TruthMove Forum

Register or log in:

Username:

Password:

TruthMove Forum » TruthMove Main Forum

William Pepper 9/11 Independent Citizens Commission (DOA?) - NYCCAN (157 posts)

1. Arabesque
   Member

   Dr. William F. Pepper: The New York City Ballot Initiative & the Re-investigation of 9/11 By an Independent Citizens Commission

   reprehensor on truthaction.org forum:

   http://911blogger.com/node/13476

   In my opinion, William Pepper alone is sufficient reason to get behind this initiative. I have communicated my concerns to Pepper regarding the 2007 9/11 "Ready for Mainstream" publicity event in NYC, regarding the unwarranted attacks on members of this site [truthaction] (and 911blogger) and the inclusion of speakers like Alfred Webre; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Webre - who seem more interested in promoting theories like "exopolitics", HAARP mind-control, chemtrails, the "Black Nobility", etc., etc., etc., than offering a serious examination of 9/11. source: http://truthaction.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2918&...

   Posted 16 years ago #
2. truthmover
   Administrator

   In my opinion, William Pepper alone...

   That's a slippery slope if I've ever heard one. It violates the basic premise of principle before association, and really after all variables in this case are considered is just a bit silly. I've got no reason to beef with Rep. Maybe he hasn't had a look at our declaration. :) I'm more concerned that others have the same opinion.

   While I'm not sure it would be fair to the other participants to say that this was a Les production, it carries his trademark penchant for negative association and poor grammar. He's been pushing this for a while, and the "Ready for Mainstream" fiasco doesn't help make it look more credible.

   However, from what I understand Pepper has taken on some part of this project somewhat independent of the rest, such as the "commission," and will hopefully be saving a good concept from a bad start.

   On the other hand, I'm sure I'm not the only one here who thinks that this could be a lot of energy put into something that actually doesn't help. It certainly could. But what if it gets put on the ballot, and gets stomped. That's hundreds of hours of volunteer work down the tubes. And a negative response would give the MSM something to harp on us about for weeks.

   To me, and I'm sure many others, it all rests on what exactly is going on the ballot. I'd think we would hope for something that might actually pass, and that wouldn't immediately get shot down by the courts.

   Anyone have a better idea of where this stands?

   Posted 16 years ago #
3. Victronix
   Member

   But what if it gets put on the ballot, and gets stomped. That's hundreds of hours of volunteer work down the tubes.

   Who'd have guessed?

   First on the list of 'commissioners' is someone I don't know named Edgar Mitchell, but described as a NASA affiliated scientist and someone who walked on the moon. . . .

   So I look him up.

   "Yes, there have been ET visitations. " Apollo 14 Astronaut, Edgar Mitchell, Ph.D. (Sixth Man to Walk on Moon) From Disclosure, pp. 61-64. See also The Way of the Explorer, Edgar Mitchell and Dwight Williams, p. 212. http://www.wanttoknow.info/050324ufotestimony

   Posted 16 years ago #
4. truthmod
   Administrator

   Why always with the UFO connections? Les sure knows how to pick em.

   Posted 16 years ago #
5. Diane
   Member

   To repeat something I said in a more private forum, regarding the issue of who is likely to be alienated by Edgar Mitchell's strong public identification with UFO beliefs:

   You may well be correct about "citizens of influence," and that is indeed a valid concern. If so, that should be the phrasing of Victoria's and Arabesque's objections in public venues such as the Truth Action forum and 9/11 blogger. It is not true that UFO beliefs would directly alienate most Americans in general. But it may well be true that a prospective commissioner's strong identification with UFO beliefs could alienate most intellectuals, making it harder for us to reach engineers and academics who could otherwise add credibility to our movement.

   So I ask that those who oppose Edgar Mitchell on the commission, becuase of his public identification with UFO beliefs, state their objection more precisely. Otherwise it is likely to be dismissed as a silly objecftion.

   Posted 16 years ago #
6. truthmover
   Administrator

   Diane, do you not think that is implied when those of us specifically invested in 9/11 truth, and most likely discussing that topic, address this issue? These are not very public venues in which we are discussing these topics. I think that most of those present understand the context in which these comments are being made. But I also agree with the premise of your post.

   In line with your concerns, I have gone out of my way on many occasions, nearly every time I discuss negative association, to make it clear that I enjoy considering many topics of a pseudo-scientific or paranormal nature, but that I would not mix my interest in these topics with my advocacy of 9/11 truth. And I am not a "citizen of influence." But I can't really ride everything I say with all the appropriate disclaimers. None the less I do repeat them quite often to avoid rubbing people the wrong way.

   Most often when the issue of negative association is raised, it is in relation to public promotion or "citizens of influence." I have often said, as have others here, that our research community is under no restriction in considering any an all hypotheses. I wouldn't flinch if I heard that someone floated the idea that aliens had brought down the towers. Well, I might snicker. However, if they found little evidence to support this supposition and yet continued to do research, bias would be apparent as they would not be adhering to the scientific method. Were they then to publish this hypothesis as having any merit, we would have a problem.

   I think you are correct that we should be a clear as possible when stating our objection to the inclusion of anyone in anything, as it is only our reasoning and not our character that matters in this expression. We certainly don't want people to think that the movement is trying to exclude anyone who happens to find aliens a topic of interest.

   Thanks for the correction. I think many of us enjoy that about as much as someone correcting our grammar. But public perception is very important to this movement.

   Posted 16 years ago #
7. Victronix
   Member

   It is not true that UFO beliefs would directly alienate most Americans in general.

   Yes, I have no problem with that.

   What I have a problem with putting those with UFO beliefs onto the frontlines to the public. Regardless of the number of people who believe in them, that topic is used to discredit us like a formula.

   Otherwise it is likely to be dismissed as a silly objecftion.

   By whom? Most seem to understand that the issue is not about one's beliefs, but about public perception. The response I've seen seems that most support my position, but if it is offensive to anyone, I have no problem with rewording it or adding disclaimers, etc.

   Posted 16 years ago #
8. truthmod
   Administrator

   Watch out, somebody may quote you out of context:

   I wouldn't flinch if I heard that someone floated the idea that aliens had brought down the towers.

   Also, I think our objections are pretty clear. After spending a great deal of time and energy trying to improve the quality and responsibility of ny911truth, and being ridiculed, ignored, and marginalized, you can't blame us for our cynicism. Maybe we should come to a meeting or send yet another email to Frank Morales or maybe the people who are actually members of that group should be responsible for their own actions.

   Posted 16 years ago #
9. Arabesque
   Member

   To clarify I don't have any solid objections or concrete criticisms at this point.

   I believe that if such a commission were to take place, it is a given that every trick in the book will be used to disrupt and discredit it. That includes ad hominem attacks against the commissioners and any "dirt" that can be highlighted. Personally I am agnostic on the issue of UFO's and I don't hold these beliefs against anyone. Of course there are always some claims that are less credible than others and we have seen our share of that used to discredit the 9/11 truth movement by association.

   My suggestion here, is that the commission have guidelines and a code to follow in the situation of disruption, conflicts of interest, or negative public perceptions. This includes the possible removal of members of the commission and its staff. There has to be an understanding that the commission WILL be disrupted and discredited by any means necessary. This would be the single most dangerous challenge facing the sacred basis of the war on terror. If the goal of the commission is truth and justice, any steps must be taken to effectively minimize distractions and negative publicity.

   Posted 16 years ago #
10. jan
    Member

    That a true investigation of the 9/11 attacks be International in scope should be clarified.

    Any serious 9/11 Commission should pull from the most credible, international leaders available. It seems to me that the pool of completely independent Investigators or Commissioners of US origin might be impossibly complex and limited for an honest investigation of this magnitude. Humankind of the entire world has vested interest in justice for the September Eleventh attacks.

    This entire project may be a political diversion from something else going on or a controlled hangout of some type. As truthmover alluded to, if this is the case then very valuable energy and focus may continue to be sqaundered.

    Not meant to be cynical but realistic.

    Posted 16 years ago #
11. jan
    Member

    answering my own question, perhaps diversion from this? http://www.truthmove.org/forum/topic/852?replies=2

    Impressive speakers, with networking opportunities aplenty ...

    Posted 16 years ago #
12. truthmover
    Administrator

    John A. got busy!!!

    http://truthaction.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=11605...

    An Open Letter to Dr. William F. Pepper

    I would like to congratulate you on your efforts to bring the NY 9/11 Ballot Initiative to fruition. Your efforts are appreciated, and I look forward to supporting them.

    As you know, the subject of 9/11 Truth, and the internal politics inherent in any political movement, are difficult landscapes to traverse, and often raise thorny issues associated with objectivity, fairness, territorialism, disinformation and internal rivalries that, more often than not, become counter-productive to the cause.

    As you know, the anti-war movement and civil rights movements of the last century both suffered from these problems. You have done well in documenting these problems.

    I welcome the experience you bring to this issue, and it is my hope that you can help the 911 Truth movement to find a fair and equitable approach to avoiding these unnecessary conflicts.

    It is for this reason that I wish to reach out to you at this time, and respectfully request that you seriously consider the following:

    • An initiative as important as the one you are proposing demands that all suspicion of possible bias and fraud be minimized. It is for this reason that I must humbly request that this initiative not be centralized in the hands of any one local activist group. Instead, I call upon you to establish an executive panel. This executive panel should consist of a diverse selection of the most credible 9/11 historians and activists available. A possible executive panel could include:

    • Dr. David Ray Griffin

    • Janice Matthews
    • Kyle Hence
    • The Jersey Girls
    • Dr. William Pepper

    • Richard Gage

    • Commissioners should be seated based upon a nomination process submitted to the Executive Panel, and a majority vote. Open debate will be allowed, for a limited amount of time, by the community at large.

    • The avenues of investigation conducted by the Commissioners must be pre-approved by the executive panel, and communicated to the public. Commissioners must not be allowed to impose their own pet-theories and/or agendas into the proceedings. Executive oversight must act swiftly to prevent this, should it occur.
    • All press releases and press interviews will be conducted by a pre-approved Press Contact who will only present materials, claims, facts and opinions pre-approved by the executive panel. Unauthorized contact with the Press, in the name of this initiative, must be publicly condemned and disavowed by the Executive Panel.

    As you well know, from your well-documented experiences in the past, political movements can be derailed and discredited by the mainstream media as a result of intentional and/or unintentional disruptions and disinformation. As you also know, this has been a very serious problem within the 9/11 Truth movement. Many of our best efforts have been derailed by disruption and disinformation designed to discredit us.

    The responsibility of steering a citizen’s commission to investigate 9/11 is a very serious one. In seeking to guide this ballot initiative, you take into your hands the concerns of millions of Americans, stricken first responders and victim’s families. In seeking to guide this ballot initiative you may find yourself confronted with allegations of bias as you attempt to expose criminality of the most serious and dire nature.

    I respectfully propose that this is far too serious an initiative, concerning the interests of far too many people, to simply entrust with one man. I respectfully point out that this initiative can have no credibility without the outward appearance of public oversight, broad consensus and transparency.

    I respectfully propose that you act now to ensure this initiative projects the integrity and professional accountability that an issue such as this demands and requires.

    Sincerely yours, John Albanese

    Posted 16 years ago #
13. truthmover
    Administrator

    Jan, I reposted your remark about the international significance of this initiative over on the TruthAction thread. I hope you don't mind. I suggested to John that he include something along those lines. I also suggested again that he have others include their names with his in the message above, to add more weight to its reception.

    I appreciate your comment about being realistic and not cynical. Other truthmovers and myself are quite concerned about the potential for people in this movement to be distracted by projects that are easily lead astray. If only more people had taken seriously our commentary on the "Ready for Mainstream" conference before it occurred instead of after.

    As Truthmod points out above we have to respect our own experience of others and treat them like free thinking adults. We have to respect their experience and acknowledge their actions. And that said, I no longer feel it necessary to extend to Les the assumption that he will benefit from or even listen to the recommendations of others. People define themselves over time through their actions. Everyone should be allowed to make mistakes. But consistent mistakes reveal something about your character. And not necessarily that you are intentionally trying to err, but maybe that you should not be given a great deal of responsibility.

    You can look at our initial response to the ballot initiative four months ago here:

    http://www.truthmove.org/forum/topic/634?replies=8

    We were totally dismissive as the project has Les written all over it. And with reason. Now we find that William Pepper has taken charge, and that may be a good thing, but not if he doesn't agree to what John is proposing above; adequate transparency and executive responsibility.

    John got on my case a bit this morning for perhaps being a bit too cynical. But my response to that was that I'm thinking more than one step ahead. What if Pepper totally rejects the very reasonable request made by John? What's our next move? Do we then continue to assume that he has positive intentions, and simply set aside our concerns in the interest of 'getting something done" or "unity?" No.

    I'm putting some time into this now, because I'm very concerned that it could be a fiasco. But I have no interest in working with Les as a volunteer to collect signatures. I certainly hope for the best, and if this starts looking really solid I may want to support it in some way. But I can't say, based on past experience, that I'm hopeful.

    I suppose we will see what Pepper has to say about all this soon.

    Posted 16 years ago #
14. truthmod
    Administrator

    Didn't they already do this in 2004? With a much better panel? And yes, shouldn't people like Paul Thompson or Nafeez Ahmed be on any commission that's expected to have any legitimacy?

    http://www.911busters.com/911-Commission.html

    Posted 16 years ago #
15. Diane
    Member

    truthmover wrote:

    Diane, do you not think that is implied when those of us specifically invested in 9/11 truth, and most likely discussing that topic, address this issue?

    Not to everyone. Different people come from different backgrounds and are likely to misunderstand what you say if you aren't precise in your meaning.

    Here is what Victronix said in this post.

    reading on . .

    "There have been crashed craft. There have been material and bodies recovered . . . "

    That's all folks! Show's over for any "investigation" done by this commission. Mixing UFO and 9/11 is only to tank 9/11, even if UFOs are 100% real and visiting every hour of the day. The fact is, it's a hotbutton switch to turn off Americans.

    It is not true that UFO's are "a hotbutton switch to turn off Americans," if by "Americans," you mean "Americans in general." Polls show that a majority of Americans believe we've been visited by ET's. It would be more accurate to say that UFO's are "a hotbutton switch to turn off many people in academia," for example. And the latter is indeed a legitimate concern.

    Posted 16 years ago #
16. Diane
    Member

    truthmod wrote:

    Didn't they already do this in 2004? With a much better panel? And yes, shouldn't people like Paul Thompson or Nafeez Ahmed be on any commission that's expected to have any legitimacy?

    http://www.911busters.com/911-Commission.html

    The "Citizens' commission" had no legal teeth. The New York City 9/11 Ballot Initiative would create a commission with legal teeth, with legal jurisdiction in NYC, where the bulk of the crime took place.

    Yes, people like Paul Thompson or Nafeez Ahmed should certainly be considered, or at least their input sought.

    I think John A. is on the right track with his open letter to William Pepper. I would suggest contacting Lorie Van Auken too.

    Posted 16 years ago #
17. Victronix
    Member

    More on Dr. Edgar Mitchell –

    'What You Won’t Read About On The “Our Commissioners” Page Of The NYC 9/11 Ballot Initiative'

    Edgar Mitchel Interview Dateline NBC, April 19, 1996 MURPHY: “Mitchell was conducting some extracurricular experiments on his own time. While the others were asleep in the capsule, Mitchell tried to transmit his thoughts from deep in outer space to friends back on earth. He had a table of random numbers matched up with these symbols At a set time, he would choose a sequence and concentrate. Tens of thousands of miles away, his friends tried to read his thoughts and jot down the same numbers and symbols. Later Mitchell thought the results were dramatic, but not as dramatic as the fallout. The press found out about it, and the headlines caught everyone by surprise, particularly Apollo 14's commander.” http://www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc1923.htm

    October 1998 – Edgar Mitchell Apollo Astronaut – "I am an American astronaut and a trained scientist. Because of my position people in high places confide in me. And, as a result, I have no doubt that aliens HAVE visited this planet. The American government and governments throughout the world have thousands of files of UFO sightings which cannot be explained . . . . Contrary to rumour, there are no alien buildings and structures on the moon. I should know, I was there! I even became caught up in these rumours when a theory started that a moon structure was reflected on my helmet during TV transmissions of my landing. That just isn't true. It's that kind of disinformation which stops credible people admitting that they too believe in aliens.” http://www.drboylan.com/emtchl2.html

    Institute for Cooperation in Space Alfred Webre and Carol Rosin founded the Institute for Cooperation in Space (ICIS) in 2001. The ICIS board is made up of various prominent individuals such as former astronauts Edgar Mitchell & Dr. Brian O'Leary, and others . . . http://www.peaceinspace.com/ab_board.shtml Website: www.peaceinspace.com

    DVD – ‘The Quantum Hologram and ESP’ Starring: Quantum Hologram & ESP-Astronaut Dr Edgar Mitchell “After decades of research and discovery on the cutting edge, Apollo 14 Astronaut, Dr. Edgar Mitchell presents an elegant scientific explanation for psychic phenomenon - The Quantum Hologram. Based on the latest research in quantum physics, this program brings to the general public information previously known by only a few research scientists in the world. Learn the details of a secret psychic experiment conducted by Mitchell on the Moon during his mission on Apollo 14. Watch as he candidly describes a personal experience of psychic and spiritual transformation that was triggered by his Moon landing aboard Apollo 14 and which led to the discoveries presented in this program. Dr. Edgar Mitchell became the sixth man to walk on the moon and later founded the Institute of Noetic Sciences to find answers to many of humanities great mysteries such as psychic phenomenon.” http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0007TKNVU/ref=cm...

    Book: ‘The Way of the Explorer’ by Edgar D. Mitchell & Dwight Williams “Mitchell tells how, while returning to earth, he carried out a private ESP experiment that seemed to yield positive results. Subsequently, he founded the Institute of Noetic Sciences, in order to test paranormal phenomena scientifically. We hear of Uri Geller's ability to bend spoons at a distance and of how Mitchell's own mother had her eyesight restored by American psychic Norbu Chen--until she realized that Chen was not a Christian and her near-blindness returned. . . . We hear how Mitchell . . . came to know the legendary Wernher von Braun, whom he believes was a true visionary rather than a Nazi opportunist.” (von Braun used slave labor to produce V2 rockets in Germany during WW2, for which an associate faced war crimes charges) http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0399141618/...

    customer review for ‘The Way of the Explorer’ “Being a psychic is no job for wimps that's for sure! And yet they come across as a strikingly tempermental lot. Norbu Chen, jealous of Mitchell's all too obvious infatuation with Geller, uses psychokinesis to reduce Mitchell's gold ring into a twisted lump of scrap metal. However Mitchell is not the slightest bit upset or should I say, ‘bent out of shape.’” http://www.amazon.com/review/product/0399141618/re...

    Book: ‘Psychic Exploration : A Challenge for Science’ by Edgar D. Mitchell http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0399141618/...

    Book: ‘Ether-Technology: A Rational Approach to Gravity Control’ (Zero-Point Energy) by Rho Sigma, Edgar Mitchell (Foreword) customer review: “The quality is superb, offering a balanced slice of the development of overunity and UFO physics.” http://www.amazon.com/Ether-Technology-Rational-Ap...

    Keynote Speaker: ‘X-Conference 2008’ ‘Paradigm Research Group is pleased to announce it will again bring together in the Washington metro area a powerful group of speakers to focus on the governmental, political and media aspects of 60+ years of extraterrestrial engagement and societal denial - exopolitics. Collectively, the X-Conference speakers hold enough knowledge of extraterrestrial-related phenomena and government involvement with this phenomena to end the government imposed truth embargo tomorrow.’ http://www.paradigmresearchgroup.org/X-Conference2...

    Interview: The Astronaut Who Travelled Both Outer and Inner Space By Torbjorn Sassersson

    Q: IONS (Institute for Noetic Science) sponsors: "leading-edge research into the potentials and powers of consciousness," and explores "phenomena that do not necessarily fit conventional scientific models, while maintaining a commitment to scientific rigor." What are the major findings of IONS so far?

    EDGAR MITCHELL: "The work at IONS, independently, and in conjunction with affiliated organizations, has helped make the case for conscious choices and intentionality as a basic cause in creating reality. That is to say that Cartesian dualism and scientific materialism are demonstrably flawed concepts."

    Q: Does IONS regard the Out-of–Body phenomenon to be of interest in your research efforts?

    EDGAR MITCHELL: "Out-of-body experiences (OBE) are an interesting phenomenon for study. Quantum principles suggest, however, that OBEs are a variation of remote viewing (RV) of non local quantum information, and that nothing is really ‘out’ of the body."

    Q: Have you yourself experienced OBEs, lucid dreaming, clairvoyance or remote perception?

    EDGAR MITCHELL: "Yes, all of the named experiences."

    Q: You have repeatedly over the years claimed that you have seen proof of Extraterrestrial highly intelligent life forms. Can you please tell us some more about that?

    EDGAR MITCHELL: "Not so. I have never had first hand experiences of ETs or UFO phenomena. Rather, I rely upon the testimony of trusted ‘old timers’ and more modern government and military personnel whose official duties and need to know, placed them in position to have such experiences. I have been briefed by such individuals." http://web.archive.org/web/20070517203510/http://w...

    Ed Mitchell Most Unhappy With Greer Using His NameAs Disclosure Witness (on Washington Times story of the Greer UFO Disclosure Conference) 5-13-1

    Edgar Mitchell: ‘I cooperated with Steve Greer some years ago, but he began to overreach his data continuously, necessitating a withdrawal by myself, and, I believe, several others. I have requested to be removed from any web site, announcements, etc., but see that has not taken place.’

    Jack Sarfatti: ‘Typical of politically-based influence operations. The real motive of the Press Club Event was the issue of militarization of space, not UFOs, on which reasonable well meaning people can differ of course. Since many millions of voters believe UFOs are real, getting control of the UFO movement clearly is a top priority for all the players.’ http://www.rense.com/general10/mitch.htm

    Posted 16 years ago #
18. Victronix
    Member

    If nothing else, it's hard to imagine how someone so immersed in UFOs and clairvoyance could really focus on the issues of 9/11/01 without eventually including a parallel to UFOs being covered-up.

    Posted 16 years ago #
19. truthmover
    Administrator

    Victronix,

    I'm laughing in an appreciative way at your ability and willingness to really drive a point home. You leave no room for doubt. Edgar Mitchell is a really far out guy, and no one to be made responsible for matters of such legal and historical importance as a new 9/11 investigation.

    Interesting that he got mixed up with Steve Greer and the Disclosure Project. I used to follow Greer for the fun of it and always knew that he was a snake oil salesman. Couldn't get enough of the stories about how anti-gravity propulsion and machines that violated basic physics were being hidden from us by the government. The UFO stuff is just fairy tales to me. I suppose Mitchell was claiming some greater logical legitimacy by distancing himself from Greer, and yet the other kinds of pseudo-science he claims to be real are as unproven as those Greer states are in development.

    New Electromagnetic Generators: These are generators that use unique circuitry to tap into the so-called zero-point or quantum vacuum energy located in the space around us. As far back as 1902, Nicola Tesla and Nathan Stubblefield demonstrated the ability to create a rotating magnetic field that accesses this environmental energy that is located in any given volume of space. The result is an off-the-grid system that uses no fuel to run the system. This so-called environmental 'free energy' has been proven scientifically to exist and AERO is working with the most accomplished physicists and engineers who are building these systems. These technologies have the potential to completely replace all current oil, gas, coal, and nuclear power generating systems. They use no fuel and cause no pollution. Energy costs are zero once the device is built and operational. The electric utility grid would be unnecessary using such a system, since each home, business, office, etc., could have its own power generating capability. Using nanocrystalline materials, solid state devices are possible that may eventually be able to power any object that needs electric power. http://www.disclosureproject.org/index.shtml#Whats...

    Posted 16 years ago #
20. Victronix
    Member

    Yes, the focus on what amounts to pseudo science is just as disconcerting as the UFO part in terms of the credibility of anything this project does. Yes, the zero point stuff . . . it's interesting to look into and someone should be looking into bizarre alternatives, but they shouldn't then be on a serious Commission position also.

    Just think, the 9/11 Commissioner who will keynote at 'X-Conference 2008' on extraterrestrials and exopolitics . . .

    I was procrastinating working on a section of a paper I was stuck on, so thought I would look into any connections between Mitchell and Webre, and the more I looked, the more other bizarre stuff came up.

    Posted 16 years ago #
21. truthmover
    Administrator

    As us TruthMovers have done successfully on a number of occasions now, I'm going to make a prediction in the interest of what I think is best for the movement.

    This isn't going anywhere. Its being promoted in the ineffective manner that Les promotes everything. There will not be enough signatures collected. If enough are collected, the initiative won't pass.

    I know that some intelligent and committed people have endorsed the initiative or are participating. They may not be aware of the the reasons why this will not succeed, and have only the best of intentions.

    The actions of Les Jamieson continue to undermine, distract, divide, and confuse this movement. He can not be trusted to administer anything that is important to this movement.

    Personally, I fully advocate the dissolution of this project, a full reassessment of its potential, and a totally fresh start under entirely different leadership.

    Posted 16 years ago #
22. NicholasLevis
    Member

    The ballot idea is great - wish we'd all thought of it years ago. Getting on the ballot would be a big success, and what would come afterward is not foreordained. Would the PTB ignore it, in which case a majority of people might not even know it existed until they saw it on election day? Under those circumstances vote count would be low and it might pass. Or would the media and politicians launch a campaign to kill it, thus fronting the issue themselves and letting everyone know the proposition exists? That has backfire potential. (Remember, this fall will see the Gitmo Six Show Trial - that has a lot of backfire potential too.)

    Of course, LJ and his crew are not going to get this on the ballot, which I think is your point. We know why, we've seen him in action. But I do not "advocate the dissolution of this project." That's superfluous. Why should I want to be seen as attacking an undeniably great idea, or take abuse in trying to explain LJ to the deluded? Most people who are taken in by him only seem to learn what he is about from the experience. They never seem to figure these things out from mere observational wisdom, but sooner or later he finds ways to discourage them. Sadly.

    Which brings us to this: Obviously, "a totally fresh start under entirely different leadership" is a great idea, too - and for a start it needn't bother with this initiative, or start life as an alternative or competition. "Someone" who wants a fresh start should just do it; raise the flag and see who gathers.

    Posted 16 years ago #
23. truthmover
    Administrator

    The ballot idea is great - wish we'd all thought of it years ago. Getting on the ballot would be a big success, and what would come afterward is not foreordained.

    Meh...I'm not convinced.

    Would the PTB ignore it, in which case a majority of people might not even know it existed until they saw it on election day? Under those circumstances vote count would be low and it might pass. Or would the media and politicians launch a campaign to kill it, thus fronting the issue themselves and letting everyone know the proposition exists? That has backfire potential.

    Not enough people will sign it. It won't get attention. It won't pass. No optimism on my part.

    But I do not "advocate the dissolution of this project." That's superfluous. Why should I want to be seen as attacking an undeniably great idea, or take abuse in trying to explain LJ to the deluded?

    I advocate dissolution because this project will waste the time of many, and very well might squander some of the enthusiasm that a similar and more competent effort might garner. I advocate dissolution because I know that Les will not be removed from the project and will very likely be responsible for its failure.

    I am not attacking the concept, although I don't think its a strong one. I am quite obviously attacking its execution. Nick, we all seem to be quite willing to criticize the likes of Fetzer or lately even Barrett. Les is in the same category for me, and just because others haven't got to that point with him does not mean that I would soften my tone. I'm not talking to the deluded. I'm talking to people who read this forum. And they are free to respond.

    Most people who are taken in by him only seem to learn what he is about from the experience. They never seem to figure these things out from mere observational wisdom, but sooner or later he finds ways to discourage them. Sadly.

    This I agree with to some degree. People often do need to simply learn from experience. But countering disinformation and pushing for a more responsible approach from our leaders is something we have been doing a lot of lately. And many of those who post here, including yourself at times, think its important to call people out for negative actions. Being nice to Les because others don't know what he's done is so 2006.

    Which brings us to this: Obviously, "a totally fresh start under entirely different leadership" is a great idea, too - and for a start it needn't bother with this initiative, or start life as an alternative or competition. "Someone" who wants a fresh start should just do it; raise the flag and see who gathers.

    I see a disconnect here. In order for another ballot initiative to appear necessary, people would need some kind of reason to start another one. Unless they have concerns about the existing one, they won't start or support a new one. And this definitely won't get anywhere without a unified effort behind it.

    Personally I don't think the ballot initiative is a very good idea. I'm in no way convinced that this is an effective course of action. And I don't believe that this is how we would be likely secure a new investigation. I don't think that a majority of New York voters would back the initiative unless it were general to the point of being deceptive. And I have little confidence that those dedicated to 9/11 truth in NYC could secure the necessary signatures.

    Therefore I think that the effort would likely be a big waste of time and also be a let down for people involved.

    That's all a bunch of pragmatism for you. That was my initial intent. I'm in a practical mood at the moment. And in that mood I have no patience for feel good activism that only makes us think we are getting something done.

    I'm also a bit tired of everyone patting one another on the back because that's what we are supposed to do. Where's the professionalism? Where's the pragmatism? Where is the in-your-face critique that we appreciate because it makes us all stronger.

    I can do that to myself. I know the problems and inadequacies of my effort in this movement. But many people seem so ego invested in their mode of participation that you can't tell them they are just wrong without an argument about 'unity.'

    I stand behind my post above. If I were being less pragmatic I might say that I HOPE that Les steps aside, and I HOPE that they change their approach to appointing commissioners after the initiative passes, and I HOPE that this would be strong enough an effort to garner support from WAC and TruthMove.

    But I have no practical reason to hope for these things.

    Posted 16 years ago #
24. NicholasLevis
    Member

    Don't you cast me as an LJ apologist. We all took a justified crack at him together, you may remember. We all criticize him in public for what he is. But if a group of people decide to be led on by him anyway, that's their problem. The public profile of the ballot initiative, as you know, is zero, and the Internet presence is close to it.

    "Not enough people will sign it" is true. Thus "It won't pass" is irrelevant. Two different things. I happen to think it might pass, but there will be no chance of it getting that far.

    "No optimism on (your) part"? Or on mine, with regard to this initiative. A ballot initiative is a great idea, but not this one.

    By the way, do you think WAC, at least Luke's version, is in any way acceptable as an alternative to LJ?!

    You can criticize them both, but in starting something new, both should be ignored.

    And a fresh start shouldn't be a different ballot initiative this year, that's not how I understood what you wrote.

    Posted 16 years ago #
25. truthmover
    Administrator

    Nick,

    Oh, I'm just on a tear. I know you would never apologize for Les, and I apologize if that was the implication above. Your post just struck me as a bit impractical. I tried to clarify the reasons why I felt that way. And your response clears things up for me.

    "No optimism on (your) part"? Or on mine, with regard to this initiative. A ballot initiative is a great idea, but not this one.

    So we agree that this initiative is not looking so hot. I take that a step further and hope that it gets shut down before too much energy is wasted. I should also expand on my statement above, and say that I think some kind of initiative might be a good idea. But I don't have much faith that those who could come up with something practical would be inclined to do so.

    Posted 16 years ago #

Reply »

You must log in to post.