Comment on 911Researchers Website Promotes Violence Against Activist John Albanese

As you all know I have been in the process of assembling legal assistance in dealing with the onslaught of dangerous incitements occurring associated with the New York 911 Truth movement, as well as myriad documented cases of threats that have been occurring.

It has come to my attention that a website has run an opinion piece as follows:

Enemy Combatant Status: Render John Albanese to a Black Site?
Submitted by Fred on Tue, 2007-02-06 14:56.

"It is my personal opinion based solely on the email presented here that John Albanese might be a dangerous lunatic who poses a threat to the American way of life. If he poses a clear and present danger to the security of our homeland and to himself, I feel it would be for the best if he were placed in a secret black location where interrogators could use enhanced methods to achieve greater effectiveness in getting the truth out of him. I feel in my gut that he could be an Al Qaida operative, based on the language he uses in that email. As a general rule, it seems to me that any dangerous character making threats could be some kind of "enemy combatant" and should be treated as such."

"Assuming that he has terrorist masters who may eventually withdraw support for his operations, it may not be long before Albanese is eating culturally-appropriate meals and waiting for his overseers to begin a tribunal process. After about six to ten years of humane detention, a tribunal could review his status. If John Albanese behaves recklessly in the future he could pose a grave danger to himself and others. My personal belief is that if John Albanese admits to serious crimes during interrogation, he should be lawfully detained until arrangements can be made for his further incarceration in a purpose-built institution."

"Perhaps the ones who ought to think about retiring are the ones who suggest it first. I have no doubt that if John Albanese is actively planning to commit a terrorist act, such as bombing a church, bus, or synagogue, arrangements could be made for the safe relocation of this "John Albanese" to someplace far away. I trust that he will be treated humanely in keeping with the spirit of the Geneva Convention. I certainly pray that John Albanese will not commit acts of violence against people or property."

"Terrorism is wrong, John Albanese, and if you are thinking of killing anyone you should surrender yourself to the authorities immediately."


(end of quote)

This of course has been documented and reported this morning to law enforcement authorities, along with the many other cases of threats and harassment that have taken place over the last several months. I have been assured by my lawyers that this language constitutes a threat to my safety, and will be pursued with all vigorous intent to determine the source.

I would like to ask for the support of the community in distributing this. I am putting my faith in all peace loving members of this community to reject the implied threats and insinuation of VIOLENCE that this post represents.

If 9/11 Activists can be threatened in this way, and standing up to those who seek to label us “Nazis” and call for “Death to Nazis” outside a church where peaceful activists are seeking answers to 9/11, then we are all in danger of losing our precious civil liberties.

In the 1960’s a antiwar group known as the Students for a Democratic Society included among their ranks Jewish activists Abbie Hoffman, Jerry Rubin, Mark Rudd, and Paul Krassner. In 1969 the FBI created and distributed a leaflet depicting photos of these four activists super-imposed against swastikas over the headline "LAMPSHADES! LAMPSHADES! LAMPSHADES!"

Today we see a church in NYC picketed as follows:

Whether this is the product of a governmental program to incite violence against a church is unknown. But, it is nothing less than threatening - and unless we show unity in confronting it, none of us are safe.

Good Work, John

And John should be commended for resisting the urge to name names here... those of us in NYC know.

Have they

..determined the cause of death of Dan Wallace yet?

I will soon, in all probability, be unable to talk about any of this. I may not even be able to release my film. NOT because I am scared - but because it is now all part of an ongoing criminal investigation. Its all very sad in my opinion.

My concern is that there are others in a similar position who are too scared to step forward. No one should ever feel threatened to seek answers or voice opinions in America.

I've heard from Dylan Avery

I've heard from Dylan Avery that Dan Wallace wasn’t murdered, he wouldn’t say how he died but he's been in contact with people and he was getting pissed at individuals who were speculating on the Loose Change boards.

I wouldn’t worry about it, I honestly don't mean to disrespect Dan's memory but he could have died of a drug overdose or something who knows, I don't know enough about the guy. That dude Luke from NY911Truth apparently knows what happened, so you should try and get in contact with him John if you want to find out.

Also I think you should try and release your film no matter what, if people are trying to intimated you in an attempt to stop it being released, the best thing you can do is release it, there's nothing that can be done once it's out there. But there is something that can be done the longer you leave it e.g. harassment and all this other shit. I'd say try your hardest not to tangle the film with legal stuff because releasing it will probably go further to combat this than drawn out legal action etc. Drawn out legal action which you should still do, but not at the expense of what I’m sure is going to turn out to be a critical piece of media.

I'm sorry I brought up Dan

It was wrong.

I am not afraid to release my film. But you do understand I have to follow the directions of my lawyers - choose effective strategies - and execute them. I do not want to undercut my own efforts.

We'll see.

I totally understand dude,

I totally understand dude, but I would have thought you'd be too smart to put some shit in there that THEY can actually legally object to, especially if you’re having a lawyer comb through it.

It's a legitimate question to inquire about Dan's sudden death

It is very suspicious how a 23-year-old truther, the son of a 9/11 firefighter, just passed away in bed. I want foul play totally ruled out (if there was none), and of course I'll still respect him no matter what the cause of death was.

Dan's Dad

I've heard that Dan's dad was a firefighter who was trapped in a stalled elevator cab, in radio contact and working to hack his way out when the sound of the detonations reached his ears. He probably had only a few seconds of terror before he was pulverized. Such an awful mental burden Dan had to carry once he learned the truth.

Its not legitimate

to speculate on his death in the total absence of facts.

Depends. Speculation in the

Depends. Speculation in the informal sense of the word is the first step in researching something odd--that is pointing out the obvious dodginess of an apparently healthy 23 year old activist dying suddenly. I don't know what word you'd prefer to use, but homicide investigators have to be able to "speculate" that much to note a death may be suspicious and investigate accordingly.

However, speculation being passed off as confirmed fact is not legitimate--I agree with you there.

Speculation is fine in its place if not done to excess--that is, one is making it clear one is speculating.

Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.

I will be very disappointed

I will be very disappointed if you can't release your film. Any chance of private screenings?

re: I am the one who made this sign


I have nothing to hide, my name is Roman Shusterman. I made the sign accompanied with an essay I was handing out at the time which you can read on my blog at

MY discussion group is where we have also been discussing the death of Mr. Wallace and our members express our own suspicions. Hope you all enjoy. Good bye. and p.s. I am a pacifist and never encourage violence against anyone. I have the free speech right especially when I hand out an essay where I explain what I mean when I call someone a neo-nazi

re: what does "death to Nazism" mean

First off, I called some leaders of the 9/11 truth movement neo-nazis which is not to be mistaken for actual Nazis. Secondly, Nazism is an ideology. If someone says death to Communism are they saying that they want to kill all communists? If that was the case then boy we would of had a lot of lawsuits during the cold war. In my opinion we have to either believe in free speech of not, it seems to me that a lot of people on this discussion board are choosing censorship instead. Censorship is one of the tools that Islamo-fascists, as well as the Chinese communists use today to intimidate their opposition movements. If that the type of movement 9/11 truth wants to represent?

The MINUS function can be very annoying!

You know, one might actually want to read what this meathead had to say for himself. Most likely he exposes himself, but he's been pointed down to below -3 and so I can't read it. (NO THE "HIDE/SHOW THREAD FUNCTION DOES NOT WORK FOR ME.) This shows how counterproductive the minus function can be.


1) Can someone summarize what "Comrade Shusterman" has to say? Preferably leaving out any scatology. THANK YOU.

2) How about we all recommend to dz and co. a different system. I think it would be great if he were to limit posting size (so that people can stop cutting and pasting 10-page articles) and allow an individual hide/ignore for every post, instead of the plus-minus popularity contest, as though that proves anything. (Not that I don't find it reassuring that Comrade Shusterman isn't getting a "plus.")

Nicholas, Please use firefox


Please use firefox if at all possible.

Let me know what browser you are using via email if you don't mind, thanks.

I was going to say, "sorry

I was going to say, "sorry Nickey--live with it--you're not missing anything", but your post is so much more contructive.

Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.

i am against censorship also

but slander is not protected free speech. its actually a crime.

the only way to DETERMINE slander is to determine the TRUTHFULNESS of the statements in question. TRUTH actually matters in legal matters of free speech.

so - in order to protect yourself against a slander and harassment charge you would have to PROVE Frank Morales the PRIEST at St Marks Church is in fact a drug trafficer.

Sgood luck with that. i am sure everyone understands what a sensible guy you are based on your choice of words.

"Terrorism is wrong, John

"Terrorism is wrong, John Albanese, and if you are thinking of killing anyone you should surrender yourself to the authorities immediately."

^ That’s just totally nonsensical and bizarre. Rick Siegel’s site is the main hub of disinformation right now, it's disturbing but luckily quite transparent.

And somewhat humorous... or

And somewhat humorous... or at least it would be if they weren't pretending to represent this movement...

here is the latest gut buster by CB_Brooklyn:

Notice the tan building on the left-hand side in the first photo? Isn't it a bit too tall in relation to the angle of the tower and "plane"? Exactly what, and where, is that building anyway? Is it visible in the second photograph below? (It should be in the south east area.) Or is the tan building in Brooklyn? If so, why does it appear the camera was within a few blocks from the south tower?
Bottom line question: Is there any other explanation other than... CARTOON ??

Sad, but kinda funny?

This is of course not about me

The question is whether American law enforcement and civil liberties will ultimately trump police-state type tactics. I could end up dead tomorrow - but that will not put an end to the tension that exists between these conflicting legal interests. Do we still have a Constitution? Are there those who still seek to enforce it? Are there "interests" at play here?

Of course. My personal safety is secondary to those interests. I only regret that i have but one life to give for my country and constitution.

The very nature of this threat is particularly telling. Internment camps? Special renditions? Blackmail? Threats of violence? Accusing me of being Al Qaeda?

Why not threaten me with crucifixion?

Chill dude, this is just

Chill dude, this is just some bizarre freak who (if is more than just a moron, and actually paid disinfo) could just be projecting his/her guilt and concern of might happen to him/her if the truth comes out. Regardless they did the same pathetic shit to GW and who knows what type of insane crap Steven Jones or David Griffin receive, Alex Jones and Dylan Avery have had a ton of f*cked up things sent to them. It just means you’re affective. Don’t be bothered by it, that’s what these clowns like Haupt and Siegel want.

i'm not bothered

its exactly what i expected. in fact - i expected better. its a little weak. not only does it hand me more legal leverage - but it also undercuts its own objectives and strengthens the operational methodologies that are systemically rising up to confront it.

Are you convinced it is an

Are you convinced it is an organized effort against you?
And not just a lone gunman on the loose.
“it is possible to fool all the people all the time—when government and press cooperate.” George Seldes - "legendary investigative reporter"


it could be a confederacy of dunces banding together as disinfranchised fools and opportunists.

but - they do obviously work in concert. either way the Constitution applies.

Show "Don't you agree that terrorism is wrong?" by fred

The police are sorting it out

They will decide who the terrorist is.

Show "The Police are sorting it out" by fred

Swastikas in churches? Death threats? Incitement to violence?

These are the patterns that lawyers and cops and journalists and local newspapers and secret sting operations and the ACLU deal with. ; )

I suppose you and your crew feel that you are above the law. Perhaps you are. Perhaps you think you ARE the law. Perhaps you are misguided enough to think what you are doing is legal - and simply too ignorant to realize that the american public and the constitution ALWAYS trumps secret psyops and unlawful secret police tactics. Where is J Edgar Hoover today? Where is Nixon and his secret enemies list? Nothing stays the same. You can blackmail and intimidate and ruin people's lives and kill people like me - but - all good things must come to an end eventually - and like any life of crime - your next threat against your fellow citizen could be your last. The winds of war and law enforcement and congressional oversight eventually always catches up with the sluggish feet of clay that is fascism. Do you even read the papers? The status quo may have shifted while you were sleeping and there are new sheriffs in town waiting for that crucial exposure and capital crime to take place.

or maybe you're just some lone jackass getting himself in deeper than he should.

Show "Your Lawyer is an Idiot" by fred

Well, fred, thank you for

Well, fred, thank you for your input. That So, anything constructive to add? Or can we just fast forward to the down arrows?

Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.

Show "Yes, I would like 911 Blogger to ammend the headline" by fred

Umm, no...

Jon Gold does no such thing. Really, check your facts before making such an inflammatory statement or you could end up in legal trouble.

Show "If Jon Gold doesn't edit comments here, that's news to me" by fred

Jon Gold...

Has nothing to do with this website. This is dz's site. The "staff" are Reprehensor, GeorgeWashington, and somebigguy. I'm a contributor of content, and a poster, and my forum used to be the "Official Forum" for, but that was then, and this is now. I have never had control over this site in any way, shape, or form.

"So where is the oil going to come from?... The Middle East, with two-thirds of the world's oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies."

Richard Cheney - Chief Executive Of Halliburton

OK, Jon Gold, I owe you a big apology.

I thought you were in charge of this site. My bad. I guess DZ is the guy who gets the cease-and-desist letter.

I'm very sorry I mistakenly linked you to the owner of this website. I was wrong, and I'm sorry.


Well that's big of you,

Well that's big of you, fred. Thank you. Hey, got to thank the guy for doing the right thing. But--

Must ask how you got that impresion. Even when I was new in the unregistered days I never assumed that.

Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.


Pity the poor sod--he's new at Disinfo Central (TM) and his office mates sent him here with bad info as a practical joke!

Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.

I'm a straight shooter, Col. Sparks

Call em as I see em. When I make a mistake, I apologize.


And we thank you. But it

And we thank you. But it just sounded so absurd I had to tweek you about it.

Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.

John Albanese Issues a Fatwa Against Nico Haupt

So, did you or did you not threaten Nico Haupt? It is my understanding that you are trying to force him to "retire or face the consequences". It appears to me you are trying to intimidate a well-respected researcher through threats of violence.

For the record, do you believe that Osama bin Laden is responsible for the attacks of September 11, 2001?

Did you threaten Nico Haupt in order to force him to "retire"?

Are you threatening researchers and activists and making false reports to the police? Do you realize it is a crime to file a fraudulent police report?

I'm not sure what your point is about Abie Hoffman. Are you trying to tell us something about your mental health?


All truth passes through three stages.

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
Arthur Schopenhauer
German philosopher (1788 - 1860)

I worry about the safety of everyone in this movement.

Speaking out about these threats are the best defense.

“We're an empire now, and when we act we create our own reality."

Thank you

The very idea that this rat would show up here acting rightiously indignant after posting a blog that is so threatening in nature that the police are now involved. what a joke.

Is this guy so stupid as to think that working his statements using "In my opinion" in any way makes his comments NOT slander and harassment?

Suggesting in a public forum that i am a terrorist?

" I have no doubt that if John Albanese is actively planning to commit a terrorist act, such as bombing a church, bus, or synagogue, arrangements could be made for the safe relocation of this "John Albanese" to someplace far away. "

" Terrorism is wrong, John Albanese, and if you are thinking of killing anyone you should surrender yourself to the authorities immediately."

You see - this is a threat to the community. These statements are so radical that it forces officers of the court to investigate. That's just common sense.

According to an authoritative source - at the very least this constitutes an extreme form of slander and harassment. At the very worst it forces an investigation into whether the autor of this statement is himself planning a violent act.


You're Welcome, John Albanese!

Now you're calling me a rat? You do realize that's what Josef Gobbels called the Jews, don't you? Do you have something you want to tell us about Jews?

I look forward to seeing the look on the Judge's face when you tell him you told a researcher at a church to "retire or face the consequences". Your mafia tactics have no place in a civilized society.

Again, if you make any death threats against me or my family I will take immediate legal action against you.

Your threats are documented, John Albanese. Your failure to denounce violence and terrorism is also documented.

I urge you to seek professional help.



"that is what the military does when there is nothing else to do." -911truthiness

Fred's comment was clear and nonthreatening

Your comment about Nico Haupt - "retire . . . or face the consequences" was threatening in its ambiguity.

You have said several times on this blog that I and others who assert theories with which you disagree are complicit in the 9/11 murders and should be tried for war crimes.

It seems to me that Fred just turned that back on you, and that his statements are obviously rhetorical. If you can dish out such inflammatory rhetoric, you should be able to take it when it is dished back.

In any case he made no threats - just stated an opinion that you are dangerous and should be dealt with by the lawful authorities.

It is also clear to me that Fred does not actually support the violations of due process he discusses, and that this is also rhetorical.


"that is what the military does when there is nothing else to do." -911truthiness

Bless you

Care to respond in substance?

Care to make a comment WITH substance?

Coughing, sneezing and farting AT the bankrupt swill being hacked out by you and your friends... is about as polite as I can muster. I've already said more than you deserve... do not expect more from me.

Take care,


My comments was quite substantial

I stated that Mr. Albanese's comment was threatening in its ambiguity, and that Fred's was clearly non-threatening. Neither are my friends, though it is apparent that a conversation with Fred would much more interesting and enjoyable.

I'm also not defending Nico's satire. It is offensive to me, especially the picture of feces, but free speech is what makes this country great and I am surprised that people in Manhattan can't take it for what it is. Geez, could Maplethorpe get a showing in Manhattan these days?

So much for my cultural pretensions

I was thinking of Andres Serrano:

Please don't tell Jesse Helms I posted this.

Making the world "safe" for "9/11 truth"

We're helping to make the world safe for "9/11 truth".

And we're helping to make '9/11 truth" safe for public consumption.


1) Ensuring that government-approved spooks, lawyers and weapons devleopers are securely in the drivers's seat of the "movement"

2) Protecting the secrecy surroundiing US black-weapons development and deployment.

3) Placing foundation-funded pseudo-reliigious cultic figures in the "leadership" of the "9/11 truth movement'.

4) Surrounding those "leaders" with a protective cheering gallery of brainwashed dupes, cult followers, blackmail victims or otherwise-compromised professional losers.

5) Slandering, smearing and isolating any honest, authentic 9/11 activists and researchers

6) Above all - protecting the street credibility of the mainstream corporate media; by silencing the evidence of media video fakery on the morning of 9/11.

It's a difficult and dirty and thankless job, but someone's got to do it: