I've finally been banned from Screw Loose Change. It's sort of a relief, actually--I was getting too attached to sparring with those tossers.
Why the banning? one might ask. Well it was simple for me: I needed an appology or revenge. And since James has deleted all philosophical context, it falls to me to archive the event.
It all began April 20th when some sick git called "killtwoofers" in a misguided attempt to scare me off-line put up a hate blog called "What Twoofers Deserves" which I blogged here and you can see here, if you must.
At 911Blogger, we flagged the blog,I swapped threat stories with the mates and it started to die down. Then the Screw Loose crew started saying I did it to make debunks look bad.
On reflection this may have been the point of the op all along--give those debunks who are dimmwitted, slow, or just looking for an excuse, something to throw at Jenny. After all, anyone who's paid attention to the war zone knows very little upsets me. In fact only three things have made me angry enough with debunks to say something on-line:
1--our Alex claiming casualties in Iraq were insignificant.
2--BJEdwards saying assulting children is okay.
3--this matter, claiming Jenny would enable evil people on-line.
At that point I felt it nescessary to to file a formal compaint with Google, something the real perp would never do, as Google has ample resources to track them down. I blogged my ongoing corespondence with Google here and here. Again it was dying down. I figured that except for my periodic updates with Google there was nothing more to add. Then the unexpected happened: the perp came to 911Blogger.
As I blogged here, I was up late reading comments at 911Blogger. Traffic was slow, about one comment an hour. Then I noticed this prat relkceh09 posting Nico shite, including that poster sized thing with all the connections to the alledged 911truthling cultists. I checked the profile; they had only been a member for a little over 2 hours. When I confronted them, first they posted a flattering Jenny Sparks pic. Then I asked about the hate blog and it all came out: relkceh09 was Nico Haupt and he claimed he could make it stop.
This changed everything because I knew for a fact Nico had posted in the new haloscan comments at Screw Loose. That meant, as far as I was concerned, Screw Loose was enabling relkceh09/nico/killtwoofers AND trying to blame me. I posted an ultimatum: I get an apology form the debunks for saying I put that peice of shite up or I'd start spamming their blogs with killtwoofer's content. I even emailed a debunk privately to make sure the message got through.
On Wed night, the 25th of April I had an epiphany: this wasn't about 9/11 anymore. Then I knew what was likely to happen. It was time to say goodbye:
Well, it's been a giggle, but nothing lasts forever.
Mr. Bennet and Mr. Curley, I DO hope it's all been worth it--and a decade from now I hope you can still say the same, and live with yourselves.
TAM--you've been a bit of a disapointment lately--I thought you had more moral courage than you demostrated, but that fell to someone else--
civilized worm--you poor bugger. Still can't post? Cheers for the emails--really; it's nice to know one debunk has his head screwed on straight, even if we'll never agree about 9/11.
Gary--haven't seen you around--I miss your cute wee avatar! I suspect you're a bit too genteel for this war zone--take care love.
ALex--you're a cynical piece of work, aren't yeh? No one's fooled by your recent calls for level headedness--anyone can see from past posts your love of insults and attacks. Hope you can live with yourself.
consdemo--I am in awe of anyone who can believe six impossible things before breakfast--or in your case, two contradictory things all the time. I want to feel sorry for you...
Sword of Truth--well what can I say we don't already know? You're either a hack or a tool. And where did yeh get SIX from? Never mind--doesn't matter anymore.
pomeroo--please, for you own sake, get some professional help.
The rest of you debunks who frequent here aren't worth a mention.
Isn't it odd, how out of all of you, only one of you demonstrated any moral courage--and he can't post here anymore?
Well, that's all for now--Jenny's got odds and sods to tie up...
BTW--South Park? Please--it's a laugh but it's hardly a 9/11 resource.
And then I left this post at Screw Loose--though it has been deleted since:
So, I was checking Sword of Truth's Non-blog and got to thinking about the real sword I bought a month ago.
This is personallly ironic because I've been a Scadian for years, have always wanted one, learned how to broadsword fight, and have a slew of knives daggers, machetes,--but for some reason I've put the sword purchase off for years. Course now I have one, it'll multiply--like the daggers--but I digress.
The point is combat reveals truths--whether it's legal, physical or verbal--in real life or on-line. The truth is this lastest scirmish between myself and James(and to a lesser extent Pat) has nothing to do with our opinions about 9/11. This fight is about who we are as people.
James is the person who runs away and ignores what he doesn't like or doesn't want to handle. He's also the person who will happily enable a sociopath if it scores some points with this "side".
I am the person who would pull someone like James out of a fire, even though I have no respect for him. I am the person who, if someone pisses me off I go straight to the source. And I am also the person who, if accused of enableing evil people, will demand an appology until I get it or I get my revenge.
Our politics are irrelevant. The out come would be the same even if our politics were reversed. Because James is the person who runs away, and I'm the person who fights to the bitter end. And when cornered, the person who runs away will do what ever they can to avoid the fight.
I can't allow someone to say I would scare people who've done me no harm and get away with it. I can't allow people to say I'd enable sociaopaths and get away with it. And James can't capitulate. And since neither James or Pat have said they will apologize for the former, there is only one way this can end--with my revenge and its consequences.
It was a laugh, and I'm surprised I'll miss you debunks--in a perverse twisted way-- but nothing lasts forever.
Game's already in play--so let's finish this.
And then I hit every thread I had time to with this:
I do not endorse the message that follows. I appologize if anyone is offended or frightened. However it is the example of the sort of thing self appointed debunkers feel is an acceptable way to attack 911activists.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
Jenny Sparks. Wouldn't it be Great?
Wouldn't it be great to wake up with the following news....
Jenny Sparks found dead. Each of her nipples had been bitten off. Her left eyeball had been removed with a pair of tweezers. Two fingers on each hand, along with two toes on each foot had been cut off with scissors. She layed sprawled out on the floor. Her arms nailed to the floor, crucifiction style. Carved into her torso were the word "DIE TWOOFERS" over and over again. The official cause of death was drowning. Her lips had been superglued together and a continuous flow of water was seeped into her nostrils.
Wouldn't it be great?........<<
You can find the original at
Note--to the best of my knowledge not ONE debunk has flagged this blog or complained to Google--the most efficient way to catch the perp, even if it really was me, as they claim.
And when eegits like consdemo kept lying about me, I hit it again.
On Thurday night, April 26, I was banned from Screw Loose Change.
The thing that's still odd is why people with a proven record of faking blogs and posting with socks were passed over to blame Jenny. These are not suspicions, mind, but PROVEN:
ewing2001/ Nico Haupt--his most infamaous example is 911BloggerSS. (WARNING--contains disturbing imagery. As a historical note, Patrick Curley found this amusing. I wonder how he even knew it was Nico--considering Nico copped to it weeks after it was blogged at Screw Loose)
B.J.Edwards--911Booger. He has had a laundry load of socks banned at 911Blogger--arty, charlied, bje--among others.
And then a couple of others who seemed to be, shall we say, obsessed with making the charges stick to me:
consdemo--while claiming no one cared about the hate blog, he/she continued screaming "Jenny did it", even after everyone else was getting a clue and being shamefully silent.
ed--an annoying prat who tried to make it sound like talking to Google was hopeless.
Had it not been for relkceh09/Nico popping up at 911Blogger, any of these last three would be suspects.
I had at one point wondered if it was possible to ban me after this fiasco on Brainster's blog:
I'd worry less about Naomi and more about your little blame fast:
Gravatar" title="Gravatar" style="margin: 2px; padding: 1px; float: right;" class="gravatar"> Jenny, you are now banned from commenting atBrainster's. Take your gripes over to Screw Loose Change.
Gravatar" title="Gravatar" style="margin: 2px; padding: 1px; float: right;" class="gravatar"> Wow, that was quick. Banning me for giving evidence of a debunk out of control? You'd think a reasonable peron would give at least ONE warning. You realize that looks ridiculously suspiscious. Sure the real reason isn't that you've found out what's happened to other debunks? All I was asking for was an appology...
Gravatar" title="Gravatar" style="margin: 2px; padding: 1px; float: right;" class="gravatar"> BTW--that banning thing has a few bugs in it...
Guess they got the bugs out. I'll close with my last two posts at the Chief's Brief:
You really should read the responses to your comments at 911Blogger--and follow the links in a timely fashion. I even talked to civilized worm about making sure you got the messege--but he doesn't seem to care so much what happens to you.
You shouldn't have jumped on that "blame Jenny" bandwagon. And now you refuse to check that IP--which is 220.127.116.11.
This is the perp. Has he/she posted in your haloscan comments, love? It's the least you can do after saying I would put up that piece of shite that scares some people and could get people hurt. I'm not a coawrd like you--I go to the source if I have a problem with a person--AS YOU CAN SEE. No "impostering"(the perp's phrasology) need apply.
Even if the perp hasn't posted(but I have reason to believe they have), it'll prove it wasn't ME.
Then I want a fucking apology. This isn't about 9/11, love--this is about you lot saying I would enable sociopaths. That's a matter of public safety. Whole different game, that.
You're already past you're deadline--so what are you going to do, James?
rather than carrying on this drama queen thing.
It really does take one to know one, Jimbo. Remember this STARTED because some debunk decided to attack me on-line and YOU and your mates decided to blame me for it. If the blame is public than then the appology has to be public too.
So, I interpret this as you will NOT be blogging an appology.
Suit yourself. Don't ever say I didn't give you a chance...
See I happen to KNOW the one of the perps(the one who confessed said "we") has posted in the new haloscan. Course they could have done so from a different machine, but I can all but guarentee that machine IS NOT in Oregon.
Be seeing you--but not for long.
As I've said, I'd rather be banned than let anyone believe I posted that evil blog. Mind, some idiots will still believe it, but not because I LET them.
Comment at 911Blogger, if you must.
A Historical Note: I stole the title from pomeroo's thread at JREF, after he was banned at 911Blogger for excessive insults, rudeness, personal attacks--well, excessive EVERYTHING, really. That one's mental, he is.