Responding to Libel.

This is the description currently posted for the 911blogger feed at a site known as wtcdemolition(dot)com;

It's not true. This is called libel. The description of the blog feed may change, it certainly has before. Here is a previous example;

The perps will be outed. By investigations, and proofs. LIHOP and MIHOP labels really are proving to be more divisive than useful as time goes on.

Stating that Lorie Van Auken's husband was "allegedly killed when the north tower was demolished" is disgusting. Insinuating that her grief is not legitimate, and that Jon Gold is a "fake truther" is a pathetic grasp at straws. Yet, this is fair game at wtcdemoliton;

The clincher, though, is that wtcdemoliton accuses this site of racism, when it has linked to a video by notorious holocaust denier David Cole (who has since recanted his views) for months, but has recently taken down the link. All that remains is this echo;

If you bother to track down the URL, you'll find an endorsement of the video by one of the users, "That video is the excellent David Cole doc, but it is kind of unfortunate that the still frame displayed sounds quite you-know-what-o-denial-a-hoax."


Well, that's just fine and dandy. Users of wtcdemolition are not welcome here anymore. Most of them haven't made a positive contribution to the site in a solid year anyhow.


Deliberate provocateurs. This goes far beyond the "village idiot" syndrome.

Arabesque: 911 Truth

Tut, tut--don't play with your undead-- its messy

Stake, dust, SCENE!


Rep, you're wrong about Mr. Cole

According to his friend Bradley Smith, Cole has since reaffirmed his stance that the official holocaust story is a lie, and is currently working on another project to expose it.

And I don't understand your comparison about promoting racism by linking to David Cole's holocaust video "The Truth Behind The Gates Of Auschwitz", since Mr. Cole was born a Jew. Here's a link to his documentary where he explains this early in the film...

(google it)

And here's Cole (& Bradley Smith) on Phil Donahue where he further explains his views about the "holocaust" (he's confronted by Michael Shermer in part 2, the same Michael Shermer who's gained fame as a 9/11 debunker by the way, hmmm)

(google it)

"If I had just paid $20 million for the NIST report, I'd be asking for a refund!... The trouble with the NIST Report is that it isn’t even science because it's not capable of being verified or negated!"
-Dr. Frank Greening

"then you are only showing

"then you are only showing that what the people over at are saying about you and 911blogger is true."

Um... not so much. That does not make us anti-arab racists. You're probably thinking of the control/censor bit, but it was the racists bit that put it over the top.

I thought the vids were informative but if I was the site admin I wouldn't want them embeded here either. Remember, even they removed what they had.

But why argue? They're(WTCD crew--not the vids) gone and it's a happy day--or will be when the sun rises again. ;-)


(Edit: I was writing this post as you wrote yours.)

Respectfully, I must ask you to not link to Cole's videos here. I edited your post to break those links. This site will not be used to even tacitly promote his work.

The fact that Cole is Jewish has not made any difference in how his work and story is marketed as "Holocaust Revisionism", by his detractors as well as his supporters. (A quick google of "david cole holocaust revisionist" is proof of that.)
Holocaust Revisionism is used as a plank by white supremacist communities such as "stormfront", National Vanguard (aka National Alliance) and is a favorite topic for David Duke.

My point is; that any site accusing this site of racism, when the accuser has linked to content that is regarded as Holocaust Revisionism, is the epitome of irony.

If you want to continue this discussion, contact me via email.

Rep you're out of line with your "racism" comparison

Holocaust Revisionism has nothing to do with "racism".

David Cole's studies are largely disputed by the same type of creeps who go around "debunking" 9/11 truth.

And If you didn't want to "even tacitly promote his work" on this site, you shouldn't have brought it up in the first place. But since you did and didn't get your facts straight about Mr. Cole (and also omitted the primary reason why he reversed his stance that the Holocaust was a lie, which was due to intimidation from ADL thugs) I decided to question your reasoning and supply others with information about Cole to help them decide for themselves.

"If I had just paid $20 million for the NIST report, I'd be asking for a refund!... The trouble with the NIST Report is that it isn’t even science because it's not capable of being verified or negated!"
-Dr. Frank Greening

Ok, I asked nice.

Move it to email if you want to continue this discussion. I'm going to put your comments in the moderation queue for now.

Holocaust Revisionism is what it is;

What I don't get is...

...why they even have a site feed of 911blogger if we're all horrid racist fake truthers. I wouldn't have a site feed of someplace I hated on a public page I owned. Certainly not including racists.

WTF? These people are beyond irrational.

Psychological projection

"In psychology, psychological projection (or projection bias) is a defense mechanism in which one attributes one’s own unacceptable or unwanted thoughts or/and emotions to others. Projection reduces anxiety by allowing the expression of the unwanted subconscious impulses/desires without letting the conscious mind recognize them."
Arabesque: 911 Truth

I suppose that fits

Mind, it doesn't change reality and keep one from embarrassment -- like earlier this year when one of the tossers insisted this bloke Winston was my sock. :rolleyes:

Distrubing patterns

I'd love to let this die and move on like the next person. But the more I think about it, the more I notice disturbing patterns.

For the record, regardless of how horrible some people where behaving I was willing to assume mental issues or what not, but this calling people racists because you don't agree with every niggling detail is beyond the pale. That is a deliberate lie--or as Arabesque said, provocation.

Thing is, this is not the first time with some of the people involved. Last fall, in the middle of the Webster Tarpley/ no plane troll tag team, one of these people was sending me emails pretending to be concerned about "how I was doing" whilst at the same time emailing site administrators lying behind my back.

I've been very quiet about that until now. Why get in the way of some git discrediting themselves? But thinking back this isn't the first time something like this happened....

John Albanese made a film. It was a very good film. I'll be honest--it wasn't my best 911 film, but it was good. Still I preferred Press for Truth. But one individual kept pushing it to the fore, recommending it as the best 911 film they liked--right up until they started slagging the man based in part on invented(or at least impossible to confirm) charges of being the author of two or three anonymous posts. Then suddenly he was evil and, coincidently part of a noplanes troll hate campaign.


This thread shows the beginning of a similar dynamic with Jon Gold:

He also became the target of BOTH this group AND noplane trolls. I received an email claiming Jon has sending threats out of the blue-- I was to find out much later that email, as angry as it was, was the end of an email argument, NOT a spontaneous threat out of nowhere.

I would like to apologize to Jon Gold at this time. I was very harsh about that in public, and whilst I do think the sitch could have been handled better, I still helped perpetuate a mistaken view of Jon as a person who spontaneously sends nasty emails of of the blue. For that , I'm sorry.

Now fast forward to the Kennebunkport fiasco:

Those of us asking questions were first slandered by Tarpley, Barrett and co, then--you guessed it--the noplanes trolls. Predictable so far. But there was a twist--for some bizarre reason a couple of people who had nothing to do with challenging the Kennebunkport Warning were targeted in videos. Both these people are part of the WTCD crew. There is no reason to include them--THEY DID NOTHING, THEY SAID NOTHING--to challenge Tarpley. They were innocent of that--but not innocent. Hind sight being 20/20, the only reason they could possibly be included is to generate sympathy to distract from what they are --part of the noplanes troll tag team.

An aside, but may be relevant:

In the last couple of months, I've had the strangest email spam pile up at an account I rarely use--spam with loads of noplanes trolls cc'd. Earlier this year, out of the blue, I also received an email from one of those cc'd, none other that Jennifer Wynhausen. For those who don't know, Jennifer is a close friend of Killtown's, some suspect his girlfriend. She emailed me at my regular account trying to stir up some bollox as the "911stalker". I mistook her for Nico until someone set me straight.(also reported her to yahoo for harassment--hee, hee). But the point is according to these emails Jennifer is the source of many erroneous accusations--including some the WTCD crew are promoting.

Mind, this is from a noplanes spam list so consider the source, but it would explain some "coincidences".

Back to the tag teams: be careful of the person(s) who is excessively flattering at the same time the noplanes trolls attack, and then turn on a dime for apparently no reason.

It's a pattern--a disturbing pattern.


Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?

Intentional Provocations

I agree that it is too easy to dismiss this as just random idiocy on the internet.

Regarding the Kennebunkport Warning controversy, it was alleged on this site that the entire event was "staged" to make certain activists more "credible" or "prominent". Statements like these are "calculated" to provoke a reaction and they are transparently disingenuous.

For one, I and no one else can control what other activists do or say in response to a controversy. So how could this be a "staged" event when everyone on the internet can make their view heard at any second. For example, some of the very people making this absurd insinuation could have spoke up. And for the record, they did not. Anyone could have raised their voice, and if anyone else raised it loud enough, maybe there would have been more characters on that Kennebunkport Warning Cartoon. So this conspiracy theory, of course, is absurd.

So when you see accusations like this, and "racist"--they are not intended as "truth", or even "opinion", but rather, as intentionally divisive provocations. Once you see through this charade, they aren't worth a second of your reading time. In fact, I remember reading that this individual specifically enjoys saying things just to get a reaction. On the internet, this is known as a "troll". Actually, such behavior benefits the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks when the result is bickering, division, and distractions.

Like all of those flame wars that resulted in comment moderation on 911 blogger. The result was to disrupt threads and activism with slimy insinuations and sarcasm. At one point, one individual (shortly after the Kennebunkport warning started coincidentally enough), started following me around in every thread and attacked me. I did nothing to provoke this behavior, but he continued until he was eventually put on comment moderation.

Don't feed the trolls, because they are here to disrupt, not have a conversation.

Again, you just have to have common sense to see through this.

I mean it should be obvious to anyone, but even if you disagree with the positions of Jon Gold, the fact remains that he is one of the most prolific and effective activists in the 9/11 truth movement. There is a difference between critiquing an argument that someone has and say attacking someone with slanderous accusations. I will critique David Ray Griffin or anyone else if I find fault with their arguments, but I will not slander and attack them. It should be obvious who is really contributing to 9/11 activism and who is actually contributing to time wasting and forum disruption.
Arabesque: 911 Truth

That reminds me ...


"Like all of those flame wars that resulted in comment moderation on 911 blogger. The result was to disrupt threads and activism with slimy insinuations and sarcasm. At one point, one individual (shortly after the Kennebunkport warning started coincidentally enough), started following me around in every thread and attacked me. I did nothing to provoke this behavior, but he continued until he was eventually put on comment moderation."

Reminds me of this thread:

In it Killtown, Jennifer and "Constitutionalist" work together to attack people. On the second page an individual makes much of being attacked as a 9/11 public figure, but mark this-- this person is not attacked by Killtown, Jennifer, or Constitutionalist in that thread. No intimidation attempts are made against them. That's odd--very odd.

It takes time to see these things.


Some needed education about what a public figure is

It would be funny if it wasn't true...

A mate of mine informed me there is a point by point rebuttal by someone who is confused about what a public figure is.
(the below was explained by the same person who sussed who 911stalker was)

A public figure is someone who has chosen to make their identity public, either by publishing their information or agreeing to be interviewed on telly or by a newspaper. At that point one may republish that identification within reason. This does not however include their address or phone number, unless of course they have given permission to publish this.

Everyone else is a private person and publishing their person information without their consent is invasion of privacy, and the party(s) involved maybe be held legally liable for any damages that may result. And the longer such information or suspected information remains public, the less likely feigning ignorance will protect the offender once the hammer does fall.

Jennifer Wynhausen is a public figure; she has chosen to be interviewed on television, as this video at this link shows:
(click on the video link under Julia Silverman's name--this video was brought to my attention by an individual who was able to prove by comparing email headers that 911stalker was Jennifer, not Nico.)

Originally posted at aayers blog:

(still shot by 911veritas)

Jennifer Wynhausen's name can be used in the context of 911activsm.

If Jennifer Wynhausen were to email me (before she was blocked) and request I not use her name, I might respect that out of courtesy, but I would be under no legal obligation to as she herself chose to be a public figure. As it is all she's sent me is vaguely threatening tot and, ironically, attempts at invasion of privacy.

I'll be happy to re-explain this distinction again if I hear it is needed.

In a similar vein there is apparently mockery about privacy concerns, by an individual who does not realize this contradicts their story of being stalked, photographed and harassed by unknown parties. Anyone who had genuinely felt harassed and threatened would be more than understanding of anyone's privacy concerns. By mocking this issue they expose them self as a hypocrite and


I almost forgot--probably because this is beyond silly...

There is also wild speculation at this site and others that I'm cavorting about the Internet blogging 24/7, apparently getting little or no sleep.
(This may be from the noplanes spam list or made up whole cloth; its been spread about a couple of boards not just these wankers. Who started it is anyone's guess--though I'd suspect J.W.).

I am able to do this by some magical means that must not include a computer or a wireless network I'm aware of. I have no laptop. My time is limited to a couple hours a day on a crap machine that is SLOW. Nonetheless, I am somehow able to accomplish quite a bit or so I hear while running errands, watching movies(saw The Dark Knight today)and looking for something better than a bedsit at the crack of dawn.

This is an attempt to inject sanity, knowing in all probability that's futile. Those spinning these tales have a combination of utter terror at admitting they could be wrong about anything, combined with a compulsive need for attention that virtually guarantees loads of more stories seeing Jenny everywhere, lurking at your blog, behind your curtains, under the floor boards--anywhere you can imagine and a few I'd rather not.

Right, I should sign off--getting punchy and I could be getting ill-- I'm a tad feverish--but I'm sure being laid up in bed(if it comes to that) won't stopped me from being sighted anywhere and everywhere by those who desperately need something to blog about.



Like many others of this movement, have been attacked for years. There is a thread on my site that has a collection of them.

The first people that attacked me were frequenters of the Howard Stern Bulletin board. When the Howard Stern site closed down, another virtually identical site opened up. Some of us went to it to post more 9/11 related information. It wasn't moderated, so people would attack and slander me and my family like nobody's business.

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.


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.

Then, the attacks started to come from within the movement as well as from the debunkers.

For anyone who thinks it's been easy, it hasn't. It has taken its toll on me. More than I could ever describe in a comment on a blog. One of the few things that helps is the thought that the reason I am attacked is because I'm good at what I do.

Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?

Jon Gold and others like him

Jon Gold and others like him have, to the contrary of what these people who have purported to know the "real truth have said, done a tremendous amount of work for the movement by focusing on the most solid evidence available. It is those who run websites like the one described in this blog post, who care only to divide the movement, and declare those who do not agree with them as "fake truthers," who are the real enemies of truth and the real people who are slowing the progress of this movement.

Justin A. Martell

In a soldier's stance, I aimed my hand at the mongrel dogs who teach! Fearing not that I'd become my enemy in the instant that I preach! My pathway led by confusion boats...mutiny from stern to bow!