New Anti 911 Truth Website

[paul wright]

From personal experience I know that large sums have leeched out of West Yorkshire Truth Campaigners funds in order to get the show on the road
Someone likened it to a hobby, like model railways, to which you'll willingly contribute funds, because, unlike investing in Hornby, this will hopefully buy us a better future
Financially its all outflow, with very small income

[ian neal]

[Belinda]

LATEST CORRESPONDANCE WITH OUR CULTWATCH FRIEND!

-----Original Message-----
From: Belinda M. McKenzie [mailto:b.mckenzie@btinternet.com]
Sent: 27 October 2006 10:24
To: 'The Secretary'
Subject: FW: f.a.o. Larry O'Hara


Dr O'H

Is Anarchism a closed shop? Was the Anarchist Bookfair a private event?

Thugs are everywhere and we're not exempt from people whose passions occasionally run away with them but on principle we don't endorse thuggery, violence or any form of intimidation such as I gather the organisation Redwatch goes in for, is Cultwatch modelled on that? We note your invitation on your site for people to help "deal" with the 911 truthers, then there's your cryptic "you will be hearing from me, at a time and in a manner of my choosing". OOOOH!!!

If anything unpleasant happens to any of us you would instantly be the first suspect.

Back to the ABF, if you have on tape the rib-digger in question and he is one of our group we will apologise to your co-editor but you'd have to show us the tape to convince us because of your economy with the truth so far.

And BTW during their time in MI5 neither David nor Annie saw any evidence that Redwatch was connected to MI5 or vice versa. Have you any evidence, if so why haven't you published it?

As for psychiatry/politics, I repeat, a person who has been pursuing a personal vendetta against a well-known critic of the intelligence services for years and years, fabricating false information in the process to support his case, must either be an agent of those same services or mentally unstable/obsessive, I can't see any middle ground here but if there is please tell me what it is?

Preferably as I said join us at a public meeting where we can all hear what you have to say and discuss it in the normal manner.

Must go out now. Copying all this to our Forum so everyone's in the loop.

Belinda




-----Original Message-----
From: The Secretary [mailto:nineelevencultwatch@uk2.net]
Sent: 27 October 2006 07:49
To: Belinda M. McKenzie
Subject: RE: f.a.o. Larry O'Hara

Ms McKenzie,

you claim "we welcome the chance to have a debate, provided people can be civilised and not descend into personal mud-slinging".

That is, patently, a lie

--when I had a public debate with Shayler it was civilised: the DVD proves it

--when you & your cult invaded the BookFair last year, it was anything
but: abuse was hurled, my co-editor was physically dug in the ribs & back
by one thug only feet away from you

--questioners were constantly shouted down.

Don't forget, we have a tape-recording.

--furthermore, the psychiatrisation of polirics entered into by you personally concerning myself on your web-site also proves otherwise.

The long-standing analysis of Shayler/Machon's activities including their implausible conversion to 9/11 'truth' is not mud-slinging, but detailed & relevant analysis.


In any event, the article which offended your cult so much--which none of you have dared answer--was not written by me, although I edited it & fully support every single line.

Dr Larry O'Hara



Dear Doctor O'Hara

Calm down - no one's dictating to you. You and we have different views that's all.
My concern was/is only that you were/are spreading outright disinformation, along with the personal slanders etc. amongst impressionable young minds and encouraging negativity, although that's in keeping with your philosophy of life as an anarchist I suppose.

Not checking facts/getting your facts blatantly wrong is unworthy of a PhD. I don't know what kind of academic career you've had since but if it's your customary practice not to do your research properly I can't think you'll have notched up much respect in academic circles.

As regards hearing from you "at a time, and in a manner of my choosing" it sounds as if you're planning something sneaky! Why not come out in the open and meet us in a normal manner so that we can deal with all these issues and grievances and hopefully clear a few of them up.

We (9/11 truth) have monthly social meetings in London which are open to all and we often invite outside speakers to address us; they are not all by any means in areement with us. In fact we welcome the chance to have a debate, provided of course people can be civilised and not descend into personal mudslinging.

Alternatively we could meet for a chat in a café, or you could come up and visit us.

Well I leave it to you.

Best wishes

Belinda

-----Original Message-----
From: The Secretary [mailto:nineelevencultwatch@uk2.net]
Sent: 27 October 2006 00:01
To: Belinda M. McKenzie
Subject: Re: f.a.o. Larry O'Hara

Ms Mackenzie,

if you really think my short reply because I have other things to do was "weak" you're even more stupid than I already took you for. The stream of disinformation on your web-site not addressing any of our querstions shows only too well what type of person your cult attracts. And again, I repeat, what a good idea setting up our web-site really was.

I am not going to have my life, and priorities, dictated by the likes of you--even before I read the laighable and pathetic smears by the Machon creature. For at the very time MI5 were consorting with Redwatch Mark I, in Yorkshire, guess which two housemates of yours worked for the security services? As you're a bit slow, I'll give you a clue--it wasn't the cats or the fish.

FYI, I signed myself 'Doctor' because I happen to have PhD (in modern politics) --indicative enough I am a competent researcher. If you were, you might be able to find out what it was in.

You will be hearing from me--at a time, and in a manner, of my choosing.

Yours Sincerely

Doctor Larry O'Hara

PS Keep on publishing the outrageous lies/smears about me/NFB on your site--as one wise poster soon drowned out warned, what you say can & will be used against you.

[Belinda]

re. the correspondence above with LOH forgot to say start from the bottom and work up. B

[PaulStott]

[Skeptic]

Paul,

from what I can tell the mood and content of 9/11 meetings seems to vary depending on who attends

perhaps you should attend more before passing judgement?

it is very bad science to take a single occurence as a sample and base inferences upon it

[andyb]

Paul,

That bookfair was well over a year ago, before a lot of us were even involved in the campaign.

You will find the overwhelming majority in the camapign to be pacifists so not sure why you feel intimidated by this and reluctant to a constuctive debate. All meetings are open public knowledge so do come down, don't worry David won't be there.

I've had a read through your site and there are a few decent points which I credit you for. Please go and do some research on Popular Mechanics though before saying it is recommended reading.

Cheres
Andy

[xmasdale]

"You will be hearing from me--at a time, and in a manner, of my choosing."

This sounds like a threat from Dr O'Hara.

[Annie]

One point about the Anarchist Fair meeting last year. The room was booked and paid for by the 911 movement, and Dave was asked to speak. O'Hara and his sidekick kept interrupting and barracking Dave, and was indeed "shouted down" - not by members of the 911 movement, but by the audience, who wanted to hear what Dave had to say!

Thanks very much for posting O'Hara's emails, Belinda. They give us a useful insight into his mentality. Dehumanising someone as a "creature" is a classic fascist tactic - a bit like saying Muslims or Jews are subhuman and can therefore be persecuted or exterminated.

I also find it risible that he can threaten the forum for smears against him, when he has been grossly libelling both Dave and myself for years, and immediately descends to childish insults and name calling when anyone else from the 911 movement challenges his views.

It is also worth remembering that NFB was set up in 1997, the year that Dave and I blew the whistle, and has always made articles about us the centre of its publicity. This has either been a cynical attempt to maximise profits when we were in the news, or a more malign attempt to erode the standing of the most significant whistleblower ever to come out of MI5.

I should also stress that if any of the campaign's supporters are subjected to the type of harassment, intimidation and violence which has been meted out to activists on the Redwatch list, the campaign will have no hesitation in putting Cultwatch at the top of the list of suspects.

Anyway, I recommend that we expend no more energy on these people. They are too focussed on their personal vendettas to want to look seriously at the evidence of 911, which is after all the purpose of this forum.

So thanks everyone for all your support, but let’s now focus on the business at hand - getting to the bottom of the events of 911.

Regards

Annie

[Larry O'Hara]

I am disgusted--if not surprised, at the level of malicious invention & fabrication contained in the above post by Machon & other cult members. I have taken the step of joining in order to pre-empt the vile slanders above from becoming accepted as "fact".

1) contrary to the repeated claims above, I have never "threatened" 9/11 cult members--my response to McKenzie about answering her at a time & place/manner of my choosing means exactly what it says. For I have a number of choices
--in the next issue of NFB magazine
--on the www.911cultwatch.org.uk web-site
--on the associated blogger site
--even on the www.borderland.co.uk web-site
--or by posting here

2) The persistent and malicious attempts by posters above to accuse me of "threats" & "intimidation" is a blatant attempt to divert attention from the thuggish behaviour of 9/11 Cult members at the Bookfair last year--indeed they made up the majority of people at that meeting, as Machon well knows, and there was no permission for Shayler to speak, indeed the incursion was planned in advance (visit the 911cultwatch.org.uk site for web-links to proof of this.

3) How utterly despicable for a spook--Machon--who like Shayler was in MI5 at the time the organisation seems to have been involved with setting up Redwatch/providing it with information, to insinuate the 911cultwatch is anything like it. Will you be blaming the Jehovah's Witnesses because their publication is called Watchtower next? The tactic of setting people up for violence by making false claims is of course a practised MI5 one, that Shayler/Machon know all about.

4) How utterly hilarious that Machon--ever the ego--claims NFB's main publicity has always been her/Shayler. Visit our web-site & look at the issues. Indeed, NFB issue 1, late 1997, contains barely a mention of Shayler/Machon, so straight away exploding that lie.

5) Machon speaks of gross libels--what, where, when? It is interesting that our critique of the pair has been long-standing & genuine--whereas the conversion of Machon/Shayler to 9/11 truth has been recent and implausible.

6) As outlined on the cultwatch web-site, outside the Bookfair last year Machon made a bee-line for us & uttered insulting remarks, in a classic spook tactic designed to precipitate violence--we had none of it then, or now. I defy anybody who listens to the DVD of my debate with Shayler to detect intimidation on my/the audiences part--we don't operate that way, though cults can.

7) I am not prepared to be set up as a 'patsy' so that if any member of the 9/11 cult comes to any harm, for any reason, I and others get the blame. No way. Going right back to 'A Lie Too Far' & 'At War With the Truth' (1993) as well as ''Turning Up the Heat:MI5 aFter the Cold War' (1994) I have stood four-square against attempts to physically intimidate opponents/circulate details to those who might do so. I'm damned if I'm going to tolerate a lying spook accusing me of supporting such now. No way Using the conspiracy mind-set of Machon, did I write these publications because I 'knew' 2-3 years later Machon & Shayler would need attacking? No, the answer is simple--unlike Machon/Shayler my politics, and allegiances, and research interests have been consistent over many years.

Apropos the word 'fascism'--it is not me, but Shayler, who believes in a "Zionist conspiracy". Case closed

[iro]

oh dear, it looks like a round of fierce argument is on the cards

[Ignatz]

Why did this stuff end up in Critic's Corner?

[chipmunk stew]

[Belinda]

The latest - and last - between LOH and me (read top down this time):

-----Original Message-----
From: The Secretary [mailto:nineelevencultwatch@uk2.net]
Sent: 27 October 2006 11:24
To: Belinda M. McKenzie
Subject: Re: FW: f.a.o. Larry O'Hara

Ms McKenzie,

you're not very adept at this research thing, are you?

1) Your snide insinuations that 911cultwatch is interested in
inytimidating people is a cynical maneouvre to divert attention from your
cult's thuggish behaviour

2) The fact that you claim not to have seen one of your thugs digging
somebody feet away from you hardly inspires anybody to think you could
begin to assess what happened in Manhattan 9/11/01.

3) How neat for Shayler/Machon to claim, via you, they now know nothing
about Redwatch/MI5 links. Our research on that was published in Notes
From the Borderland issue 2: the same issue where the careers of
Machon/Shayler was first analysed. We will in fact (& were anyway) be
putting the Yorkshire/C18 article on-line in the next couple of weeks
anyway, and it will be a shock to the likes of yourself to read properly
referenced research.

4) Logic isn't a strong point of yours either is it--you present the two
alternatives as either I (& others at NFB) are working for some state
agency, or I/we are psychiatrically disturbed. The thought hasn't crossed
your tiny mind that there is a third option--what we say is substantially
true. It is this sort of refusal on your part to consider any evidence
you disagree with that marks your movement down as a cult.

5) The snide insinuations by yourself/Machon that I support any kind of
personal targeting of yourselves properly belongs in the sewer.

6) Finally, you have not produced one instance of this so-called
"fabricated false information", but I would love to see one--even though
that itself would be fabricated.

Yours Sincerely,

Dr Larry O'Hara


-----Original Message-----
From: Belinda M. McKenzie [mailto:b.mckenzie@btinternet.com]
Sent: 28 October 2006 11:51
To: 'The Secretary'
Subject: RE: FW: f.a.o. Larry O'Hara

Larry

Thugs & thuggery: You wouldn't get far as a lawyer! My actual words were "thugs are everywhere", which is not the same as agreeing that the guy who ribbed your co-editor if indeed that happened was a) a thug b) one of our group. The room was jam-packed and I don't have X-ray eyes.

But if as you say you have visual evidence of 911-ers being rough why don't you publish that on your cult-watch site? That would really make your point rather than unsubstantiated allegations - "a picture says more than 1000 words".

Snide insinuations: I'm merely picking up on your own cryptic turn of phrase on these emails and on your website (I see you've hastily changed the bit about getting people to help come and "deal" with us!!). People filled with blind, obsessive hatred can't be expected to behave rationally/in civilised ways. Especially since you've set up a site of which the very name echos that of a group notorious for its methods of dealing with its targets. I repeat, the slightest sign of any of that and the finger of suspicion will point straight at you/those you hang out with, you being about the most hate-filled individual we've met and clearly out to 'get' David, whether purely on your own account or on the account of the other parties with reasons for wanting to silence him.

Your upcoming Report: I wouldn't myself be in a position to judge the content of that but in any case I doubt it'll add anything to what I already know about David and Annie or change my view of them. But how about we do a deal: I'll look at your report if you'll watch one of our 9/11 films?! We can then discuss our findings in the critics corner of the UK nineeleven forum which I gather you've now joined - good!

The possibility that what you're saying is "substantially true": sorry, I just don't buy that, in fact I saw in your own eyes where you're coming from the day I first met you. The clincher though is this stuff about D & A's finances of which you clearly have zero knowledge. I repeat, as someone claiming to be a researcher/academic it's extraordinary not to check your facts before publishing something/spreading rumours and in a swoop you've discredited all the other stunning revelations you're about to come out with in this report. In fact I shall assume that any actual evidence you produce regarding D & A's alleged Secret Life will be fabricated and that you've had help from your friends in MI6 for that although I have to say they're not that brilliant at cobbling false evidence in our experience.

On the human level it's sad to be so devoid of love and so desperate to harm someone else that a person loses their reason over it and behaves in a manner which would be merely ridiculous if it wasn't also so dangerous - if you'd supported David in the late 1990s in trying to get his evidence heard by Parliament/the government rather than deliberately trying to trip him up at every turn you could have helped prevent the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. The deaths of the 650,000 innocent people slaughtered in Iraq alone should be on your conscience and I urge you to search that and not make the same mistake again. By avoiding this kind of personal conflict that in fact I still believe you've been put up to, rather than that you're mad, together you and we can help save millions more lives. To do anything else is to connive in the senseless slaughter of the innocent.

I repeat the invitation to you to sever your current associations and come and join us, now you've got as far as the Forum! At least you'd get to know this 'cult' you're watching so busily!! It could be the turning-point in a clearly unhappy life. And I'd remind you that your current masters are not the best when it comes to protecting those who serve them once the job is done - or has failed.

Enough said, I'm not going to continue this correspondence at least not on email, write to me/us on the forum from now on.

Belinda

[xmasdale]

I was at the Anarchist Book Fair meeting last year and can clear up one or two points of contention.

The room where they were showing movies was booked by the 9/11 Truth Movement (though I don't remember whether it was booked under that name or the name of one of our supporters) for the showing of a DVD followed by a talk and discussion with David and Annie. The movie showing was running behind schedule so we got into the room after a long wait. When we tried to show our DVD we discovered the equipment in that room would not play it, so we vacated that room and let the next group of people in to show their movie.

We went into an adjacent room in which a few people were hanging about chatting and snacking. We asked the people in there if they would mind if we had a discussion there with David Shayler. No one had any problems with that so, in a suitably anarchistic way, a few of us moved in. Soon the small room was packed with perhaps forty people in it. I knew all the committed 9/11 truth campaigners who were there of whom, from memory I would say there were between six and a dozen of us.

Someone pointed out to me a group of three men hanging around the door, saying that the largest of them was Larry O'Hara and the others his friends who would be there to heckle David and Annie.

Annie began to speak to the audience, but I had to leave to rescue my car from a parking space where my time had run out, so I missed the ensuing debate, which I subsequently learnt had been quite acrimonious.

I would say that in a packed room like that it was well possible that people could have got dug in the ribs, either intentionally as tempers rose, or unintentionally and it would be almost impossible to see what had happened or who had done it.

[xmasdale]

[Larry O'Hara]

I only joined this group to counter dangerous lies, that I see are still being propagated. And it is to those I confine myself here primarily. I have no intention of becoming a regular poster on your forum.

1) Concerning Xmas Dale's claim to have been absent when the thuggery took place--convenient

2) As too the implication Shayler would have been welcomed to speak--he wouldn't have been, as Fran Trutt's email in advance on this site shows. But then you people aren't interested in 'truth', are you?

2) Concerning the rubbish spewed forth by Ms Mackenzie

a) the principal thug was one of your group, a Canadian by accent I think, & very clearly one of your group. You are welcome to now pretend he wasn't--but you & I know different.

b) If you don't really know the difference between a tape-recording (which we have) & a video-recording (which we do not have & have never claimed to) no wonder you have trouble dealing with the hundreds of eye-witness takes on 9/11 that contradict your fantasies.

c) To my knowledge, there was never any phrase on the web-site talking about 'dealing' with your cult--and I can certainly say it hasn't been changed. Therefore yet another, casual, lie on your cult's part. To be on the safe side, I'll plough through & check, if I am wrong, I will retract.

d) The phrase cultwatch wasn't chosen to echo Redwatch, you dense fool, it was chosen in direct imitation of the religious 'Cultwatch' sites that abound in the world. Why don't you--again--do some proper research and find out? Or are you afraid of research, I am beginning to get the clear idea you are, very.

e) the despicable references to "your friends in MI6...your current masters" are pathetic laughable lies.

Finally, I reiterate, that I joined this site because I strongly believe Shayler/Machon to be inveterate liars who are well capable of staging a "stunt" attack on themselves. From what I recall, Shayler's various tales of attempts on his life are (as usual with him) inconsistent, indeed hardly surprising, as he & Machon lie as they breathe.

You speak of 'lawyers'--if the best you can do to implicate me in advance in any stunt your cult may arrange is an invented quotation from a web-site, claiming (falsely) that this site named after religious cultwatch sites is in fact something else entirely, and, er...that's it, bring it on! Even Machon's friends in Met Special Branch would find it hard to take that one seriously.

GIven some of you are hard of comprehension, I'll spell it out in bold

UNLIKE YOUR THUGGISH CULT, I HAVE NOT ASSAULTED ANYBODY< OR THREATENED OR PROMISED TO, NOR WOULD I. MY PROVEN TRACK RECORD (ALLUDED TO IN MY FIRST POST) IS OF STRONGLY OPPOSING SUCH INTIMIDATION. YOU MAY BE TOO FAR GONE TO UNDERSTAND THIS. MS MCKENZIE< BUT SANE PEOPLE IN THE REAL WORLD WON'T BE. END OF

[Annie]

"Since there's no help,come let us kiss and part -
Nay, I have done, you get no more of me;"

Do grow up, and get a life, Larry. And I wish you all the best.

Regards

Annie

[Ignatz]

[Larry O'Hara]

I have checked the www.911cultwatch.org.uk site, and as I thought, there is no reference to seeking help to 'deal' with the cultists. And certainly none has been removed. Impartial observers, therefore, will be able to work out for themselves exactly what this--along with baseless claims about Mi6, not being able to see 3-4 feet in front of her, and even being unaware of what a tape-recording is, says about MsMcKenzies research abilities. In short, the ideal dupe to be preyed on by Machon & Shayler . Agent Q states her main concern is for the cats in this mad-house--I agree!

[Andrew Johnson]

I think we need to look at some dictionary definitions here:

cult kult,
noun a system of religious belief; a sect; an unorthodox or false religion; a great, often excessive, admiration for a person or idea; the person or idea giving rise to such admiration; (with of) a fad.
adjective applied to objects associated with pagan worship; pertaining to, or giving rise to, a cult, extremely fashionable.

Chambers English Dictionary, CD ROM edition 1996

Thanks Belinda and Annie and David for your immeasurable contributions to the campaign. "Sticks and Stones", ay? People always seem to feel the urge...

Well, let's see...

There are a varity of posts on here and perhaps some could be classed as "cultish" - these, however, are probably the ones which refer to matters tangential to 9/11 Truth. Pillars of 9/11 Truth are based on Science, as I repeat ad nauseam, such as how materials behave when they fall under gravity. Other pillars are based on a re-analysis of evidence discussed in official reports by the US government and how those analyses are greatly flawed.

So, from a brief overview, describing the 9/11 Truth Movement as a "cult" is almost entirely inappropriate. Now, I am sure critics can stack a number of dodgy posts, but these do nothing to dent the cast iron science-based case as contributed to by the following people (not necessarily originally):

Kevin Ryan
Prof Judy Wood
Prof Morgan Reynolds
Prof Steve Jones
Prof David Ray Griffin

So we see the misnomer even more starkly apparent. Whomever has said what to whom, or whatever may or not be on tapes of a book fair event will never change the content of videos of the collapses of WTC buildings 1,2 and 7 and the physical evidence which proves that Muslim Hijackers played little or no part in the "terrorist attacks" on New York. The War on Terror is a lie - let's stop the illegal and senseless wars and deal with the power-crazed world leaders - or is your paypacket more important? Oh well, that's fine then. "I'm alright Jack! Sod everyone else!"

This is basic analysis of evidence, basic science. People who can not see or understand this seem to have difficulty in having a consistent view of our physical reality. That's how it is. Sorry guys!

=============
REG:
Listen. If you really wanted to join the P.F.J., you'd have to really hate the Romans.
BRIAN:
I do!
REG:
Oh, yeah? How much?
BRIAN:
A lot!
REG:
Right. You're in. Listen. The only people we hate more than the Romans are the * Judean People's Front.
P.F.J.:
Yeah...
JUDITH:
Splitters.
P.F.J.:
Splitters...
FRANCIS:
And the Judean Popular People's Front.
P.F.J.:
Yeah. Oh, yeah. Splitters. Splitters...
LORETTA:
And the People's Front of Judea.
P.F.J.:
Yeah. Splitters. Splitters...

[Dogsmilk]

[Bushwacker]

[Dr Hemp]

Larry O'hara is either a complete moron, or works for the security services (or both) - there can be no other explanation on this Earth for his writings.

Personally, I shouldn't give him the time of day, when we have the far more important task of exposing the truth about 911 to the masses and ridding the world of the poisonous Neo-Cons that currently shape world events.

We should take heart that the success of the 911 truth movements and the large numbers of people that have been awakened by DVDs, web sites, literature, public talks, etc.,. This has been achieved by a growing number of dedicated activists from all works of life who share a united goal to get the truth out. The evidence is out there, all one has to do is study it for a short while to know undoubtedly that 911 was an inside job.

We should be proud that our campaign has reached far more people than the web site of Notes From the Borderland could ever dream of. What's more this information is available for free; though I suspect NFB would probably still generate very little interest, even if you didn't have to pay to read their articles.

Ignore Lary O'hara, and carry on with the good work of exposing the truth about 911.

Chris.

[conspiracy analyst]

[Bushwacker]

[chipmunk stew]

[Andrew Johnson]

[chipmunk stew]

[chipmunk stew]