Forum

TruthMove Forum

TruthMove Forum » TruthMove Main Forum

2 out of 7 “Truths” on This Website are Harmful Lies (6 posts)

  1. Angie911
    Member

    2 out of 7 “Truths” on This Website are Harmful Lies

    I just found this truthmove.org website & offer this critique after a quick look.

    First, it’s a nice idea, this broadening of the 911 Truth movement to a Truth
    movement generally - where 9/11 is only one of the truths desiring to be revealed.
    Only thing is, a quick scanning of the other 5 truths reveals that 2 out of 7 of them
    are harmful lies. I speak first of the “environmental” truth that truthmove.org disseminates.
    For why I believe it to be a scam, see http://mysite.verizon.net/vze25x9n/id25.html -
    particularly toward the end of the webpage with my postscript to the 911 truth movement
    community all about this environmental “sustainability” myth, which I’m disappointed to see
    on the truthmove.org ‘s website. The postscript begins as follows:

    A Postscript to the 911 Truth Community:
    I am providing here some starter links for those who are familiar only with mainstream ecology/ pop. growth/ we’re running out of everything/ and one world gov’t is the solution to the ‘sustainable development’ rhetoric, which the 911 skeptic literature is surprisingly and creepily ripe with. How many of you know that there is a rich alternative literature demonstrating this ‘sustainable development’ mantra is all a scam perpetuated by the very same global elites who ensure that the resources of the world are never distributed equitably? Have you read any of it? Or have you given into a knee-jerk reaction to avoiding “conspiracy theories”, the reaction which all 911 truth movement advocates should know by now is a carefully cultivated one? Come on, not you 911 skeptics! Explore the possibilities and don’t dismiss them out of hand. And realize that is exactly what each of us in the movement is asking others to do about 9-11, to entertain the possibilities, because once they’re examined with an open mind, only then can the truth be revealed. If 9-11 exposers won’t began examining this ‘sustainability’ scam, then who will? You’re qualified more than most because 911 skeptics generally have good reading comprehension and logical thinking skills, are not self-centered and have morals. . . (continued at http://mysite.verizon.net/vze25x9n/id25.html )

    The truthmove.org website subdivides their “environmental” truth into 3 sub-topics including 1) climate change - and for a fun book exposing this global warming scam which truthmove.org unfortunately buys into, read Michael Crichton’s thriller called “State of Fear” ; 2) peak oil - & about this scam that 911truthmove.org fell for see “9/11 and Peak Oil” at http://mysite.verizon.net/vze25x9n/id16.html ; and the third environmental bullshit gift bestowed on us by the truthmove.org website is “mass extinction”, in which they advise that the earth is “already well into the phenomenon” of “mass extinction”.

    Unfortunately, this environmental sustainability myth is so inextricably woven into truthmove.org’s website in numerous places

    (like under their “priorities” subpage for example: “Survival may be the ultimate priority. But as we can clearly see in human's disregard for their own environment, even this most basic drive has been subverted through manipulation and confusion.” )

    that although the unnamed website authors indicate that they are interested in hearing others’ views and/or disputes
    about the “truths” they present (“We will always be willing to debate and/or revise our content based on new information.
    Truth is a process and so is the site”), I don’t anticipate changes in response to such website critiques. The differences between us are fundamental because they matter. This is not, for example, a dispute over whether astronauts landed on the moon because what does that really matter, whether they did or not? However, if I’m correct that with the environmental sustainability myth, we are “being pre-programmed to lie down and fail to resist genocidal depopulation and precipitous global "downsizing" by fatalistically absorbing the idea that the earth can't support the current population anyway." then truthmove.org is harming us and our differences are certainly not trivial. What is more fatalistic than truthmove.org’s website which advises us in their FAQ that it will take a miracle for us to survive: “We are facing unavoidable environmental challenges of pollution, mass extinction, global warming, and peak oil.
    Other than a true miracle, technology and ingenuity will not save us from reaping what we have sown.” at http://www.truthmove.org/faq.html

    It’s also distressing to see that one of the 7 truths on the website concerns “election fraud” since that’s
    a limited hangout. The “election fraud” issue reinforces the myth that there are differences between the
    political parties and that therefore election vote fraud is something that can harm us. In effect, however,
    such a “truth” legitimizes the whole election farce in this country where there is never a candidate that
    represents our interests. So the election fraud exposure just serves to hide the bigger truth - that it doesn’t
    matter which party is in office.

    On an unrelated to the 7 truths of the website, I’ll just note that truthmove.org's sparse site index which is
    supposed to contain “Important Terms, Organizations & Individuals” doesn’t contain
    anyone important but instead just mentions fixtures of the bullshit OFFICIAL story, like Sibel Edmonds,
    and about her, see paragraph C of this webpage:

    (“Sibel, however, is not even LIHOP for 9/11, guys. Sibel is only about warning us of a future (post-9/11) LIHOP, and even that not explicitly, just by implication. Her hints consist of pointing fingers at unnamed corrupt gov't officials, whom, she hints may, because of their on-going ties to foreign business interests, could assist and/or cover for and/or protect and/or turn a blind eye from these foreign others who might attack us in the future. Thus, she REINFORCES the official story. Far from being a story of “special import”, it’s a story that 9/11 truthers should avoid, together with the stories of other so-called FBI “whistleblowers” who tell us they were trying to protect us from the foreign hijackers, etc., that we were warned about. . . “) http://mysite.verizon.net/vze25x9n/id29.html

    In short, I give this website an A for its attempt to broaden the 911 Truth Movement to a Truth Movement generally,
    but an F in its execution because dissemination of its non-911 truths will harm us & I hope therefore, that
    the website deletes all such disinfo as discussed above.

    Angie

    911 Truth Movement Musings (Watching the Watchers)
    http://www.Angieon911.com

    Posted 17 years ago #
  2. Keenan
    Blocked

    Angie,

    Have you ever stopped to consider the possibility that it is YOU who has been duped by the NWO crowd, which funds anti-environmental propoganda? Several right-wing think tanks, including the Heritage Foundation, Competitive Enterprise Institute, CATO Institute, American Enterprise institute, American Policy Center, to name but a few, who are funded primarily by the most ruthless and powerful global industries (oil industry, mining industry, logging industry, weapons industry, etc.) that are responsible for the largest share of environmental destruction in order to make Trillions more money than what anybody would ever need, spend billions each year to attack environmental groups and try to convince the public through the use of lies and deception that the envirnoment is just fine and that any environmental regulations that restrain their activities is bad. It's too bad that you have apparently fallen for this propoganda.

    ExxonMobil is the ring leader in financing industry PR and propaganda to advance their agenda. They've poored millions of dollars into pushing the Global Warming skeptics counter claims, for example.

    Here is a good place to start:

    Global Warming Skeptics: A Primer
    http://www.environmentaldefense.org/article.cfm?co...
    Guess Who's Funding the Global Warming Doubt Shops?

    Posted on: 10/26/2005
    In 1998, Exxon devised a plan to stall action on global warming. The plan was outlined in an internal memo (see the memo [PDF]). It promised, "Victory will be achieved when uncertainties in climate science become part of the conventional wisdom" for "average citizens" and "the media."

    The company would recruit and train new scientists who lack a "history of visibility in the climate debate" and develop materials depicting supporters of action to cut greenhouse gas emissions as "out of touch with reality."

    As for your global warming comments, Angie, only a small and dwindling handful of people are among the global warming denial club, which you are apparently a member of. Angie, doesn't it bother in the least that you are standing with the worst, most evil entities of the NWO, including George Bush, ExxonMobile, Dick Chaney, etc., in denying the reality of global warming? You should really think about that long and hard. If you are not embarassed by this fact, then you really aren't thinking too deeply about what positions you latch onto.

    I am assuming that you are a libertarian and therefore, simply latch on to whatever theory "proves" whatever you want to hear, llike those that "prove" that you don't have to take any responsibility for how your behavior causes harm to others around you and damages the environment. You are one of those people who apparently refuses to acknowledge the fact that the American Way Of Life, in which America uses 25% of the world's resources for 5% of the world's population, is consuming our children's future and recking havoc with the global environment.

    So, please spare us that tired old libertarian anti-environmental propoganda about 'NWO controlled environmental movement, myth of sustainability, ecology/ pop. growth/ we’re running out of everything/ and one world gov’t is the solution to the ‘sustainable development'' blah blah blah blah, and just open your eyes. Most environmental regulations are RESULTS, NOT CAUSES. In other words, only after a long history of reckless disregard for the environment by big business and by reckless individuals, which resulted in human poisenings and cancer, to say nothing of the suffering and destruction of other species, were environmental grass roots movements able to get legislation passed to stop the insanity. It was through the long hard work of countless individual citizens and grass roots envirnmental organizations, NOT NWO ELITES, that good envirnomental legislation finally got passed. If you don't understand this history, then you really should educate yourself and look more deeply into this history, instead of buying into that nonsense that "the environmental movement is a scam by the one world government NWO crowd".

    Posted 17 years ago #
  3. truthmod
    Administrator

    re: angie

    thanks for your critique, i honestly appreciate your input. on the other hand, i think that saying that mass extinction is bullshit, is bullshit.

    are you actually contending that we are not experiencing this phenomenon? almost all scientists agree that it is occuring (it is a fact borne out by the data). if you want to try to argue that it's not caused by humans, go ahead, but you'll really be reaching to try to explain it...

    we are not pessimists, we are realists.

    do you think this system (industrialized capitalism, globalization, pollution) is just fine besides the fact that 9/11 was an inside job? no, the whole thing has got go. we need a new paradigm, a new society and a new consciousness.

    the environment is the key. i don't trust anyone who wants to avoid it.

    Posted 17 years ago #
  4. Angie911
    Member

    No truth dissemination w/o personal examination

    Ah, Keenan, if only the enemy was as unsophisticated, and the world as uncomplicated, as you appear to be believe. Keenan believes there are clearly identified good guys and bad guys, and that the bad guys don’t know how to disguise themselves, or how to disguise their true agendas behind other fake agendas; that the bad guys aren’t smart enough to know that there will be opposition so therefore they must co-opt it and yes, even to seemingly create certain varieties of it so they can control it from inception to make sure all victories are hollow, or even unbeknownst to most, actual harmful things.
    Keenan, referring to George Bush as one of the most evil entities of the NWO, has fallen for the ‘Bush is really a president and actually is the one making decisions’ official story, not aware that he’s a mere actor, playing the role & reciting the script he’s been assigned - to be the bad cop in the never-to-be- tired-of routine of good cop/bad cop.

    Keenan, nobody needs your links in further support of the official or mainstream oppositional view of environmental matters. It’s already accepted as fact or truth by basically everyone, including the mainstream media, all except the few relevant bad-cop officials in the Bush Administration. People can watch t.v. shows about it all the time & see popular theatrical movie releases which scare them all about the horrors these mainstream opposition environmental groups cry about. And it starts early, even with the kiddies (i..e, that Disney “Ice Age” cartoon movie). That’s why Jon Stewart is permitted to mock Bush Administration’s environmental policies daily. It's permitted, i.e, acceptable, i.e., mainstream dissent & the views you speak of have been ingested as the real truth by any person who would characterize themselves as a thinking person. What the readers of the truthmove.org website need to examine, however, before passing on a link to this site, is whether they sign on to all 7 of the truths it espouses - including the environmental ones and they can only do this by looking at the literature with which they are UNFAMILIAR, the viewpoints which aren't turned into Disney movies, that which claims the other is a lie and see if it stands up to scrutiny.

    Of course, nobody has time to consider every “conspiracy” possibility. We’re drawn, though, to examine those that seem plausible and those that if true, are so horrendous that their cessation or exposure could bring about good results to humanity. Isn’t that the criteria everyone used when considering whether it was worth their time to look into 9/11?

    At the link I provided in my original post, to starter links on the environmental conspiracy charge, are two quotes which undoubtedly, on their face, make such an environmental conspiracy plausible. The motive for such an environmental conspiracy is present, clear as a bell:

    “Hidden in this warning about a hypothetical breakdown in global over-consumption was an urge to mobilize Western opinion against a real political spectre. People in the Third World were struggling to escape from poverty. They no longer wanted to be part of a world order where Western European and North American corporations gobbled up their natural resources and exploited their labour. That was the threat. The challenge from the oppressed nations was transformed into a myth of destruction.”

    . . .

    “By the 1970s elitist intellectuals and globalist institutions had focused on population growth and industrial development as two of the most pressing enemies of the human race. The United Nations, the Club of Rome, the Tavistock and Aspen Institutes and many other organizations that served as mouthpieces for the ruling elites all began crying out that the environment was being destroyed and that industrialization was becoming a terrible menace. Technology, science and human progress were falling out of favor. The elites considered the earth's resources their possessions and they did not want to share them with an emerging and developing Third World”.

    So, again, above you have a clear motive. You also have a refutation of Keenan’s claims of a factual nature, of who really created the theories and subsequent mainstream environmental opposition movements. And this dispute, on this factual issue between us is one that research can resolve. It’s a historical matter, who in fact started these “we’re running out of everything, population growth, global warming, etc., etc.” claims. You can take my word for it or Keenan’s word as to the identity of these creators & sustainers, but only your own research should satisfy you as to which of us is correct.

    Let me whet everyone’s appetite & spark your curiosity by showing how truly significant (read harmful) such a scam about environmental matters can be. You all heard about DDT, right? You know, it’s that toxic chemical, the one which causes birth defects, and the banning of which was a victory by the mainstream opposition environmental movement following their very hard fought struggle.

    What goes through your mind when you read this paragraph about DDT from Michael Crichton’s book “State of Fear” which I recommended in my original post:

    “Banning DDT. Arguably the greatest tragedy of the twentieth century. DDT was the best agent against mosquitoes and despite the rhetoric, there was nothing anywhere near as good or as safe. Since the ban, 2 million people a year have died unnecessarily from malaria, mostly children. All together, the ban has caused more than 50 million needless deaths. Banning DDT killed more people than Hitler and the environmental movement pushed hard for it.” (at page 478).

    Everybody feel safe going back to their mainstream environmental opposition views as Keenan suggests we should and forget you ever heard a claim to the contrary? We all have heard unfathomable malaria death statistics periodically enough to accept that portion of Crichton’s claim as true. What if he’s correct about the rest of it? Could any of us truly be working on something more important than this? Or be unintentionally disseminating environmental lies as "truths"?

    I expect a lot from 9/11 researchers. I expect them to use their brain and reasoning skills not only on 9-11 but also as they look at evidence which purports to reveal that official stories and official Jon Stewart sanctioned-opposition-mainstream views are real or Memorex, to examine the possibility that they’re meant to deceive so the elite can continue with their diabolical plans which demonstrate time & again that human life is not valued.

    I also don’t expect that any 9/11 researcher would pass on a website espousing 7 truths without having first examined them all, with the same care that they’ve examined 9-11. Don’t pass off things as truth if you have no real knowledge of same. Truthmove.org talks about “mass extinction”. Do you all know about this "truth" theory and accept it? If not, why would you pass on a link to this website unless you mentioned that you couldn’t vouch for this or the other of the 7 truths. Think of the doctor’s oath - first do no harm. So, to all of you I urge you not to pass on truths unless you’ve first checked them out to your own satisfaction. Never take anyone’s word for anything. That should be second nature to critical readers and thinkers. You didn’t take anyone’s word for anything on 9/11. Why should you on other issues of significance? And if you examine the environmental and election fraud “truths” that truthmove.org is selling, I submit that you’ll figure out like I have, that you shouldn’t be buying.

    Angie

    911 Truth Movement Musings (Watching the Watchers) http://www.Angieon911.com

    Posted 17 years ago #
  5. truthmod
    Administrator

    michael crichton is your source?

    " if only the enemy was as unsophisticated, and the world as uncomplicated, as you appear to be believe. Keenan believes there are clearly identified good guys and bad guys, and that the bad guys don’t know how to disguise themselves, or how to disguise their true agendas behind other fake agendas; that the bad guys aren’t smart enough to know that there will be opposition so therefore they must co-opt it and yes, even to seemingly create certain varieties of it so they can control it from inception to make sure all victories are hollow"

    hmmm....

    you don't address the actual evidence that we point to on all this environmental stuff. http://truthmove.org/insight/environment.html

    Posted 17 years ago #
  6. truthmover
    Administrator

    Response to Angie's comments

    Angie,

    We are familiar with your work. We are familiar with most of the research and sources to which you refer. We are familiar with the possibility that the peak in oil production is being utilized by industry to support its own interests. We are familiar with the fact that some people promote limited hangouts, and that our two party system is dysfunctional.

We very simply don't agree with you that environmental and voting rights movements are entirely populated by agents and dupes. The environmental movement is not one big limited hangout designed to obscure the realities of the system. These movements have long histories that predate both you and the 9/11 truth movement. There is much that we can learn from the past victories, failures, and present strategies of these projects. 

TruthMove is not simply a 9/11 truth movement site. While we have our roots in 9/11 truth, and feel very strongly that 9/11 is one of the biggest cracks in the wall through which we are able to view the criminal activities of our government, we also have a wider focus that includes matters that have not been generally presented as being significantly related. The seven catagories in our Insight section are not our "7 truths". They are the most prominant areas in which mainstream suppression of information can be directly exposed. All of these catagories are full of official lies. They need not even be viewed as related except in their common lack of honest represention by 'official sources'. Yet that relation is important, as it sheds light on a purpose common to many diverse organizations. 

 We suggest further review of the website, and "The Autobiography of Martin Luther King Jr."
    Posted 17 years ago #

Reply

You must log in to post.