TruthMove Forum

Register or log in:

Username:

Password:

TruthMove Forum » TruthMove Main Forum

The future of 9/11 truth: No justice? (13 posts)

1. truthmover
   Administrator

   I think that it has become impractical to seek justice for the crimes committed on 9/11. And while I could try to argue that point, the difficulty in arguing the opposing view makes that seem like a waste of time and energy.

   Social movements aren't self help groups. They aren't a hobby. They aren't meant to simply give us a sense of purpose. They are intended to achieve specific goals.

   In the case of the 9/11 truth movement, some of our goals continue to be practical and important. We hope to educate the public about just how nefarious our government has been and will likely be again. As I've said elsewhere, 9/11 is an important object lesson. We also hope to promote transparency and accountability. These are important goals, and so I'm not suggesting the movement is dead.

   But most of the public care more about abuses of power that are more recent and familiar. Abuses that, true or not, may seem more relevant to their lives. And yet we can have little expectation that those crimes will be prosecuted either.

   9/11 truth has receded into the past and I could argue as have others that the likelihood of obtaining any justice for those crimes is very unlikely. Some goals of the movement are still relevant. I'm just not convinced that justice is one of them. And that brings us to a big problem.

   If what I've said above is true, then a lot of people are wasting a lot of time, and/or maintaining impractical hopes that are likely to be dashed. And that fact can't be lost on our infiltrators who would be hoping to waste our time. There are many plans that sound good to us that have absolutely no hope of succeeding and once again...

   There is no real value in fighting to feel good about yourself for caring.

   I think that the whole movement needs to re-evaluate it's goals and tactics. I think some of our plans need to be set aside and others taken on with greater focus. Once again, I'm not saying to movement is dead, but simply that there seem to be a lot of people participating who are working toward unobtainable goals.

   So that's just a thought I've had brewing in the back of my mind. I'm sure I'll be accused of blasphemy, but I don't really care. Wasting time is not honorable.

   Posted 15 years ago #
2. NicholasLevis
   Member

   All this was true several years ago already. To say it now is short-sighted, however, for the reasons I've reviewed before:

   Today represents the best opening for 9/11 truth since 2004. The Bush regime officials most implicated in the events and the cover-up no longer hold the powers of office and have lost legal immunity. The Guantanamo show-trials have been suspended. A new way of dealing with the accused masterminds of the Sept. 11th attacks has yet be devised. The "War on Terror" rhetoric has been dropped.

   Insiders may be prepared to step forward. The Commission documents are being released. FOIAs may be possible that weren't before.

   Emotions are no longer as passionate. Everyone's been exposed to and familiarized with 9/11 skepticism and "inside job" theory, these may no longer seem remote or exotic or unpatriotic. The long-term global trend in opinion has been against the official story. Many aspects of the official story were discredited long ago, in part even by the 9/11 commissioners themselves.

   The majority of the people rejected the Bush agenda and, more importantly, they know it. They constitute an incipient popular front for real change. The new government is vulnerable to popular fury, it can be called upon to actually live up to its rhetoric of progressivism, rule of law, and justice.

   The best way to curb the continuing system of war, imperialism and cryptocracy (or parapolitics) in the present is to expose and prosecute the proven crimes of the Bush regime. That's a question of both: justice and using the "teachable moment." However, running perpetually after the apparent new urgency of the moment is a way not of challenging but of perpetuating the system. (This is the same chance that was missed in 1993.)

   Ironically, small mass protests of Sept. 11th families and allies calling for disclosure in the vein of 2002 could have an enormous impact toward reopening the key issues of September 11th. I do wonder whether that energy is left; I don't have much of it, I must confess.

   Posted 15 years ago #
3. giveback
   

   truthmover, this particular post has a landmark quality to it. In this movement, the drive for justice strikes me as a glamorous intention. "Justice" has been a cost free rallying point, aggrandizing leaders of the movement, while making absolutely no progress in the cause itself.

   But how is it possible to rally for justice when the overriding cultural concern has been to redefine and discount our need and terms of justice. I am amazed and disturbed by how many people have only chosen to defend that which could bring them the greatest stress. This has been the generation of defending the scariest of monsters. The Stockholm Syndrome is deeply entrenched and extraordinarily complicated. The Bush Administration took this country hostage for their own convoluted business interests. Some defended them with supreme adulation, while most defended them with a passive, but unflinching, emulation. Right or Left, Liberal or Conservative, no inherent difference. Striving for justice in these conditions is similar to asking somebody to jump out of a reckless, speeding vehicle. They rather make good with the psychopath on the steering wheel. Maybe they'll get the chance to ride shotgun.

   If the cultural toxicity is not undone, or at least the edge taken off, there is no need, much less desire, for a mindset relatively free from deceit.

   Posted 15 years ago #
4. critique
   Member

   @truthmover: this certainly is a thought-provoking post. Allow me to share some random, impulsive thoughts. And feel free to crit them.

   You talk about people working towards unobtainable goals. You talk about wasting time. You wonder whether justice will ever be served.

   Your most important paragraph (for me) is:

   "In the case of the 9/11 truth movement, some of our goals continue to be practical and important. - We hope to educate the public about just how nefarious our government has been and will likely be again. As I've said elsewhere, 9/11 is an important object lesson. - We also hope to promote transparency and accountability."

   The way I see it, these goals you've outlined are important and hugely relevant. In my opinion, these goals are all related to media, journalism and the flow of information and perhaps that's where we need to be headed.

   What's pained me most since 911 has been the way the media/journalists dropped the ball; the way black holes opened up - no-go areas and taboo subjects emerged. The fact that certain subjects are 'taboo' puts to death that long-held Western myth about "free flow of information" and "a free and democratic media".

   Perhaps we need to wake more people up to this deadly and deadening myth. To show, in big and small ways, across a range of different subjects (politics, ecology, movie-making, fashion, celebrity culture, war-reporting) that the media's message is limited and narrowly framed. People like to pride themselves on the comforting myth that the Western world has a proud "Fourth Estate" and watchdog media. Does it? Those who've been in the TM know this is not so.

   Fighting for transparency and accountability - in a far wider sense, across a range of issues - is a good fight and more attainable because each person can fight for the area that is important or dear to them personally.

   The fight could take the form of pointed letters to lead journalists (Medialens of the UK and MediaBite in Ireland do this well - I recommend a visit to both their sites); communications to raise awareness among specific academics, artists, ad agencies, glossy magazine editors and movie/documentary makers. Reaching out to people you've never reached before, on any issue that stirs you and you feel you are able to politely comment on. Draw their attention to double standards, lies of omission, factual errors, etc. The movement can naturally widen its focus (as you already do on this very site) by concentrating on media in general - and I'm talking newspapers, TV news, documentaries, art shows, magazine articles in mainstream and tiny suburban rags.

   The way I see it, investigate journalism is a lost art. Journalism schools seem to churn out stenographers. (Read Flat Earth News by Guardian journalist Nick Davies (Chatto and Windus)). We need to be lobbying/communicating with journalism department heads, raising awareness anew about journalism and the need to re-read The Propaganda Model (Chomsky) and Ed Herman.

   You say: " Some goals of the movement are still relevant. I'm just not convinced that justice is one of them."

   Perhaps justice is not one of them. But perhaps 'raising awareness' across the board is. It's an ongoing slog but every little bit helps. Perhaps widespread 'awareness' is halfway to some kind of justice?

   Posted 15 years ago #
5. JohnA
   Member

   I don’t know.

   On the one hand - 9/11 (as an issue) has fallen off the radar in the general public’s eyes. Many who still pursue the issue are hopelessly confused by the muddled tsunami of disinfo/misinfo. I now have zero faith that progress will be made from WITHIN the ‘movement.’

   On the other hand, Americans at large are hurting… bad. The world is hurting… bad. People are beginning to demand accountability - and the anger of the people is growing. 9/11 COULD be the straw that breaks the camel’s back. if it ever becomes apparent to the general public that their trust was betrayed on 9/11 - I STILL believe it COULD be a revelation of historic proportions - igniting outrage on a widespread scale.

   To some people it would represent the culmination of all the cumulative frustration and non-specific anxiety they have been feeling. The public knows something is wrong – on an emotional level – and that they have been betrayed. They are losing homes and jobs and faith in the system. So – should a smoking gun surface on 9/11 – it will make torture look like a tickle-fight.

   Which leads me to my final conclusion. 9/11 justice is possible. Unfortunately, it will only come as the result of some new bombshell revelation. None of the tired arguments about controlled demolition of air force stand-downs or insider trading will do the trick. The existing body of evidence simply is not enough to reignite this issue.

   I only believe 9/11 justice is possible if some new evidence surfaces – some bombshell revelation that shows direct intentionality. Recycling the existing evidence is not enough.

   But – also – I believe that it is VERY POSSIBLE – maybe even PROBABLE – that new evidence WILL present itself in the next few years. As Nicholas points out we are entering a new period of governance based on self-declared transparency and openness.

   We can debate the sincerity of these declarations – but – the fact is that this new era of declared openness – coupled with the growing public discontent and anger - may provide fertile ground for whistleblowers to come forward. All bets are off. Monumental tectonic shifts in the power-structure are underway.

   It will be fun to sit back and watch what unfolds.

   Don’t lose hope. These days anything is possible.

   Posted 15 years ago #
6. truthmover
   Administrator

   Nick said:

   All this was true several years ago already. To say it now is short-sighted...

   Actually, I was thinking of you and Ruppert as I wrote this post. You have certainly addressed this topic with greater intellectual rigor. I wouldn't say I was being short sighted as I wasn't trying to suggest that the movement is without any motive or momentum. I was specifically suggesting that some of our goals are unrealistic. I don't think that any amount of public assumption of complicity is going to get Cheney indicted. My response to John below is related.

   Everyone's been exposed to and familiarized with 9/11 skepticism and "inside job" theory, these may no longer seem remote or exotic or unpatriotic. The long-term global trend in opinion has been against the official story.

   Agreed. Everyone I know now takes it for granted that we were warned and didn't adequately respond. While that's not very deep into the issue, it's a far cry from a couple of years ago when all my friends still thought that the warnings were just more conspiracy theory. Lihop, dare I use the term, is far more accepted than ever before.

   Giveback said:

   In this movement, the drive for justice strikes me as a glamorous intention. "Justice" has been a cost free rallying point, aggrandizing leaders of the movement, while making absolutely no progress in the cause itself.

   Nice to hear from you. Well said. I was thinking something similar about what motivates many people to continue to push for something that seems ever more unattainable. Alex Jones probably says the word 'justice' more than most, yet he rarely if ever lays out any realistic way to obtain it. I'm concerned that without any practical connection to a plan of action the term begins to lose it's meaning. With no realistic plan to achieve it, justice becomes an abstract concept. A motivation more than a goal.

   Critique said:

   Fighting for transparency and accountability - in a far wider sense, across a range of issues - is a good fight and more attainable because each person can fight for the area that is important or dear to them personally.

   That is a fairly good summary of this project. See also: http://www.truthmove.org/forum/topic/954?replies=1

   Perhaps widespread 'awareness' is halfway to some kind of justice?

   To the extent that one of the goals of this movement is to prevent people from being duped the next time I agree. And I really do think we have had that impact. But the movement is still called the 9/11 truth movement, unless you are one of the few people who agrees that we need a more general truth movement addressing a wide range of issues. Many in this movement specify to the exclusion of the big picture.

   John said:

   Which leads me to my final conclusion. 9/11 justice is possible. Unfortunately, it will only come as the result of some new bombshell revelation. None of the tired arguments about controlled demolition of air force stand-downs or insider trading will do the trick. The existing body of evidence simply is not enough to reignite this issue.

   I suppose it depends on how you define justice. I was assuming justice would be the perpetrators going to jail. This reminds me of Leahy calling for a Truth and Reconciliation commission. Just yesterday he stated that he didn't think indictments were likely, but that the best we could hope for might be just obtaining more facts. Is justice served if no one is prosecuted for explicit war crimes just because everyone knows they were committed and by whom?

   I agree that we may yet see some revelation that changes the game. But then again, how many people know about the MLKjr. civil trial from '99? How many people heard about the Gulf of Tonkin false flag confirmation from just a few months ago? Do we now have justice? Have these revelations changed the game?

   I hope for the smoking gun and we may see it. But waiting for a smoking gun is not a social movement, and it doesn't seem that we have many ways to compel that smoking gun to be revealed. People will certainly continue to do what is possible. But I'm really just hoping that people maintain a good deal of practical realism about what is likely.

   Posted 15 years ago #
7. NicholasLevis
   Member

   "Is justice served if no one is prosecuted for explicit war crimes just because everyone knows they were committed and by whom?"

   The answer can only be relative to the alternative. It would be better served that way than under the reigning alternative, in which even the fact of whether a given crime of state was committed remains in question and is banished from being mentioned in acceptable public discourse.

   Certainly future justice would be better served, if past crimes are fully exposed, even without punishment of the past perpetrators. In the US, the major parapolitical crimes of state have never been exposed to the point of undeniable consensus, have never even been open as a respectable subject of study. Parapolitical players always relied on having their actions remain sufficiently secret or mysterious or "plausibly deniable" that they still get to define political reality and policy through the means of covert manipulations. That might change if the role of parapolitics can no longer be obscured as "conspiracy theory."

   Even a revelation and consensus on the full story of the JFK assassination, at time when perhaps none of the perpetrators remain alive, would still move the world and create a (partly) different future. It is arguable that revelations like the release of the Northwoods documents, 38 years later, may have placed limits on the range of parapolitical crimes contemplated after 9/11. It is arguable -- it is unknowable -- whether 9/11 skeptics have actually posted successes by causing hesitation and slow-downs. Not in the vulgar manner played by the likes of Tarpley (whose often unfounded warnings are credited, after their failure to come true, with having prevented the events they incorrectly predicted), but imagine there had been no skepticism whatsoever with regard to the events of Sept. 11th, only universal and total acceptance of everything the government said (even where the various government stories contradicted). Maybe the PNAC plan would have gone forward to Syria and Iran. Maybe one of those martial law scenarios would have happened.

   Or maybe something of the kind still will happen, under Obama, though it would surprise me. It's untrue that the outcomes are predetermined, or even that we can assign reliable probabilities to the various possibilities, or foresee all possibilities.

   Posted 15 years ago #
8. JohnA
   Member

   One thing we do know is that time is not our ally. Many crimes of state have in fact been exposed – but are so safely buried in the past as to blunt the current generation from feeling a contemporary collective guilt about them.

   Sure – we all feel bad about the trail of tears and slavery – but – that was not us –that was a ‘different’ America - ‘someone else’ marching under a different flag (with less stars) – not THIS America. Those crimes were the product of a barbaric past - in an uncivilized time. We might as well be talking about gladiators.

   Smallpox infected blankets and genocide. Horrific crimes blunted by time.

   On the other hand – historical epochs like WW2 resulted in an immediate and SUDDEN period of collective self-realization where we were faced with the horrible reality of us – humanity –– and the brutal reality of what we are capable of doing as a species.

   I sometimes wonder how desperate this current period of chaos will become – and whether it will require the 21st century equivalent of 20th century nazi-hunters to track down and hold those responsible – responsible – after it is all said and done.

   Posted 15 years ago #
9. critique
   Member

   I am not sure where the Huffington Post positions itself in terms of readership.

   Does this have any traction or is it a space-filler?

   http://www.huffingtonpost.com/melissa-rossi/obama-...

   Posted 15 years ago #
10. JohnA
    Member

    i guess its up to us to provide the traction. no?

    i gotta believe that HuffPost tracks all the metrics associated with their content to gauge where the public's interest lies.

    i think the first order of business is thoroughly reviewing this woman's content to determine if it is worthy of promoting. (Levis?)

    If so - everything possible should be done to bump it up.

    Posted 15 years ago #
11. NicholasLevis
    Member

    .

    It's a blog. I gotta believe the many bloggers hosted by HuffPo are picked through prior relationships and write what they like, as is usually the case, and I'd confidently bet whole houses that no demographic or marketing studies preceded this article. She wrote her blog, people. And it tells me she's one of the good guys. Her article's fine, as any of you can tell by reading it yourselves. Sticks to the compelling argument against cover-up and for disclosure, with a minimum of "unnecessary entities."

    She's being mocked as naive already, very predictably in some circles, for addressing anything to Obama -- as though any president's Justice Department would take up a call to investigate possible high crimes of the US parapolitical establishment. I consider the mockery to be far more naive than her article. There's nothing wrong with her addressing the relevant authorities under the law as an anchor for her argument. No doubt she knows these authorities are never going to act on their own simply due to their conscience, or because she asked them. The point surely is to seek ways to build popular pressure, something that no one necessarily knows how to do best. At least she has a target in mind, one that should live up to its formal function or be exposed when it predictably fails to do so. While it's unlikely at the moment, I don't rule out any shift, even in the longstanding policies of empire; if perestroika happened due to crisis and the pressures of objective conditions, a similar opening may yet happen here.

    .

    Posted 15 years ago #
12. JohnA
    Member

    and you have to admit the soil is fertile for change. economic collapse has a funny way of proselytizing converts.

    Posted 15 years ago #
13. JohnA
    Member

    Walter Jones, GOP Congressman, Signs on to Investigate Bush

    There is, in fact, an element of bipartisan support for creating of a truth and reconciliation committee to investigate illegalities from the Bush years. And it comes from within Congress.

    Rep. Walter Jones, a North Carolina Republican, has signed on as a co-sponsor of legislation introduced by House Judiciary Chair John Conyers to establish "a national commission on presidential war powers and civil liberties."

    A self-described conservative who brought "Freedom Fries" to Congress, Jones developed into one of the most vocal Republican critics of the Bush administration. He took particular umbrage at the handling of the Iraq War and the decision to prohibit photographs of returning coffins of American soldiers. Late in the past administration's time in office he was reported to have been reading Vincent Bugliosi's book, "The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder."

    more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/13/walter-jo...

    And earlier in the month there was this:

    Jones introduces Executive Accountability Act

    U.S. Rep. Walter Jones recently introduced legislation that would impose fines or prison time on presidents or executive-branch officials who "knowingly and willfully" mislead Congress to gain authorization to use U.S. military forces.

    I wonder if we should stop lamenting the current situation, and whether or not justice is possible, and get off our asses and start organizing to get PEOPLE behind these efforts - and push it until it breaks.

    Posted 15 years ago #

Reply

You must log in to post.