Gold & Cheri Audio Interview
What do you all make of this interview? It seems just a little ironic to hear Gold demand 911 Truther's stop demanding things.
I've posted a few of the questions asked to Jon Gold by Cheri Roberts below. The text might not be verbatim but it works.
Jon Gold & Cheri Roberts Interview
Cheri Roberts Says -
How would you advise people in the 911 Truth Movement to maybe withhold from their activism what their personal theories are?
Cheri Roberts Says -
"There's a lot of Disinfo out there, as we all know, and you for one have been one of the biggest champions in debating these people, probably the other thing you're very well known for. Like people like Screw Loose Change. But not just them. Were talking about the Jim Fetzers and Judy Woods.
How can we as a truth movement reach out to their base? How do we disenchant them as apposed to write them off?
How do we reach these people that maybe frequent Fetzer's site or anyone else we deem disinfo?...um there's some questions on Pilots For 9/11 Truth....These people have followers..how do we get them to come back into the fold of real truth and information?"
Jon Gold Response -
"I can guarantee if you start showing them the plethora of hit pieces over the years that (inaudible) the information that they are peddling maybe some of them will come to the realization that I shouldn't be pushing this information because it's being used against us."
Audacious
Thing that struck me Jpass was how Cherie infers that Pilots for 911 Truth may be disinfo, and has posted the interview on their forum. Maybe no one's listened to it yet. (6:30 in)
Hi p45
I posted that part of the interview specifically because of the way in which she insinuates that Pilots for 911 Truth are disinformation.
Here's my take...
Has Judy Wood ever had a fan base?
NOPE.
As Cheri suggests, has anyone ever needed people like Jon Gold to decipher truth for us? Do we really need Gold to help us understand why SPACE BEAMS are disinformation?
NOPE.
The only reason to continuously brag about being a 'hero' in regards to Space Beams, Judy Wood and Nico No Planers is to build his their own 911 Truth credibility and associate others with obvious disinformation.
I ask my self "What would more sophisticated disinformation look like and what would more sophisticated agent provocateurs look like?"
Would they not continuously associate themselves with 'the 911 Family Members Victims' and use those victims as crutches in debate? Would they not claim themselves as "heroes' because they took on fake disinformation like NO PLANES or SPACE BEAMS?
The game is the same since the time I stepped onto the scene. Here's something I wrote in 2007:
Omar Saeed Sheikh Disinfo Goose Chase
http://www.911blogger.com/node/5945
Soon after that someone wrote a kind of hit piece directed at me which implies that I'm at odds with "GASP!!! The Family Members!". I see they still have not removed my full name like I asked.
9/11 Press For Truth Accused of Spreading Disinformation
http://www.911blogger.com/node/6083
It's good these fakes have to continuously work to maintain their own credibility. Keep talking and doing interviews!
This is an attempt to thwart research in the name of...
...waiting for something that will never be, ie, a truly impartial official investigation. People like Jon Gold would have us all sit on our hands till the truth movement dies out.
I replied to him several times to point this out, as well as pointing out that 500 times more Iraqis have died because of 9/11 than Americans (killed on the day), and am being downvoted as fast as I've ever seen it happen, like my comments hidden within 3 minutes of going up.
He is now, predictably, calling for me to be banned.
http://www.911blogger.com/node/22370
sorry, but you play right into their hands there
Getting into an argument with Jon Gold and his meat puppets over who are the real heroes of 9/11--Craig Ranke or the Family Members™ is probably not the best way to expose the fake truthers' agenda. Making any of this about personalities as opposed to logic and facts is what people like Jon Gold want. They would rather talk about Aldo and Craig's demeanor and tactics than about their own proclaimed certainty (despite a complete lack of evidence) that AA77 hit the Pentagon. They would rather complain about the movement (rightly) ignoring the Patsystani pork chop transfer than pretend to believe that there is still any doubt about the use of explosives to demolish the towers (and the significance of that fact in undermining the entire narrative including the faked hijackings.) They would rather call for unity and denounce their critics as dividers than have to debate them day in and day out and thereby expose themselves to more people as the dishonest shills for the OCT that they are. When interacting with these people, don't do it on their terms--make them have to do the things they would rather not do, the things they know are unpopular.
Well, I won't have a chance to play into their hands anymore..
...since I've yet again been queued. I've spent 8 out of the past 12 months in the queue at blogger, and being in the queue is the same as being banned, with the exception that you can still vote. Your comments do not go up.
No reason given why I was queued or what rule I broke.
Of course the site is controlled, with an agenda to prop up the OCT and weaken the movement.
I regret that I didn't make it more clear, in that exchange with JG, that my main point re. The Family Members®, is that he's wrong that the only valid 9/11 truth activism is about supporting The Family Members® -- as he attempts to disparage people like Ranke, Marquis and Balsamo by saying "What have they done for The Family Members®?" As if a focus on The Family Members® is the sine qua non of responsible truth activism!
It's actually not activism at all, as it does nothing to get at the truth of what happened or spread that truth more widely. At best, it is humanitarian work, not activism. At worst, it is a pathological pretense of endless grief used to minimize the importance of far greater, ongoing losses, like the many millions of lives destroyed in the middle east.
By now, any emotionally healthy Family Members® have recovered from their grief and gone on. Given that average life expectancy is something less than 80 years, by the time 8 years have gone by, at least 10% of the earth's population has passed away. Even if each dead person left behind only five people who really loved him or her, that's still half the world's population who lost someone they loved in the past 8 years. If they were all still prostrate with grief, life as we know it would have come to a halt by now. So the continued invocation of the terrible grief of The Family Members® rings more and more hollow as the years go by.
In fact, The Family Members® have been a major obstacle to 9/11 truth, since almost all of them accepted the hush money in lieu of seeking justice for the death of their beloved. Had thousands of Family Members® gone on a rampage of talk shows and interviews about the circumstances under which their beloved died, we would be in a very different place today. Think about it: they watched the nation go to war and commit genocide, while they had an advantage of easy access to the media that most of us will never enjoy.
No, it was more important to most of them to take the $1 million plus and live in luxury, while leaving the hard work of uncovering the truth of 9/11 to others.
Jon Gold will never admit that The Family Members® have recovered and gone on to marry other people and enjoy their lives because he needs to prolong the illusion of endless grief as his all purpose Super Dooper Impenetrable Deflector Shield. He uses it to put himself on a fake moral pedestal, while castigating real activists, who have done real work, as having done "nothing for The Family Members®."
So far it's working pretty well for him, as he dominates the central watering hole for 9/11 truth, and has managed to drench any actual facts coming his way with a big spray of goopy, ersatz emotion based on the myth that The Family Members® have suffered unbearable losses beyond what anyone else has ever known, with he, Jon, tenderly by their sides, as their Savior and Protector, a veritable Saint Among Men.
Thanks Casseia and JPass for the supportive emails.
no problem
"Think about it: they watched the nation go to war and commit genocide, while they had an advantage of easy access to the media that most of us will never enjoy."
Right. As much as I feel like I need to apologize for being at odds with Jon Gold's '911 Family Members' I find at times I don't understand the constant focus on LIHOP Muslim Terrorists. Here's the questions family members want answered according to a joint statement posted at 911Truth.Org by 40 victims family members and 100 others.
We want truthful answers to questions such as:- Why were standard operating procedures for dealing with hijacked airliners not followed that day?
- Why were the extensive missile batteries and air defenses reportedly deployed around the Pentagon not activated during the attack?
- Why did the Secret Service allow Bush to complete his elementary school visit, apparently unconcerned about his safety or that of the schoolchildren?
- Why hasn't a single person been fired, penalized, or reprimanded for the gross incompetence we witnessed that day?
- Why haven't authorities in the U.S. and abroad published the results of multiple investigations into trading that strongly suggested foreknowledge of specific details of the 9/11 attacks, resulting in tens of millions of dollars of traceable gains?
- Why has Sibel Edmonds, a former FBI translator who claims to have knowledge of advance warnings, been publicly silenced with a gag order requested by Attorney General Ashcroft and granted by a Bush-appointed judge?
- How could Flight 77, which reportedly hit the Pentagon, have flown back towards Washington D.C. for 40 minutes without being detected by the FAA's radar or the even superior radar possessed by the US military?
- How were the FBI and CIA able to release the names and photos of the alleged hijackers within hours, as well as to visit houses, restaurants, and flight schools they were known to frequent?
- What happened to the over 20 documented warnings given our government by 14 foreign intelligence agencies or heads of state?
- Why did the Bush administration cover up the fact that the head of the Pakistani intelligence agency was in Washington the week of 9/11 and reportedly had $100,000 wired to Mohamed Atta, considered the ringleader of the hijackers?
- Why did the 911 Commission fail to address most of the questions posed by the families of the victims, in addition to almost all of the questions posed here?
- Why was Philip Zelikow chosen to be the Executive Director of the ostensibly independent 911 Commission although he had co-authored a book with Condoleezza Rice?
Want more LIHOPPY questions?
The Family Steering Committee For The Independent 911 Commission
And what about "911 Press For Truth" ?
— Lorie Van Auken, September 11th Widow
I would be fine with this quote but Van Auken is obviously talking about Muslim Terrorists. Watch 911 Press For Truth if you think she is referring to the other 'real' terrorists that were behind the 9/11 attacks.
Something seems to be missing though...hmmm...always something seems to be missing...what is it?
Oh yea I remember...absent is mention of the obvious demolition of WTC 7, WTC 1, and WTC 2. These demolitions prove that this infatuation with hijackers and Muslim terrorists is a diversion that is being embraced and touted as truth, something Jon Gold is supposedly against.
I believe you are right NorthSide. The US government will never sponsor a truely independent investigation into the attacks on 9/11/2001.
Even if another cover-up commission were to take place and blame the planting of explosives on Evil Muslims, that would itself confirm the campaign to hide the truth and nature of the 9/11 attacks from the world since 2001.
People would realize, as you and I have done, that this has resulted in MILLIONS of deaths world wide. These points, if officially acknowledged, would rip US society as we know to shreds and confidence in anything the US Government or it's military and intelligence agencies do would fall at free fall speed to absolute zero.
The obvious demolition of WTC 7 is should be emphatically accepted as the most solid and structurally sound piece of evidence we have at our disposal as 911 Truth advocates.
I'm preaching to a choir here though so I'll stop typing for now.
sorry if i sounded harsh
what you say above is spot on without question. that said, you did not make such good points in that blogger thread and it ended up looking like a coup for Gold and his gang. on their turf they should be taken to task not for their position on marginal, sensitive, and controversial topics but for the marginal, controversial positions they take on utterly inarguable topics like the undeniable fact of controlled demolition and the failure of the OCT to provide the most minimal evidence for the existence of real arab muslim hijackers.
Banning
"It wasn't censorship. It was being responsible"
(This is an attempt to reply to comment “Sorry…
http://www.911blogger.com/node/22378
and will be cross posted to WTCDemolition.com. Com where I know it will not be censored as my last attempts to comment here were.)
Unfortunately, many people who would disagree with you about this can't comment to tell you their side, nor can they repost all their deleted comments from here which would show clearly to everyone why they were censored.
I know it is not (as you will no doubt re iterate in reply) just about anti-Semitism, because a lot of my comments have been deleted here also, and I had nothing to do with that.
I was deleted after weeks of condescending insults by you, accusing me of being from "the dark side" (cant mention the name or else I will be labelled “an individual that posts on WTCD who does not care about this cause” BTW is that a crime here? It is no wonder that people have to resort to asymmetrical blogging /sock puppetry in that case - they have been driven to it by this controlled site. BTW 2, I was not then, but am now, thanks for the link) asking for my history, when all I had done was stood up to your fallacious noise about changing the focus of the movement from CD.
I was censored here when I refused to get dragged into your personal insults and irrelevant accusations, and stay on the issues. Like arguing how wrong your 'focus change' was, or how your alternate 'facts ' were weak evidence, and what you will do if we don’t get an investigation (as is obvious to most).
You are a hypocrite to call for unity, because all you are interested is exorcising or putting off everyone here who opposes your limited plan, and get the remainder to unite behind your lead, and weak circumstantial evidence and hearsay you claim to be “THE Facts”.
Loose Nuke is very fond of telling everyone to back up statements with evidential links, but that never applies to your constant damaging and wrong comments that CD is not conclusive and too hard to understand.
Unlike others, you have never been called upon to make that case by Loose moderator, and debate your objections, and are allowed to time and time again undermine CD without any debate or reason.
(And don’t re iterate that you are only saying we should use CD AND other stuff, because you have often stated CD is Inconclusive-Well prove it!, and Loose Nuke don’t let him say it without that proof)
Many, many people are put off from contributing here because of your bullying condescending arrogant and unrepresentative dominance of every page of this site.
Americans had until last night to lodge their objections against net neutrality, before new rules are written to allow ISP's to prioritise/censor content.
The way things have become here ,it is likely that this site has nothing to be worried about, because many would argue it has been neutralized already, one way or the other.
Jon, if you are sincere about unity, and you and this site are sincere about effecting change, then I would urge you to spend the last few months of net neutrality you may have left , by trying to involve and engage as many people as possible from ALL perspectives in these evidential discussions, instead of turning people off if they contradict you, or by this site exorcising and censoring dissent. Unity is great as long as it is democratic.
Let's democratically (and inclusively) decide what our best evidence is and unite behind that.
Question for Leftwright
Leftwright,If you are here,as an example, I would very much like to know why the above comment was not allowed on 911Blogger.
It would be helpful to know if there is a particular sentence or phase which is un acceptable, or is it just that Jon Gold is protected there and does not have to meet the same standards of evidence or respect for others that cause censorship of such comments.
I would also like to clarify that I did not mean to suggest this site (WTCD)is anti Semitic,and do not consider it to be so. I was just trying to pre empt and side step a 911B typical dismissal tactic ,as it could not be leveled at my contributions to date. I am glad to hear you are here to discuss unity, a discussion which I very much welcome and will contribute to respectfully.To this end I decided to leave this inquiry to you as a side issue should you be gracious enough to comment.
First of all,
let me make it quite clear that I am not here to discuss and/or defend every decision made by the moderating team at 911Blogger, as that would require me to revisit all the decisions others have made in the past, which I think any reasonable person would agree is far too onerous a task to undertake.
That said, let me first say that I regret very much that that particular blog was posted in the way it was at the time it was because it unnecessarily inflamed an already contentious situation. Unfortunately, I was not fast enough to address the issue before someone else did and we just have to deal with it and move forward, as we do with everything in life.
More specifically, I would say that the bulk of your post was generally off-topic (the topic being "Should individuals that use sockpuppets be tolerated"), was more a laundry list of complaints directed at more than one individual, was unnecessarily argumentative, included personal attacks and attacks against the site. Any one of these reasons is sufficient to put the comment in moderation.
I am not blind to the irony (some might say hypocrisy) here (please see my first statement above, but we have to draw the line somewhere and we don't allow full blown flame wars. [I noticed someone had a very short stay here recently, so the moderators here have standards and are "controlling" things to a certain degree, which I hope everyone agrees is their right.]
Clearly, there is a lot of anger and frustration as certain issues have not been addressed adequately nor has there been the kind of transparency regarding some decisions that I would've liked. I understand and accept the reasons for some of this and part of why I've decided to be more fully engaged at 911blogger and start a dialogue here is to hopefully address these issues and come to an understanding that works for most of us (it's impossible to make everyone happy and I'm not going to try to do that, that is just part of the human condition).
Going forward I would encourage everyone who has a comment that is not published to contact me directly through the site to see what can be done. However, I do have a life outside of 9/11 and 911blogger, so don't abuse the process and if you do, don't expect a reply (i.e. if you repeatedly ask about comments that are clearly over the line).
We are in the process of clarifying and revising the site rules. Hopefully, this will assist everyone in using the site and better understanding how it is moderated.
I hope that was an adequate answer.
Regards,
John
Any Chance
Can we start with this...
I was banned from 911Blogger.com and TruthAction.org almost two years ago with no warning, explanation or response to my e-mailed concerns. Would you reinstate my account "JPass" at 911Blogger.com? I still don't know why or who decided I did not need to have access to sharing material on those sites.
Thanks,
JPass
JPass
As that was way before my time (as moderator at 911blogger, I remember your posts) I have no idea why you were banned, but I will look into it and get back to you.
Regards,
John
hey, me too!
reinstate Kate
no big deal...
i am quite content here, but was offended that there was no explanation for my being banned.
same, offended
Same here. Just one day I couldn't post, discuss or get a warning or response from the moderators. It's kind of easy to say "anyone from WTC Demo was banned" but that is in retrospect.
There never was a 'wtc crew' back then and any condemnation based on affiliation with the so-called WTC Crew is based on post-banning history.
No offense, but I don't consider myself part of any crew, including the 'WTC Demo Crew'. If I established crewmanship with every site I post under, there would surely be crew-conflicts.
What is that saying by Groucho Marx?
"I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member."
I think a good policy would be to have all bannings and censorship accounted for. I can't imagine it happens often (I hope not) so a dedicated 'section' of a site devoted to pointing out 'who, when, how and why' when someone is restricted or banned would be a easy to manage.
"Sept. 21, 210 - Gretavo banned by JPass
Reason:
Overly sarcastic (see http:// link to offense)
Banned By: Jpass
Supported by:
List other admins
good idea JPass!
Sept. 21, 2010 - Jpass banned by Gretavo
Reason: failure to show deference, subsume self to group, toe the gretavo line, etc. (see http://www.wtcdemolition.com/blog/node/2569#comment-18840 )
Banned By: Gretavo
Supported by:
Real Truther, Harley Guy, Posh Israeli, Mossadmed Atta
Seriously though, it's a great idea. :)
EDIT: and thanks for making clear that you aren't part of any (WTCD or other) "crew". There's nothing wrong with friends and allies hanging out, in packs, or whatever, but we should all be striving as you do to establish ourselves independently of any groups--this is the best way to combat groupthink, and counteract the "Sunstein-style" manufactured diversity by having for comparison genuine diversity that will make the fake stuff stick out like a sore thumb.
Also agree. Silent
Also agree.
Silent censorship just adds to resentment and increases the frustration and ferocity of dissent. (I know it does in my case). If valid reasons were given for deleting a comment then it could be refined and re applied "correctly" without the person jumping to conclusions about the overall content of their message.
If you placed all the moderated comments openly somewhere with valid explanations it would go a very long way indeed to restoring confidence in 911 blogger.
Same here
I'd like to go further with this.
I'm open minded about this discussion but still extremely skeptical of www.911Blogger.com. Secretly moderating user contributions and secretly banning users is extremely suspicious and even negligent to the truth about 9/11/2001. Selectively applying these rules (ala Jon Gold) doesn't make things less creepy.
First, a user is 'selectively moderated' which means his/her comments must be 'approved by 911Blogger Mods'. Comments can take hours or days before joining the discussion which, unless you live in a vortex, is hours or days along in it's maturity. Now that just pisses me the 'F)(* off and it just might show in my moderated comments. Has anyone else forgone the discussion taking place and just sent messages to the mods in charge of approving your comments?
I could even support this sort of behavior if it was public. But the community really has no idea that someone was wiped out of the discussion. They have no idea how often dialog is restricted and exactly for what reasons.
I would love to have my 911Blogger account re-instated. Maybe I'll use it..maybe not (; probably though. But mainly it's for the record.
Lastly, I haven't forgotten how rotten and fake I believe 911Blogger.com has become. Is it possible that 911blogger.com has helped build up certain myths regarding the 9/11 attacks?
This cross-website discussion helps. And I understand 'human irrationality' and 'we are all human with day jobs and kids'...but let's not forget the extremely violent and diabolical nature of the topic we have taken on.
Someone wired those buildings for demolition.
welcome, LW!
As I'm sure you've noticed, your presence here is bound to elicit two types of questions from many of the users... 1) why wasn't [moderated comment at 911blogger] posted and 2) why was [user] banned? I agree with you that instances of the former will be potentially too numerous to respond to. Instances of the latter, however, are surely of greater importance to those asking, and as such I would like to offer a general appeal. It would seem to many people here that they were banned at 911blogger primarily because they were known to also post here at WTCD, as a form of punishment and/or warning that merely engaging in discussion at WTCD was some kind of unforgivable violation. By most people's standards, this--if true, and think it is--was uncalled for and detrimental to the very understanding we might hope to reach among truth activists who hold diverse views. In any case, yes, being a moderator can be a thankless job, and there are times when one has little choice but to restrict a user who persists in violating a site's published standards of conduct. I respect and thank you for taking on the role at 911blogger, which however we may feel about it is an important site to the truth movement, and for reaching out such that we might, through more--not less--dialogue, work together to advance the cause we all purport to share.
Thank you for your reply,
Thank you for your reply, and I accept and understand your position, and the fact that my reply was a shotgun /multi issue comment. However the result again is to let Jon get away with an off topic outrageous statement himself and prevent a challenge to his comment. It is this constant duplicity which is most troubling for me.
Since we're talking about sockpuppies
According to the comment linked below by JPASS, YT is known for having many sockpuppets.
YT and his sockpuppet brigade
It's one thing to have a few sockpuppets that re not used in a deceptive manner. In fact, I admit to doing this at one time. But it was painfully obvious I was the same user.
It's even understandable people would do this when 911 Truth communities enact secret banning procedures that go un-checked or accounted for such as 911Blogger.com
It's quite another thing to have 20+ user names and accounts that you use interchangeably with different personalities attributed to each. That suggests someone is attempting to deceive others.
Maybe YT doesn't do this anymore.
It's ridiculous to suggest that discussing possible agent provocateurs is wrong or negative. I say speak up! Discuss it. Start naming names. There are surely provocateurs are surely in our midst.
According to Adam Syed, anyone who posted at WTCDemolition.com/blog was banned from 911Blogger.com.
That's fucking CREEPY folks. Considering I was never given a warning and only just found out about this today, it's creepy.
My example is one of how many? Who knows. But the notion of secret bannings that the entire community knows nothing about is fucking creepy and absolutely resembles an organization attempting to control dialog in a deceptive manner.
The campaigns against 911 Truthers such as the BIll Douglas / The Shell Game affair are absolute indicators that 911blogger.com is deceptively attempting to control the dialog and steer people away from specific view points.
I'm working on a decade of experience with the online face of 911 Truth. It's quite obvious who is attempting to control the dialog and restrict it's coverage to only those truths they deem comfortable for the rest of us feeble, weak minded 911 Truth advocates who apparently need a hero named Jon Gold to help us understand that fucking space beams should not be focused on. Thank god for Gold right?
What if I didn't have Gold to help me at that crucial moment in 911 Truth history when Space Beamers were trying to take over the world? I might right now be stuck on 'aliens with space beams shot the towers' instead of 'someone blamed Muslims and demolished the WTC complex with explosives'.
YT = Whitey = Cosmo
whitey, 31 accounts: [1] => whitey [2] => CIAlien [3] => freefall [4] => Anphony [5] => Geronimo_Skull [6] => kIDx [7] => EvilJeff [8] => spellcheck [9] => Il_Duce [10] => Angel [11] => shoogoo [12] => MattHeikkila [13] => 228 [14] => EvilJosh [15] => GNNSUCKS [16] => RobinBanks [17] => PeglegSue [18] => JizzySinus [19] => Rojelio [20] => IsraelForever5 [21] => vegandeathsquad [22] => YT_ [23] => PhysOrgRegular [24] => Schniebster [25] => Schnubster [26] => OPIE [27] => Anphony_ [28] => Jesus [29] => Anphony [30] => Kerri [31] => 53N58