Forum

TruthMove Forum

TruthMove Forum » TruthMove Main Forum

STJ911 Misrepresented in Draft Bill Sent to 8 House Members (6 posts)

  1. Arabesque
    Member

    Scholars for 9-11 Truth & Justice Misrepresented in Draft Bill Sent to 8 House Members http://stj911.org/press_releases/Misrepresentation...

    Berkeley, CA, October 22, 2008 -- On October 18, 2008, an OpEdNews article titled, "8 House Members View Draft Bill on Independent Science/Tech Probe of WTC 1, 2, 7 Collapses," was published by four members of the group Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice (STJ911.org). The authors of the article and draft bill are not spokespersons for Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice, and therefore are individually responsible for it.

    Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice does not endorse the draft bill due to the inclusion of numerous unscientific claims and misrepresentations, and condemns in the strongest of terms any associations between the organization and the claims presented by the authors of this bill. As stated at the front page of their website, Scholars for 9-11 Truth and Justice "take[s] care to present the strongest, most credible research available..."

    While in agreement with the authors of this bill that a new investigation into the tragic events of September 11, 2001 is warranted, representatives of the Scholars group note that the draft bill and article lack basic scientific rigor and credibility, with statements such as, "the entire WTC [complex] was destroyed by directed energy weaponry (DEW)," and the ideas that "nuclear materials, missiles or DEW weapons were used." The sister publication of the Scholars group, The Journal of 9/11 Studies (www.JournalOf911Studies.com), has numerous peer-reviewed scientific articles refuting such claims.

    [...]

    Kevin Ryan, a former Underwriters Laboratories (UL) manager who was fired in 2004 for publicly questioning the NIST report, and a committee member of the Scholars' group, says the bill is harmful to the cause of exposing the truth. "Basically," he said, "asking Congress to investigate many poorly defined, and highly implausible hypotheses minimizes the chances that Congress would be willing or able to investigate the actual evidence for the demolition of three WTC buildings." In fact, the bill also omits any mention of the 9/11 Family Steering Committee, which provided hundreds of questions left unanswered by the 9/11 Commission.

    Posted 16 years ago #
  2. nornnxx65
    Member

    Here's my take on it:

    Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice Rejects Association with Directed Energy Weapons and Mini-Nukes in Draft Bill http://911reports.wordpress.com/2008/10/23/scholar...

    From my article: "The “22 nationally recognized experts” are not named, and this statement only says it was sent to them “for review and changes”; it does not say what their response was, or that any of them actually support the draft published at opednews.com. Steering committee members of STJ911.org were sent a copy of the bill, and they decided not to support it, for the reasons outlined in the STJ press release; no endorsement was given by the organization, though Ellis refers to the bill’s four authors as “Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice”."

    STJ911 committee members didn't endorse it; who are the rest of the 22? And how in the world does a Phd. justify misrepresenting STJ and promoting misinfo?

    Posted 16 years ago #
  3. nornnxx65
    Member

    Hello truth activists,

    Barbara Ellis has posted the response of herself, Hirschhorn, Ball and Pease on the thread for the STJ911 press release posted at opednews.com.

    Scholars for 9-11 Truth & Justice Misrepresented in Draft Bill Sent to 8 House Members http://www.opednews.com/articles/Scholars-for-9-11...

    (Ellis bill at OpEdNews) 8 House Members View Draft Bill on Independent Science/Tech Probe of WTC 1, 2, 7 Collapses http://www.opednews.com/articles/8-House-Members-V...

    (My commentary at OpEdNews) Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice Rejects Association with Directed Energy Weapons and Mini-Nukes in Draft Bill by Erik Larson http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/diarypage.php?did...

    If you support investigation of 9/11, including evidence of controlled demolition of WTC 1, 2 & 7, and you disavow association with debunked theories that discredit the 9/11 Truth Movement, i.e. DEW and mini-nukes, here’s a couple simple things you can do:

    1) Click on the link to the STJ press release to boost its visibility in popularity/page view rankings at OpEdNews 2) Leave a comment- or several, if a discussion starts or trolls/shills appear.

    Suggestions for commenting:

    1) Quote from Ellis’ press release and bill, debunk nonsense and promote good evidence, with links

    2) Pose questions and suggestions to Ellis; don’t attack her

    3) Ignore trolls and shills; even make it clear you’re ignoring them by repeating steps 1 and 2 as replies to their comments.

    Posted 16 years ago #
  4. Arabesque
    Member

    The latest from Joel S Hirschhorn, who was behind this "Draft Bill"

    He's a member of "POLITICAL LEADERS FOR 9/11 TRUTH LAUNCHED TODAY"

    Joel S. Hirschhorn, Senior Staff Member, Congressional Office of Technology Assessment 1978-1990. (Charter Member of PL911Truth) Click here to see statement. http://911blogger.com/node/19527#comment-205469

    Hirschhorn supported a bill to Congress endorsing the investigation of DEW, saying by email:

    You continue to argue the wrong issue and also to denigrate most of the scientific world that does not accept your views. Over my long career I have routinely observed how arrogance breeds self-delusion. I used to conduct studies at the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment. In that capacity I routinely interviewed very credentialed scientists and engineers who wanted to work for OTA or serve on advisory panels. Based on all your views you would never have been selected. It takes a special kind of mature, sophisticated scientist or engineer or architect to be able to critically and objectively examine all data and theories, and perform vigorous comparative analysis that supports what often are unpopular conclusions.

    http://911blogger.com/node/19527#comment-205512

    After getting kicked out of STJ911, he is now "co-chair" of Fetzer's scholars group.

    Posted 15 years ago #
  5. truthmod
    Administrator

    It takes a special kind of mature, sophisticated scientist or engineer or architect to be able to critically and objectively examine all data and theories, and perform vigorous comparative analysis that supports what often are unpopular conclusions.

    This guy sounds like a real creep. Sometimes when these people talk (or write), it seems like they're actually mocking our effort to be logical and rational...

    It's been a while, good to hear from you.

    Posted 15 years ago #
  6. Victronix
    Member

    Yes, I think Joel Hirshhorn is the new Morgan Reynolds. It's pretty much the same formula. His articles are listed on Fetzer's site, just below "The Science of 9/11" and just above "Possible Evidence of Video Fakery".

    http://911scholars.org/

    http://twilightpines.com//index.php?option=com_con...

    Things are ramping up to cope with the new Administration and the possibilities it brings.

    Posted 15 years ago #

Reply

You must log in to post.