The Simon Weisenthal Center accused credible 9/11 truth organizations of being terrorists, or at least helping to radicalize people into becoming terrorists.

Fox News Commentator Geraldo Rivera reportedly stated that the New York Times Square bombing was carried out by 9/11 truthers.

How should 9/11 truth activists respond to these smear campaigns?

SUE!

It is illegal to make false claims about people. It is called "defamation" ("slander" if it is a spoken lie; "libel" if it is a written lie). There are very clear defamation laws in the United States.

Given that 9/11 truth activists are thoughtful, peaceful people, it is defamation to call them terrorists. They are not terrorists. It is defamation to accuse them of being bombers. They are not bombers.

Instead of becoming intimidated or scared, I suggest we sue. Perhaps a class action lawsuit. A bunch of prominent 9/11 truth activists can get together and sue the Weisenthal Center and Fox News for defamation.

While truth is a defense to a defamation claim, it should be relatively simple to prove that 9/11 activists are not terrorists or violent people. Let the Weisenthal Center and Fox try to prove otherwise. Indeed, if we add a claim that Fox news has called 9/11 truth activists insane (which it has) then Fox would have to prove that we are crazy. That would open the door for the court to consider whether or not 9/11 was an inside job.

And because being called crazy, or a terrorist, or a bomber will obviously hurt the business reputation of the engineers, architects, scientists, legal scholars, security consultants, congress people and others who question the government's nonsensical version of 9/11, we can sue for defamation "per se", where the people bringing the suit would not even have to prove damage to their reputations.

Note: Consult an attorney before deciding whether or not to file a defamation suit. If you wish to bring a class action suit, consult a class action attorney. This essay is not intended to convey legal advice, there is no legal relationship between the author and reader, and the author does not know the specific factual situation of any of his readers.