digg

Join DiggAbout

9/11 Firefighter Testimony watch!

youtube.com — One more testimony from a first responder that got completely ignored by the 9/11 Commission Report and the Mainstream Media.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • syxle, on 10/10/2007, -35/+31Inside job.
    • TGMD, on 10/10/2007, -21/+23moron ^
    • FeargusMcDuff, on 10/10/2007, -16/+7Moron.
    • knowyourrights, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4I hate conspiracy theorists, but I don't think this movie is that at all. It's very well put together, and allows you to draw your own conclusions, Zeitgeist is extremely thought provoking.
      http://digg.com/offbeat_news/the_government_is_cheating_you (Please excuse ***** submitter for the ultra lame title)
      If you don't have 2 hours to kill, feel free to read the Wiki, http://filmguide.wikia.com/wiki/Zeitgeist
      Just reading for 5 minutes will hit you like a ton of bricks.
    • knowyourrights, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1dugg for referencing a 'bruce willis die hard movie' of course.
    • kd1s, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1When coupled with the fact that the Bush administration deliberately stood down air defenses, and then quashed a very big part of the investigation some of these videos make very valid points.

      Put it this way, when a government refuses to answer questions you can pretty much be assured that they have something to hide.
  • FeargusMcDuff, on 10/10/2007, -28/+7OGMF COSIPRICY!!111!!1111!
  • everfresh59, on 10/10/2007, -33/+22Loose Change - These guys are still over at the WTC site, letting people know what is really going on...
    http://youtube.com/watch?v=7E3oIbO0AWE

    This is simply undeniable.....
    http://youtube.com/watch?v=7RXrKRuNvNU

    Do you still believe what they tell you now?
    • kosmoX, on 10/10/2007, -14/+28Yes. I believe the experts over the kids in their parent's basement.
      • everfresh59, on 10/10/2007, -11/+4?? The guys from Loose Change are US Army.... Do you trust them enough to fight a senseless war?
      • evilesttoast, on 10/10/2007, -4/+4Really? Show us some proof, besides, my dads friend was in the Pentagon when it got hit and he was blown through a wall and stepped over plane parts on the way out.

        Pwned.
        • knomevol, on 10/10/2007, -4/+7my girlfriend's mother's brother-in-law's goat was there too and had to step over parts from a spacecraft from the andromeda galaxy.

          proof? "my dads friend" "my leprechaun" "my schnauzer"

          why don't you give us some proof?
      • p0tent1al, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7but yet you don't believe one of NYC's firefighters. It sickens me that people support Giuliani when his OWN PEOPLE hate him!
        • ronmexico, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3I'm sure every firefighter in your town approves of your mayor.
    • Brandoskey, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4you realize the second video is a mockumentary right? they're making fun of conspiracey theorists
    • knowyourrights, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2The reason why the conspiracy theorists are getting dugg down is because people haven't seen the movie Zeitgeist yet. Plus it feels much better to digg down something ver depressing and to shut it out. It's the human condition.
      • ronmexico, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4It also appears to be a human condition for some to hold on to these ridiculous conspiracy theories that make no sense.
    • jeremymccurdy, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1I believe you're a ***** idiot.
  • jadacyrus, on 10/10/2007, -16/+25when a plane that big smashes into a building that energy has to go somewhere..
    • BrapAllgood, on 10/10/2007, -4/+11When it turns into fire, it goes UP. Simple physics.
    • bcasper1, on 10/10/2007, -5/+5yeah that energy did, when you see the footage, all that fire that causes the huge fireball? thats pretty much all the potential energy your talkin about. if that fuel burned in that instant, so did the rest of the fuel. when fuel is on fire its all gunna catch on fire. to say that some dripped down the elevator shaft is not really realistic because it would be burned up before it reached the bottom.
      • ronmexico, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1.
      • scotticus, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8Have you ever seen burning liquids? There are thousands of gallons of fuel on a passenger jet... all of that fuel doesn't burn in an instant. It absolutely would drip down...
  • masamunecyrus, on 10/10/2007, -8/+10The only thing I wonder about is the wide reporting of the explosions coming from underneath the building (and even the video that shows smoke coming from the bottom before the collapse). Al Qaeda had already bombed the underground of the buildings once, it seems logical that they'd try it, again (they tried the USS Cole bombs twice -- the first time, they put too many explosive on their boat and it sank. The second time was successful.). The shaking of its foundation would cause the top of the building to shake pretty bad, and if the steel is already dented or weakened from heat, it could probably pretty easily destroy the whole structure, as it did.
    • p1k3y, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4So you say they planted the bombs and THEN hijacked the planes? WTF?? Doesn't make sence!
    • barakatx2, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4if al-qaeda bombed the base too, dont you think the government would be happy to tell us that so they could use it as propaganda? why wouldnt they tell us if the terrorists put bombs in the building?
    • knowyourrights, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3People are scared ***** of the truth, they can't handle it, it's as simple as that. We'll all shut it out, and go to work tomorrow pretending like nothing's going on. Happy work week everyone...
    • strangewill, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Even if they did, it should have been reported, no matter what someone isn't doing their job, whether it's through lies or not telling us what happened due to a total rush and ***** investigation.
  • wastedlife, on 10/10/2007, -15/+9Why does a big event always need a more elaborate explanation?
    Is it more scary if the US Government did this, or if a bunch of pissed of muslims in a country far away did this?
    Does believing in this conspiracy paradoxically make you feel safer?
    • Tilon, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10People who can magicially 'choose' what to 'believe' instead of requiring evidence are the problem.
  • godfly, on 10/10/2007, -9/+3sumthin's gnawin on hee.
  • gab00n, on 10/10/2007, -11/+23You can't convince people that something is not right if they don't have any understanding of the physics involved, if everyone was properly educated and didn't rely on their flawed common sense then 9/11 would be impossible to pull off. You just have to face the fact that 99% of the people on this planet are grossly uneducated. Once you become enlightened to this fact you too will join the elite and repeatedly rape these hapless ***** for all they are worth.
  • harvinator24, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6In reference to the video,

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7866929448192753501
  • jester55, on 10/10/2007, -4/+24when a plane smashes into a building, the energy disapates into the steel, the air, the glass. but remember, that energy wouldve had to travel thousands of feet through reinforced concrete, insulation, wires, and tons of other things that wouldve absorbed it. the bulding was designed to absorb energy such as wind, so that is another factor. So saying that the energy had to go somewhere is true, but i cant see it going as far as destroying the lobby, without blowing out every other window in the whole building first.
    • fluffyllemon, on 10/10/2007, -4/+13From what I've seen/read, the towers were actually built to withstand a plane crashing into them from any direction.
      • revid_ffum, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Read more carefully. They were meant to withstand single engine planes not commuter jets.
    • cvrti5, on 10/10/2007, -5/+3The lobby is where the building intersects the ground, so I can see why it would happen there. The building gives everywhere else except for the ground floor. Makes sense to me.
  • mntbikeracer1, on 10/10/2007, -11/+16I'll stick to ockham's razor the simplest explanation is probably the right one. And the simplest explanation is not that the U.S. government, who cannot handle anything well lately, pulled off the most well executed plan of all time without a single person leaking it.
    • BrapAllgood, on 10/10/2007, -10/+7When one gangster is convicted and then busted out of jail by the other gansters, it's all fine and dandy. That's just them doing their job. RIGHT?

      STOP BEING SO NAIVE! Please.
    • Draracle, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4One thing history class has taught me is that Ockham knows ***** about history. The simplest answer is rarely the correct answer.
      • strangewill, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Especially when government or money is involved.
      • revid_ffum, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Please, give some examples.
        • Draracle, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Take a history class -- preferably level 200 or higher. Or just pick a topic and find out for yourself. Take the Bomb, for example, why did the US drop it? To end the war? To make a statement to the Russians? To field test a new weapon? Because the command was trigger happy? The truth is always more complicated than one simple answer.
    • tehnico, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Ockham's razor should imply that you follow the money. Also, it's not a matter of someone leaking it or not, it's a matter of whether or not people want to believe that they have or haven't been assaulted by people they trust. You can leak it all you want, if believing it means you look like a fool for trusting someone you shouldn't have, then you'll never believe it.
    • tryangles, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2What's funny about your comment is that you simply imply our 'entire govt' would be implicit in this type of act. I've seen two low level people at work conspire to get another upper level person fired and it worked flawlessly. What more with a small group of powerful people with endless amounts of resources. - Then again because your average person cannot seem to comprehend that this could ever happen in a million years, it simply remains some tinfoil hat fairy tail. This is the best part of being the villain, all you need to do is show to people how incredibly asinine or impossible a plan would be to execute and - poof - it never happened.
    • Izzie, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2you certainly know that US government didn't crash japanese fighter planes on pearl harbour but if you made some research about US history, you might know that US government didn't do anything to prevent japanese planes from attacking pearl harbour probably because it fitted their plan for war. Afterwards it was said they didn't believe it was even possible to do so.
      IMHO same goes for 9/11, US government could not be aware this was coming, they were warned by foreign intelligence, inside intelligence, several emergency training exercises took place for such an event, but they let it happen probably because it provided fuel for their own agenda (Project for a New American Century, Patriot act, and so on).
      this make them responsible of not acting and letting it happen but maybe not of orchestrating everything though I don't rule out the possibility the US government was involved as they are responsible for putting Saddam in power, for training/funding Bin Laden (former CIA agent).
  • datastorageguy, on 10/10/2007, -11/+4Everyone saw 2 planes fly into the buildings. It was captured on live television and by thousands of people. The heat from the burning jet fuel caused the steel beams that support the building to weaken and the building collapsed. Osama bin laden referenced this in a video tape released by the government.

    If you think it was an inside job, please provide more substantiated proof than this. I have yet to see anything refuting the fact that 2 planes did hit the building and that Osama bin Laden, himself, referenced the attack in his own words.
    • knowyourrights, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Data storage guy,

      I take your point. I also thought that the people posing this as an inside job were out of their minds, until I saw a recently released movie called Zeitgeist; lots of evidence, and most of the time they are letting you make your own conclusions about all the commonalities between the prophets, etc..
      The administration has almost no incentive to make the machines any better, they're spending their time and energy in wrapping the world around their finger at our expense. Please watch the movie if you can, I'd love to hear your thoughts about it.
      http://digg.com/offbeat_news/the_government_is_cheating_you (Please excuse ***** submitter for the ultra lame title)
      If you don't have 2 hours to kill, feel free to read the Wiki, http://filmguide.wikia.com/wiki/Zeitgeist
      Just reading for 5 minutes will hit you like a ton of bricks.
  • fritson, on 10/10/2007, -7/+7Fear of harm and punishment by the people who orchestrated the demolitions of the 3 WTC buildings can keep people from talking.
    The fireman is saying that there were demolition bombs every where and they were exploding in a way that had nothing to do with a fire 80 floors above. I believe the fireman's story.
    The WTC destruction was an inside job by the ruling class to create wide spread panic and profit from it. It did work so well and as a result there is a new 9/11 type attack is in process right now to turn US into a dictatorship.

    Hitler had only a 30% of the people voting for him, and that could not have kept him in power, GWB also has a 30% approval and he wants to stay in power forever, the history is about to repeat itself.
    There are people who know all the details of the plot by US that killed JFK
    but if they talk they will also be killed! Fear and panic is running this country now!

    Thank you Mr. John Schroeder for telling the truth, you are a true hero!
    • datastorageguy, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3Proof!!! Where is your proof??? No matter how much anecdotal evidence you have, nor your misguided JFK and Hitler references you posit, you still lack any substantial proof. Show me that, and I will listen!
      • tryangles, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Where is your proof datastorageguy that all that you have seen on the Main Stream Media is true??? See how backward your thinking is? The simple fact that there are so many interviews that make no sense to what the official story should concern you. Stop being a spoon fed robot and think for yourself for once in your life.
      • tryangles, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Where is your proof datastorageguy that all that you have seen on the Main Stream Media is true??? See how backward your thinking is? The simple fact that there are so many interviews that make no sense to what the official story should concern you. Stop being a spoon fed robot and think for yourself for once in your life.
    • ronmexico, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Did we watch the same video? I didn't hear the fireman say anything about seeing bombs. I can assure you Bush will be leaving office in January. Get a grip man, the world isn't that dark of a place.
  • lansuggs, on 10/10/2007, -4/+5So his testimony is that something was messed up with destruction happening where it shouldn't be while he was inside the building. Isn't what the conspiracy theorists conclude that it was a controlled demolition??? If it was a controlled demo, then the supposed bombs would have gone off at nearly the same time to bring the building down, not spread throughout long intervals of the building being on fire. He rightly said he's no expert on plane crashes. I guess I'm just ignoring the truth, eh?
  • Allenx1, on 10/10/2007, -8/+4These 9/11 conspiracy theorists cherry pick certain facts and add them together to make a big fact, or big accusation against someone else.

    The arguments for whether or not it was a conspiracy can be debated ad infinitum. Who did it doesn't really matter anymore, many people are more concerned about the conspiracy than the fact that over 3000 people are dead because of it, and over 3000 soldiers are dead as the result of the action taken. Bush exploited the attacks sure and it was very convenient for him, but considering what it would take to carry out such a large scale attack, I don't think they had anything to do with the actual carrying out of the attack.
    • Izzie, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2actually not it can't be debated at all. it was a conspiracy (check the meaning of the word). the debate goes on about who were the people drawing string behind the scenes.
  • aliveonarival, on 10/10/2007, -3/+7i hate this ***** about oh all you guys who believe this crap are idiots it couldn't possibly have been an inside job! but then you never take the time to actually explain why its so impossible the argument you guys put up is basically this;

    9/11 truther " The attack on the world trade center was an inside job because there has never been a skyscraper that fell
    because of fire and building 7 had no been impacted at all the video tape looks exactly like a controlled
    demolition and there are hundreds of eyewitness saying that they heard explosions after the impact of
    the airplanes not to mention many of the supposed hijackers are still alive "

    Non-Truther "No it wasn't"

    i hate how some of you think that just magically the same people that threw your constitution out the window, that is torturing people, that brought you the patriot act, the people who sent you to a fake war against a fake enemy just to line there greedy pockets are just somehow magically incapable of doing something so wrong. And if your one of those people that says "oh why would they kill thousands of there own citizens?" because they don't give a ***** about you!
    • ronmexico, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3Actually we take the time to watch these lame ass videos to see what you people are all talking about and are amazed that you still hold on to these absurd notions of conspiracies. It's truly mind boggling.
      • aliveonarival, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3you see thats exactly the point i'm trying to make you just call me absurd and how its truly mind boggling that i believe this but you don't provide any evidence that i shouldn't
      • Yokohamalion, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Here is some evidence. 2 ***** AIRLINERS FLEW INTO THE BUILDINGS.
  • EldenChang, on 10/10/2007, -3/+10These buildings can not fall in 10 seconds by gravity alone.
    The physics is on the side of the truth movement!
    • dime, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3Bombs make things fall faster? Who knew...
      • Draracle, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1He is a little mixed up: an object would fall from the hight of the WTC Towers in about 10 seconds. The problem is that the entire building is in the way. The pancake theory requires that each floor must be impacted, overloaded, and sheered -- something that takes time. It is impossible for the pancake collapse to occur in a ~10 second time period. The only way the buildings fell at near free-fall speed is if the supports where completely absent, not impeding the decent of the tops of the towers.The only way this is possible is an act of god or controlled demo.
        • Yokohamalion, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Really? Show me the math or shut up.
          • strangewill, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1g = 9.81 m/s2

            In 10 seconds a free falling object from 1,608.7 feet will hit the ground. A little shorter than the WTC.


            Not to much an "inside jobber" as I'm giving you the math you wanted. :p
    • mighty_mouth, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1The seismic record shows that the collapse lasted 12.59s (+ or - 0.5s) for the North Tower, and 10.09s (+ or - 0.5s) for the South Tower.

      A free fall would last 8.08s for the North Tower and 7.42s for the South Tower.

      See http://www.civil.northwestern.edu/people/bazant/PDFs/Papers/00%20WTC%20Collapse%20-%20What%20did%20%26%20Did%20Not%20Cause%20It%20-%20Revised%206-22-07.pdf
  • p0tent1al, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5And yet another video the Rudy Giuliani camp refuse to watch or take serious; One of 9/11's own firefighters people. How the ***** can you support Giuliani, when his own people who he claims to be the savior of, HATE HIM?
  • dime, on 10/10/2007, -8/+6"9/11 truthers" are some of the most vile, disgusting creatures on this planet. They stand on their soapbox and proclaim loudly that they're just "trying to get to the truth", but any evidence that contradicts their preconceived beliefs is dismissed as "biased" and "disinformation". It's a convenient way to operate: have a belief, consider anything that refutes your belief false, and you can never be wrong. ON TOP OF THAT, they say the most revolting things of the people who died on those planes. They were CIA operatives. They were moved to an undisclosed location and are actually alive. It's a desecration of their memory and you folks should be ashamed.
  • lopla, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4The report also doesn't mention that a large team of "air conditioning" specialists overhauled all internal building duct systems two weeks prior to the collapse. They had full access to all internals. Likely placed the thermite charges etc. They would have been under orders to configure the charges and manually detonate them on the day sacrificing themselves in the process. After that only a few people know the truth namely Bush/Cheney and the few wtc workers who were confused why a team of marine looking men were working on the airconditioning system for 3 weeks..
    • ronmexico, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3Does the report mention the green men from Mars who were kidnapping people from the towers just two days before?
    • MewTwo, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2lopla you're, like, 13 aren't you?
  • BigTun4, on 10/10/2007, -6/+0I stopped watching when he tried to imitate the sound of the explosion.
    • BrapAllgood, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0For all you know, he did a perfect job of it. You go ahead and go back to warming the sand with that head.
      • BigTun4, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0For all I know? What do I live under a rock? Everyone has seen and herd the video of the planes hitting the tower. They have audio, and no it did not sound like that. So no, he did not do a perfect job. *insert witty comeback here*
  • Clogs, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth:

    The Twin Towers' destruction exhibited ALL the characteristics of destruction by explosions -- and NONE of the characteristics of destruction by fire.

    The collapse of WTC Building 7 (a 47 story high-rise not hit by an airplane) exhibited ALL the characteristics of a classic controlled demolition with explosives -- and NONE of the characteristics of destruction by fire.

    http://www.ae911truth.org/
  • SuperMoses, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1If it was a demolition how would they catch on fire in the lower floors?
  • Clogs, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4William Rodriguez:

    http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/survivors.html#Rodriguez

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4380137365762802294
    • strangewill, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1His story is really amazing. Most people would be like "*****, I'm not getting paid enough for this!".
  • Obscenewords, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Anybody else feel like Trillions of dollars have been stolen from Gods country since 9-11?
    We still debate ***** while the rich criminals are stealing everything our forefathers and we have worked fought and died for.
    I say Heaven you say Hell, gay rights- no gay right, pro choice- baby killer, blah blah blah.
    This ***** goes on forever, and you know what, rich people don't give a *****. They've taken care of their families for generations to come at the expense of all you debaters and masterbaters. They can give a ***** who blew up the towers and why, and all the petty little thing we all argue about every day, they only care if the stock goes up. All the politicians do propagate this nonsense so we believe it's relevant and important. The Rich people are the only real terrorist in this world and if you believe otherwise try to do anything without money, and i mean anything.
  • Homerr, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Without contradicting this testimony (I think) there can be explanations of what happened in the lobby. I'm not convinced either way, but I do think there are many fishy aspects that day that haven't been explained. I just wonder why I never hear about the following explanation:

    Jet fuel pouring down the elevator tower(s), possibly vaporizing, then fuel on fire igniting it causing a bomb more or less at the lower levels and the concussion blowing out the lobby windows. If an elevator on fire in freefall ignited the fuel/air mixture, then it was also overpressuring the air below it and making a more powerful explosion.

    Also, too bad he didn't elaborate more on this body in the closet, wtf!
  • sickthoughts, on 10/10/2007, -5/+3inside job, bottom line
  • tehwired, on 10/10/2007, -4/+28:25: "I'm not an expert on a plane hitting a building"

  • martin2968, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4http://www.loosechangeguide.com/LooseChangeGuide.html

    you guys need to all suck ***** and shut up... please view the site before digging/responding.

    intelligence is hard to find these days huh...
  • lwoj, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5The 9/11 Truth movement should not be dismissed so easily. It is not made up of raving lunatics and deluded conspiracy theorists; it is a group of (mostly) intelligent people who have examined the evidence and are not convinced the US government is telling the truth. There are so many fishy discrepancies between what we saw happen that day, and what the government told us had happened. For example, if the government is has nothing to hide, why don't they just ease all our minds and release, say, one of the dozens of videos captured that day that would have clearly shown an American Airlines jet hitting the Pentagon?
    • strangewill, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I've always wondered about that one, it is the most simple and sideways problem to 9/11 I deal with. Why were the videos taken unless they showed something the public cannot be allowed to see.

      It's even more ***** dumb that people don't question that in and of itself, not so much believe it was a missile or whatever the theory is, but that they don't question why videos were taken and why we're not allowed to see them.
  • Vinadetta, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Regardless of what you believe, the facts are the facts. The government is not telling the truth, and physics don't lie!!!! I know it's hard to have your belief system turned upside down, but when you truly explore what happened that day it only leads to one conclusion!!! 9-11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB
  • FriedGeek, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Here is something to chew on. Look at the collapse of the bridge in Minneapolis, there are at least two separate videos that recorded this ransom event. Let's think about this, a bridge that no one really knew of in the country (locals aside) falls into the river and we've got a couple angles of it on video.

    The Pentagon, the seat of the United States military might, what should be one of the most secure buildings in the world, and the only video to be released is a few frames from a gate house camera? So the pentagon has NO PERIMETER CAMERAS that face either away from the building or at the building???????

    Again, bridge falls in Minneapolis, two videos within a few days. Plane crashes into the Pentagon and only a choppy gate house video in 7 years.

    Does that make sense to you?
    • electrictooth, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1This is a good point, but of course it's not going to change people's minds that are already set. It shouldn't be as hard as it is to reason with people, but you simply cannot reason with someone who won't look at evidence, this includes the Warren Commissi....uhh 9/11 Commission.
  • electrictooth, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3How many more of these highly credible testimonies will be necessary before the American people wake up and demand an actual investigation? I believe I am vindicated in saying that this issue is paramount to the future protection of our beloved liberties. This event has been and is still being used as justification for expanding military operations around the globe and expanding powers of the executive branch and that is why, contrary to some who want to forget it, it is still of immense importance.
  • yellowcakewalk, on 03/12/2008, -1/+4What's the NEXT false-flag attack going to be ... you know, the one the fascists will blame on Iran to get the entire world engulfed in flames.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.