Recent Headlines

Carlyle, Kissinger, SAIC and Halliburton: A 9/11 Convergence
Investigate Waste, Fraud & Abuse at NIST
Rosie O'Donnell is picking up where she left off.
Once Again, The Will of the Voters Is Denied
Uzbek officer says Tashkent bombings falseflag
US Congressman Ed Markey gets a copy of 9/11 Nano Thermite Scientific report
Ex-ISI Chief Says Purpose of New Afghan Intelligence Agency RAMA Is ‘to destabilize Pakistan’
Taboo News and Corporate Media
Peter Phillips Of Project Censored Endorses NYC CAN
Polls show broad skepticism among Americans of official 9/11 narrative
New York Judge Dismisses Claim Negligent Construction Contributed To WTC 7 Collapse
Bombshell: Bin Laden worked for US until 9/11
Drills successful planting bombs in 10 buildings, including DHS offices: GAO
Kevin R. Ryan: Demolition access to the WTC Towers
Naval "National Center for Energetics" Records Of Pre-9/11 Nano-Energetic Materials Development, Nonexistent Or Destroyed
Did the Earth Shake Before The South Tower Hit the Ground?
29 Engineers: Only Explosives Can Explain 9/11 World Trade Center Destruction
David Chandler responds to Frank Greening
“Chief Engineer” Hyman Brown by Patrick Marks
Two Days Before 9/11, Military Exercise Simulated Suicide Hijack Targeting New York
Psychologists Weigh In On 9/11
New York Senator Gillibrand Supports New 9/11 Investigation
Much Of 9/11 Commission's Findings Cite Intelligence Garnered By Torture
AE911Truth in Washington DC July 14th-16th
Daniel Sunjata: Intellectual Dishonesty In The Age Of Universal Deceit...
Vice President Biden receives Thermitic Material paper
Pardon Our Dust, or, Why the World Trade Center Dust Matters
Marie-Paule Pileni (Bentham Open) and nano-technology
Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe

Recent Media

Harassment of 9/11 Truth Activists

Entries in this section are created by individual users who register with this site and are largely unmoderated. Content in this section should not be interpreted as being supported by 911blogger.com, or by any other members of this site, and should only be viewed as a posting of the individual who created it. Please contact a team member if you notice a post which violates our general rules.

http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2007/04/threats-of-violence-against...

The people harassing 9/11 activists also appear to be those promoting the theories that (1) directed energy weapons brought down the Twin Towers and/or (2) the videos of Boeings crashing into the Twin Towers were fake.

Many of us have emails and phone messages of threats of physical violence (direct or implied), harassment and intimidation against us. We are not whiners. In fact, we have largely held our tongues on the threats and intimidation we have received, because we did not want to make a mountain out of a molehill or distract the 9/11 movement.

But videos are now appearing on the web impliedly advocating violence or harassment against certain 9/11 activists, and listing their home addresses and phone numbers. Who made the videos? Folks promoting the theories that (1) directed energy weapons brought down the Twin Towers and/or (2) the videos of Boeings crashing into the Twin Towers were fake.

Is there any importance in the fact that those doing the intimidation happen to also be promoting the above theories?

Why do these acts of harassment and threats appear to be made when sincere 9/11 activists refuse to promote theories which they believe contradict the factual record and the laws of science?

Why do these acts of harassment and threats seem to be made right when 9/11 activists actually start being effective in spreading 9/11 truth?

What should we conclude about the purpose of such intimidation?

Postscript 1: If people in good faith believe that directed energy weapons destroyed the Twin Towers or that the videos of the Boeings were faked, wouldn't they want to reign in people promoting those theories who were threatening physical violence or trying to intimidate others? In other words, wouldn't people who actually believe those theories want to distance themselves from violent people, rather than associating with them and promoting their research? If not, why not?

I am sincere in my question: If you believe -- after reading the contrary evidence discussed here -- that facts and logic point towards these theories, why aren't you promoting them with facts and logic, instead of threats of violence and intimidation? I rally around whatever theory has the most factual and evidentiary support. Personally, I believe that the factual support put forward for the aforementioned theories has been totally disproven by the articles published at the Journal of 911 Studies and elsewhere. If you think there is stronger factual evidence for these theories, I am open to looking at it (but not while the people pushing it are threatening me).

Postscript 2: Of course, some defenders of the official story of 9/11 are also threatening violence - such as the threats made by Danny Bonaduce against Rosie O'Donnell. But this essay focuses solely on people calling themselves 9/11 activists who are making threats.

Postscript 3: I am ready to forgive those that have threatened me if they will just stop threatening me. And, frankly, I will feel no need to write any more on disinformation if all of the different threats and campaigns of harassment and intimidation against me are stopped.

Postscript 4: In response to this essay, two proponents of the directed-energy-weapons-destroyed-the-Twin-Towers and fake-video theories have alleged that threats have also been made against people promoting such theories. I do not know of any such threats, but I want to make it clear that I do not condone threats against anyone.

Postscript 5: I sincerely apologize if I have at any time incorrectly stated anyone's position. If so, it has been wholly unintentional.

Aiding and abetting the cover-up of 9/11

The people who are harassing 9/11 activists are aiding and abetting the cover-up of 9/11.


http://arabesque911.blogspot.com/

"Postscript 3: I am ready to

"Postscript 3: I am ready to forgive those that have threatened me if they will just stop threatening me. And, frankly, I will feel no need to write any more on disinformation if all of the different threats and campaigns of harassment and intimidation against me are stopped."

I cannot make a correlation between the harassment I endured back in Jan-May of this year and what is obviously a coordinated campaign against 9/11 Activists like yourself, but in my case, giving in didn't make the situation better - it just made it worse.

9/11 was an act of State Sponsored Terrorism. One lesson I learned is don't try to negotiate with State Sponsored Terrorists.
--
Truth Revolution: The Eleventh of Every Month

To whom it may concern---

Observe this very generous statement :

Postscript 3: I am ready to forgive those that have threatened me if they will just stop threatening me. And, frankly, I will feel no need to write any more on disinformation if all of the different threats and campaigns of harassment and intimidation against me are stopped.

I respect and support GW 's personal approach--we all have to do what is right for each of us.

But it's not mine--you should know that by now. I won't start a fight--but I will finish it. Because I believe holding you accountable--and making this as painful as possible for you lot-- is the only way to discourge you from hurting people.

It's not like you've proven you have a conscience...
______________________________________
http://coljennysparks.blogspot.com/

Truth, justice and non-violence

All activists sincerely interested in truth and justice will denounce all threats of violence against anyone, no matter who they are or what they have done. This is what justice is about.

It would be good to provide links. You are naming names, slandering people as "liars" and "stalkers" and making accusations without evidence, which helps no one.

A question

Do you believe you're attempting to expose what you think is someone's personal information?

Because, correct or not, I believe that's grounds for banning.
______________________________________
http://coljennysparks.blogspot.com/

Sorry..

Sounds like some Nico Haupt disinfo you got there....

You got a habit with that, don't you, sunbeam?
______________________________________
http://coljennysparks.blogspot.com/

What are you babbling about?

[below viewing threshold, show/hide comment]

Webster Tarpley: Your services will no longer be required

As a former moderator,

I can tell you that 911blogger doesn't condone or approve of threats of violence against anyone. If the moderators had seen any of the comments making threats (I've never seen such comments), I'm sure they would have deleted the comments and/or banned the user, or at the very least, warned the user they would be banned if they did so again.

Personally, of course, I don't approve of threats of violence made by anyone against anyone questioning the official version of 9/11.

That's 3 times--Ban the wanker

Three times he's tried to intimidate people with what he thought was personal info--it don't matter if he's correct or not, or the intimidation isn't working.

The fact that he's doing it deliberately means he's trying to create a hostile enironment for 911 activists.

I've already emailed reprehensor.
______________________________________
http://coljennysparks.blogspot.com/

What personal information have I posted here?

[below viewing threshold, show/hide comment]

911 activists???

[below viewing threshold, show/hide comment]

Do you approve of SLANDER?

[below viewing threshold, show/hide comment]

I understand where you're coming from...

But we should practice what we preach.

It might not be Nico's sugar daddy; unless constitutionalist has has actually confirmed this ID and has no problem with people knowing it...

______________________________________
http://coljennysparks.blogspot.com/

Well, I will just give you one out of many.

This was posted on the Internet and emailed around:

"These vermin who slander and censor the hardworking men and women who expose the truth about 911tvfakery are the war criminals and 9 11 murderers and they will be hunted down and brought to justice one by one....

they're going to learn exactly what justice means."

This post then named ten 9/11 truth activists as people who should be targeted.

Then it goes on, talking to the activists:

"Perhaps you will wish that you had been inside the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001. Perhaps you will wish that you too had been inside the Bakery in Eliat (the site of a terrorist attack)."

There have been a lot more direct threats of physical violence, also. That's just one example.

I have never heard of any threats of violence being made by you, KT. My essay does not say all people who believe in directed-energy weapons-hit-the-Twin-Towers or faked videos have threatened violence. It says that all people who have threatened violence promote directed-energy weapons-hit-the-Twin-Towers or faked videos theories. Do you understand the difference?

Yes I understand the difference even with your snide tone

[below viewing threshold, show/hide comment]

A prominent 9/11 activist

who has been graphically threatened with physical violence, wrote me the following email (this is not me talking, this is the activist):

"simply tell Killtown that you will not add to the suffering of those whom have already been threatened by further circulating this vile threatening material.

but - also tell him that when videos and blogs are posted all over the internet accusing people of being members of an Al Qaeda cell - including the person's home address - accusing them of being a terrorist planning an attack - accusing them of complicity in the mass murder of thousands on 9/11 - accusing them of being pedophiles - while also including language about rendition and torture and 'collateral damage' to family members in the same video/blog - this threatens the safety of entire families and communities. it incites violence and is the lowest form of harassment and irresponsible free speech allowable under the 1st amendment.

then tell Killtown that his question is a transparent intentional attempt to bait and stir up further threats.

tell Killtown his question is disingenuous ....."

Again, this is not me talking, and I have no idea whether Killtown's question is disingenous. But his point (and the reason I'm posting this) is that some of the people who have been threatened don't want to publicize the threats -- some of which are very personal, graphic, or disturbing.

So I have to take you guy's word???

[below viewing threshold, show/hide comment]

Killtown,

first of all, please check again -- that quote is not there.

Second, if you're asking whether I believe in slander? No, I am totally, 100% opposed to it.

My essay does not name names, AND is totally based on truth.

One interesting point: Killtown says "PS - Tell John I said hello." in response to the anonymous message from a 9/11 activist who has been threatened. If Killtown is in fact right that that activist's first name is "John" (which I am neither confirming or denying), doesn't that prove that Killtown already knew about the threats of violence against that activist? In other words, Killtown claims not to know about any threats of violence, but then seems to know that John has been threatened (assuming he is right about the name). Or am I missing something?

Nice one, Inspector!

;-)
______________________________________
http://coljennysparks.blogspot.com/

Just sayin'...

Actually it would be possible to guess that based on some stylistic quirks. Nonetheless, the behavior of KT in this thread and SBG's is obnoxious and mentioning a name in this context should qualify as an attempt to intimidate, IMO.

wtcdemolition.com/blog

Obnoxious? Intimidating? How so?

[below viewing threshold, show/hide comment]

Thanks for editing out that slander against me

[below viewing threshold, show/hide comment]

You're on a fine line, mate....

If it was up to me, I'd boot yeh just for pushing it.
______________________________________
http://coljennysparks.blogspot.com/

Boot me for what?

[below viewing threshold, show/hide comment]

Btw, John Albanese used to slander me all the time here

[below viewing threshold, show/hide comment]

Hmmmm...

I've been threatened with nails being driven into my skull, and I get crank called at least once a week by someone living in West Virginia. On 911Blogger.com, someone threatened to put a bullet in my head, and dz erased the post. I was also on the list that GW just mentioned.

We can also talk about the pictures of 70-80 year old homosexual men having sex being depicted as my deceased grandfather (whom I dedicated my 9/11 research to), or we could talk about how people used to talk about digging his body up out of the ground, and ______ in the ___.

What about the accusations of JDL, Zionist, Mole for Larry Silverstein, COINTELPRO etc...? What's to stop some psycho from killing me because he actually believes it?

I've taken a lot of shit for this cause. I'm a very stubborn individual which is one of the reasons I'm still here.

From people on my site...

Well, let me first say that I was one of Gold's most heated opponents way back on the Howard Stern board. I started in on him because all he did was talk about 9/11 and these weird and wild accusations about our Govt. So I played the bad guy for a long time. I was mean. But I wasn't being me. It was a character, if you can understand what I am saying.

Anyways, this guy has had his grandfather pulled through the mud. His grandfather (who has passed) was made up as pictures, screen names, and just other horrible things.

Still Gold stayed strong. I don't know how he did it. He wouldn't be online more than 2 minutes, and he would get a shit load of people making fun of him.

I was guilty as well, as making Gold feel paranoid. I would say I worked for a Gov't Agency, who was monitoring the 9/11 movement, to being a hired gun for the Republican party.

It is very easy to make someone think a certain way while you are online. Gold kept his head high, although sometimes he would get pushed over the limit. He lasted longer than I would have.

Anways, understand that if anyone who knows what you are going through, it is Gold.

And...

I've known Jon for quite a few months now and I have seen him take more shit on BB's than most. People would even go as far as to talk shit about his family and friends. I don't even want to say some of the things that were said. I would defend him as much as I could because he is a friend and people don't talk shit about my homies! The truly sad thing is, is that people would say these things simply because he is very passionate about 9/11 and the truth.

Just ask SBG sometime about the abuse I've taken. Here's someone coming to my defense on the HSBB (Howard Stern Bulletin Board).

"Dear Gold9472, amen to you brother. I admire you for fighting in something you believe in with such great passion. At first when I started to read your posts I like many others thought you were just a crazy person ranting on about a conspiracy theory, I was wrong. So I started to educate myself about these topics at hand with the literature/videos that Gold had presented to the community. After hours of reading/watching I came to my final verdict. I was shocked at the cold hard facts slapping me in the face. I want to thank Gold for taking the time to educate me and many others. People of this board who constanly put him down, I laugh at you. You are fighting a lost cause. Do you really think he would go to such extremes just to get a rise out of you? Honestly come on now. This hate needs to stop. All the power to you Gold9472. Hopefully some day this country will wake from its eternal slumber.

"All propaganda has to be popular and has to adapt its spiritual level to the perception of the least intelligent of those towards whom it intends to direct itself."

Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf ("My Struggle"), Vol. I

Let the flames begin."

I wonder if it's all because of my good looks. :D

Edit: The attacks I've taken over the years went in waves. First, it was die-hard Republicans. Then, it was "debunkers". Then, it was alleged people in the movement.


Who Is? Archives

Ever notice the disinfo

Ever notice the disinfo people never argue amongst each other? No matter how absurd the idea, or if an article differs from other ones, they'll all promote it anyway. They all agree and say, "good find!" . Every last one of them.

Your right!

I never had noticed that, but youre right. I have seen minor quibbles, but no out right disagreement. Hmmm....
______________________________________
http://coljennysparks.blogspot.com/

bah #1 rule about studying

bah #1 rule about studying shills is they behaving in a manner of quantum mechanics, as soon as you make your observations known, the observed behavior tends to change. Remember they are learning more about us as they KNOW they are a shill rather than us about them. Not saying don't share your insights just not so openly :D

One tidbit that won't really change (behavior) is they usually don't respond to direct questions with direct answers. Linguistic acrobatics is the name of the game for them, and if the question is phrased in such a way that it makes it hard sliming out of giving a direct answer, Well they just ignore the question all together.

--
Truth Revolution: The Eleventh of Every Month