to a namecalling site MONGO reverts me leaving the following statement I like this weblink it summaries things quite well I apologize for any insinuations on my part but also must stress my own attempts at a NPOV I m sure we all agree from MONGO s own statements here that he is neither apologetic nor neutral The POV pushers that try to add nonsense to the articles related to the 9 11 events have been told repeatedly that the vast majority of their contributions to those article violated numerous policies This doesn t seem to stop them This editor I blocked routinely reverts those that support the concensus verison and yes conspiracy theorists is what they are they are not researchers Simply put and I won t apologize for this not being more civil I will continue to block POV pushers that disrupt the discussion pages and the articles with nonsense Two other admins responded to the unblock request and did not unblock this editor I then moved the early parts of this conversation from an article talk page to here for all to see It is ludicrus to assume that I was doing anything other than to ensure that the POV pushers of nonsense know that there is a limit to the level of disruption that needs to be tolerated If MONGO calls this paper which has been peer reviewed by two physicists before being accepted for publication in a book nonsense obviously he is not NPOV