Forum

TruthMove Forum

TruthMove Forum » TruthMove Main Forum

New Article in the Atlantic Free Press on 9/11 Truth Movemen (16 posts)

  1. truthmod
    Administrator

    New Article in the Atlantic Free Press on 9/11 Truth Movemen

    Fairly fair-minded...

    The Time Has Come

    http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/content/view/1083...

    This brings me to the 9/11 Truth Movement. An increasingly popular conspiracy theory, the Truth Movement holds, among other things, that 9/11 was a federally orchestrated “inside job.”

    I do not buy it.

    According to a press release issued by the 9/11 Truth Movement to accompany a Zogby poll which the Truth Movement sponsored: “over 70 million voting age Americans distrust official 9/11 story and support new investigation of possible US government role in the attacks.”This is a significant number of Americans. However it reveals more of a mistrust of the 9/11 Investigation and official report rather than a belief in an “inside job” theory.

    I have done my homework. I have read the official report of the 9/11 Commission. I have logged onto the 9/11 Truth Movement website to study “The Top 40 Reasons to Doubt the Official Story of September 11, 2001.” I have diligently read every pro-conspiracy theory article that has come my way. I have watched the 9/11 Truth Movement videos such as, Loose Change and 911Mysteries: Part One. I read Steven E. Jones and books by David Ray Griffin. On the other side of the argument, I have read Popular Science’s book Debunking 9/11 Myths Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up to the Facts. I’ve watched the PBS Nova film Why The Towers Fell. I’ve tried to keep as open a mind as possible.

    My conclusion is that the “inside job” theory does not stand up to scrutiny. I agree with the analysis offered by Dr. James B. Calvert, more about which below.

    Why? Because there is an undercurrent of hysteria in the Truth Movement’s presentations. I feel more like I am being “Roved” and coerced rather than persuaded.

    Posted 17 years ago #
  2. SkepticGuy
    Member

    And, among the people visiting a very active conspiracy-theory discussion board, 9/11 conspiracies are at the bottom of the topics that interest people:
    http://www.abovetopsecret.com/ats_demographics.htm...

    It's looking more and more like the "truth movement" was actually created to destroy any hope of discovering real conspiracy information. If you can't generate interest in those predisposed to have an affinity for your cause... you're lost.

    Posted 17 years ago #
  3. Dem Bruce Lee Styles
    Member

    SkepticGuy Wrote:

    And, among the people visiting a very active conspiracy-theory discussion board, 9/11 conspiracies are at the bottom of the topics that interest people:
    http://www.abovetopsecret.com/ats_demographics.htm...

    It's looking more and more like the "truth movement" was actually created to destroy any hope of discovering real conspiracy information. If you can't generate interest in those predisposed to have an affinity for your cause... you're lost

    I'll think you'll find that 9/11 truth is not a "Conspiracy Theory" issue, so I'm very glad to see as few people as possible advocating 9/11 truth on a website that is all about reinforcing the "conspiracy theory" stereotype. “UFOs” and all that kooky shit is what destroys hopes of getting something actually done, you need credibility to be taken seriously.

    Posted 17 years ago #
  4. truthmod
    Administrator
    It's looking more and more like the "truth movement" was actually created to destroy any hope of discovering real conspiracy information. If you can't generate interest in those predisposed to have an affinity for your cause... you're lost.

    I'm not quite sure I follow you. Who do you think this "truth movement" was created by?

    I agree with Dem, it's not such a bad thing that people who are into aliens are not into 9/11 truth. I think that 9/11 truth has captured the imagination of a whole new segment of the population, who had no background in "conspiracy theories," and that's a good sign.

    By the way, where does assassination research fall under in your forums... I don't see anything here:
    http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/index.php

    I think a healthy thing that's happening with the truth movement, is that the kooky stuff (i.e. bad for PR and/or unsupported by factual evidence) is being filtered out from the solid evidence of government/media/class conspiracy, deception, and corruption.

    Posted 17 years ago #
  5. SkepticGuy
    Member

    Dem Bruce Lee Styles Wrote:

    I'll think you'll find that 9/11 truth is not a "Conspiracy Theory" issue,
    I agree... "9/11 Truth" people are activists who have encountered conspiracy theories for their activism.

    Dem Bruce Lee Styles Wrote:

    so I'm very glad to see as few people as possible advocating 9/11 truth on a website that is all about reinforcing the "conspiracy theory" stereotype.
    I see you don't know much about us. You can start here or accept the short story: the vast majority of our members apply a significant dose of critical thinking to a broad range of "alternative topics" that include conspiracies, extraterrestrials, paranormal, and more.

    So, the important point: our visitors tend to be well within the range of people who would like to learn more about 9/11 conspiracies... which are the core issues embraced by the Truth movement. Are you even aware of the conspiracies that surfaced long before the Truth movement started?

    “UFOs” and all that kooky shit is what destroys hopes of getting something actually done, you need credibility to be taken seriously
    Now this is funny. While I too am exceptionally skeptical of "alien visitation", there exits a great deal of well-documented cases of the government's disruptive efforts in the "UFO community" in the 1960's and 1970's... and even some ongoing items today. There is a great deal that "Truthers" can learn from "UFOlogists".

    But this is funny because we often here the counter-point from UFOlogists... that the Truth movement is full of kooky shit that obfuscates any hopes of getting something done. Poetic. Incredibly poetic.

    Posted 17 years ago #
  6. Dem Bruce Lee Styles
    Member

    SkepticGuy Wrote:

    Dem Bruce Lee Styles Wrote:

    I'll think you'll find that 9/11 truth is not a "Conspiracy Theory" issue,
    I agree... "9/11 Truth&q
    I agree... "9/11 Truth" people are activists who have encountered conspiracy theories for their activism.

    Dem Bruce Lee Styles Wrote:

    so I'm very glad to see as few people as possible advocating 9/11 truth on a website that is all about reinforcing the "conspiracy theory" stereotype.

    I see you don't know much about us. You can start here or accept the short story: the vast majority of our members apply a significant dose of critical thinking to a broad range of "alternative topics" that include conspiracies, extrate
    I see you don't know much about us. You can start here or accept the short story: the vast majority of our members apply a significant dose of critical thinking to a broad range of "alternative topics" that include conspiracies, extraterrestrials, paranormal, and more.

    So, the important point: our visitors tend to be well within the range of people who would like to learn more about 9/11 conspiracies... which are the core issues embraced by the Truth movement. Are you even aware of the conspiracies that surfaced long before the Truth movement started?

    “UFOs” and all that kooky shit is what destroys hopes of getting something actually done, you need credibility to be taken seriously.
    Now this is funny. While I too am exceptionally skeptical of "alien visitation", there exits a great deal of well-documented cases of the government's disruptive efforts in the "UFO community" in the 1960's and 1970's... and even some ongoing items today. There is a great deal that "Truthers" can learn from "UFOlogists".

    But this is funny because we often here the counter-point from UFOlogists... that the Truth movement is full of kooky shit that obfuscates any hopes of getting something done. Poetic. Incredibly poetic.

    No, nobody cares about the "9/11 Conspiracies" in the 9/11 truth movement, people care about fighting for a real investigation, people care about stopping the “war on terror” before it moves into Iran, people care about doing the right thing in face of invalid ridicule. And on that last point, where does the invalid ridicule come from? It comes from the false association with the "conspiracy theory" stereotype. A stereotype that has been deliberately created over the last few decades as a thought-stopping device, a phrase used to emotionally delegitimise something. So don’t tell me you don’t know what the “conspiracy theory” stereotype implies and that your site doesn’t promote it in anyway, when you've got “UFOs”, “Aliens” and “The Paranormal” plastered all over it.
    Now this is funny. While I too am exceptionally skeptical of "alien visitation", there exits a great deal of well-documented cases of the government's disruptive efforts in the "UFO community" in the 1960's and 1970's... and even some ongoing items today. There is a great deal that "Truthers" can learn from "UFOlogists".

    But this is funny because we often here the counter-point from UFOlogists... that the Truth movement is full of kooky shit that obfuscates any hopes of getting something done. Poetic. Incredibly poetic

    No, nobody cares about the "9/11 Conspiracies" in the 9/11 truth movement, people care about fighting for a real investigation, people care about stopping the “war on terror” before it moves into Iran, people care about doing the right thing in face of invalid ridicule. And on that last point, where does the invalid ridicule come from? It comes from the false association with the "conspiracy theory" stereotype. A stereotype that has been deliberately created over the last few decades as a thought-stopping device, a phrase used to emotionally delegitimise something. So don’t tell me you don’t know what the “conspiracy theory” stereotype implies and that your site doesn’t promote it in anyway, when you've got “UFOs”, “Aliens” and “The Paranormal” plastered all over it.

    Posted 17 years ago #
  7. SkepticGuy
    Member

    truthmod Wrote:

    Who do you think this "truth movement" was created by
    Forgive me... I don't have hard data, as my focus has been much more on providing the soap box than having any desire to stand on it myself. But we saw rumors of it about 18-20 months after 9/11, soon after those odd 9/11 conspiracy TV commercials aired. My comment was from current observed perception... not from data.

    I think that 9/11 truth has captured the imagination of a whole new segment of the population, who had no background in "conspiracy theories," and that's a good sign
    I'm sorry but I'm not seeing it that way. I don't see "9/11 Truth Issues" increasing. I do see "truther" becoming like a "dirty word" even in conspiracy theory circles.

    It may feel like there is increasing interest in your closed loop of like-minded advocates for 9/11 Truth. The universe of Truth websites appear active and vibrant. But outside that circle, it's not so bright. I wish it wasn't, but that's how we're seeing it.

    By the way, where does assassination research fall under in your forum
    Do you mean JFK research... it's all in the general conspiracies forum.

    Posted 17 years ago #
  8. SkepticGuy
    Member

    Dem Bruce Lee Styles Wrote:

    No, nobody cares about the "9/11 Conspiracies" in the 9/11 truth movement,
    I've seen lots that indicate otherwise, but pressing for a new investigation is important, and I agree that's where the focus should be.

    So don’t tell me you don’t know what the “conspiracy theory” stereotype implies and that your site doesn’t promote it in anyway, when you've got “UFOs”, “Aliens” and “The Paranormal” plastered all over it
    Certainly we're aware of the stereotype... how can we not be? ;) But I believe many of our members are doing a great deal to counter the stereotype.

    But in the end, the "Truth" movement was inspired by the abundance of 9/11 "conspiracy theories" online... not that many of them were valid... but they are the basis for the demands for a new investigation.

    Posted 17 years ago #
  9. Dem Bruce Lee Styles
    Member

    SkepticGuy Wrote:

    Dem Bruce Lee Styles Wrote:

    No, nobody cares about the "9/11 Conspiracies" in the 9/11 truth movement,

    I've seen lots that indicate
    I've seen lots that indicate otherwise, but pressing for a new investigation is important, and I agree that's where the focus should be.

    So don’t tell me you don’t know what the “conspiracy theory” stereotype implies and that your site doesn’t promote it in anyway, when you've got “UFOs”, “Aliens” and “The Paranormal” plastered all over it.
    Certainly we're aware of the stereotype... how can we not be? ;) But I believe many of our members are doing a great deal to counter the stereotype.

    But in the end, the "Truth" movement was inspired by the abundance of 9/11 "conspiracy theories" online... not that many
    Certainly we're aware of the stereotype... how can we not be? ;) But I believe many of our members are doing a great deal to counter the stereotype.

    But in the end, the "Truth" movement was inspired by the abundance of 9/11 "conspiracy theories" online... not that many of them were valid... but they are the basis for the demands for a new investigation

    No you don't get it, "Conspiracy Theories" aren’t the basis for anything, the basis for a real investigation comes from the fact that the Commission Report was entirely inadequate. Again I don't think you understand, there are many other valid reasons why a real investigation is vital, but you should go and find out yourself and stop attacking something that you're ignorant of.

    Posted 17 years ago #
  10. truthmod
    Administrator

    it all depends who you think "started" or "is behind" the truth movement. i say it started with questions and factual evidence, not theories. people like mike ruppert, nafeez ahmed, paul thompson. so what if we've had an infusion of crackpots and speculators? that doesn't mean the movement is theirs. we will continue fighting to discern the crap from the quality and to marginalize the dis/misinfo crowd.

    Posted 17 years ago #
  11. SkepticGuy
    Member

    Dem Bruce Lee Styles Wrote:

    No you don't get it, "Conspiracy Theories" aren’t the basis for anything,
    Sure they are. Woodward and Bernstein were routinely called conspiracy theorists by contemporary press, politicians, and their own editors. The people digging into Iran-Contra, the same. Those writing about the FBI's involvement in the L.A. gang wars, the same. Gulf of Tonkin researchers, the same. The list goes on. A conspiracy is theorized, and research attempts to see if it's true or not.

    I think you're reacting more to the JREF forum's intense negativity than anything else.

    Again I don't think you understand, there are many other valid reasons why a real investigation is vital, but you should go and find out yourself and stop attacking something that you're ignorant of
    ???
    I've been involved in speculating on a coming false-flag event months before 9/11 happened (as have scores of "conspiracy theorists").

    I'm not sure where I've "attacked" anything, and certainly haven't used any confrontational tone. Why the vitriol?

    (Is my name, "SkepticGuy" causing ideological confusion?)

    Posted 17 years ago #
  12. yfhahn
    Administrator

    I'm not sure what this argument is about...

    It seems that most of the hard feelings are directed at this statement, which is somewhat ambiguous:

    It's looking more and more like the "truth movement" was actually created to destroy any hope of discovering real conspiracy information. If you can't generate interest in those predisposed to have an affinity for your cause... you're lost.
    The latter statement is more like an interesting observation--that the audience of ATS is not particularly interested in 9/11 truth. But there can be lots of reasons for this, and if it is some aspect of the "truth movement" to blame, the "truth movement" is a pretty vague term. Who are we talking about? Eric D. Williams or Paul Thompson? Some of the dogmatic commenters on 9/11 Blogger or the Jersey Girls?

    SkepticGuy, if you can clarify what it is about the "truth movement" or what segment/aspect of it you think is responsible for turning off the ATS audience, I think it would make this exchange a bit clearer, as right now it's just turned into some kind of weird confrontational back and forth.

    As for "conspiracy theorists" (another vague term) I don't think there is any reason to think they shouldn't have valid interest in 9/11 or spend time researching it for everyone's benefit. Certainly association with UFOs, etc. is not helpful for general public activism, but I'm sure that's something the "conspiracy theorists" already understand. Skepticism and inquiry into government and military secrets can be legitimate without being part of your main publicity thrust.

    Posted 17 years ago #
  13. SkepticGuy
    Member

    Re: I'm not sure what this argument is about...

    yfhahn Wrote:

    SkepticGuy, if you can clarify what it is about the "truth movement" or what segment/aspect of it you think is responsible for turning off the ATS audience, I think it would make this exchange a bit clearer, as right now it's just turned into some kind of weird confrontational back and forth
    Excellent idea.

    From my perspective, there are two issues we regularly encounter: attitude and theories.

    Attitude: We've not had good luck with self-proclaimed "9/11 Truthers". To understand why, you'll need to understand that we enforce strict rules of civility and decorum... insults and vulgarity can get people banned very quickly. The vast majority of people that come to ATS and claim involvement with "9/11 Truth" have been angry, mean-spirited, and highly confrontational (imagine the Nico Haupt video, but posting to a board). So, unfortunately, these people will get angry, piss off many members, get themselves banned, and get even more angry.

    We've worked quite a bit with Coast To Coast AM and George Noory on several topics, and this is essentially why he will no longer go anywhere near 9/11 topics. He's had a few guests from the Truth movement, and they ended up insulting callers and he had stop the segment early. Similar attitudinal issues can be seen in the TV segment where Dylan Avery and Jason Bermas are with the editors from Popular Mechanics.

    Now, I certainly concede that our unfortunate experiences are not representative of hard working people in the Truth movement, however, first-hand experiences and first-impressions count for a lot.

    Theories: Some of the worst 9/11 theories are attributed to aspects of the Truth movement. Again I can concede that these are not representative, but the plethora of distracting (often childish) ideas obfuscate and confuse. You'd be surprised to realize that those who consider themselves "conspiracy theorists" (there are those who embrace the term) intensely dislike a lot of the material published by portions of the movement.

    Now, this doesn't diminish the desire to see justice and/or new investigations, but the combined attitude and theory problems make it difficult to maintain a soft spot. ;)

    Those are some generalities that turn stomachs whenever the topic of "9/11 Truth" is brought up. However, when I discussed my visit with NY 911 Truth, the response was positive and hopeful... we want to help.

    You brought up some names...

    Eric and http://www.whatreallyisthematrix.com/
    He's never been held in high regard among the conspiracy-minded.

    I'm not sure I ever considered Paul's timeline work as part of 9/11 Truth... but it is often used both on ATS and by the Truth movement. Nor did I ever consider the Jersey Girls as part of the Truth movement... but I could simply be not up to speed.

    I hope that helps. I'm wide open to discussing more about this... I think it's important to understand how or where the "9/11 Truth message" may have broken down, and how it might be repaired.

    Posted 17 years ago #
  14. yfhahn
    Administrator

    Thanks, this is telling...

    Thanks SkepticGuy, to me this is very telling. Again, this shows the degree to which the "Truth Movement" has failed to, in my opinion, leverage the good faith and efforts of many dedicated citizens and instead hilight speculation and spectacle.

    As I've been wondering before, what's needed? A "reform" in the 9/11 truth movement? How would that work (considering the dynamic that already exists)? A "break" with the movement? Can the good individuals and methods be gathered up, and what would distinguish it (in the public's eye) from the prior movement?

    Posted 17 years ago #
  15. truthmover
    Administrator

    Where did this guy go to school? (Chartier)

    Wow. Sounds like someone is feeding this guy a bunch of garbage. He needs to read The War on Freedom. I suppose its "fair minded" for someone who arrogantly proposes to understand the movement in two weeks time. Is it any surprise that this guy thinks we are lame? No one is pointing him in the right direction. Ya, Loose Change, and 9/11 Mysteries. Great. Its like reading the tabloid news and condemning American journalism. Seriously, how would you feel if someone was very critical of the country, and had only been watching FOX News?

    This isn't journalism or even very good editorializing. Sounds like it was written for a college newspaper.

    My conclusion is that the inside job theory does not stand up to scrutiny. I agree with the analysis offered by Dr. James B. Calvert, more about which below.

    Why? Because there is an undercurrent of hysteria in the Truth Movements presentations. I feel more like I am being Roved and coerced rather than persuaded

    So let's get this straight. Due to an undercurrent of hysteria, all the facts discussed are nullified? David Ray Griffin is a pretty hysterical dude. Uhhh....ya.

    More of the same. Don't let it get to you. This guy makes himself look worse than the movement. We do need to set a better example and strive to present this issue in ways that are more accessible. But let's not feel like every new hit piece in the press is an indicator of our failure. They are just doing their job, and following the rules after all.

    Posted 17 years ago #
  16. Victronix
    Member

    From the ATS thread -

    Skeptic Overlord -

    Keep me up to date - I am one of the 'leaders' of a major chapter of the Truth movement in Pennsylvania, and the Philadelphia-area universities.

    We'd love to help in any way possible.

    Also, I think that if Loose Change is released in theaters in 2007 (like expected), this will create a plethora of Hollywood Buzz. I know that Loose Change is not the most credible source - as does the creators - but it is an elementary film that could very well open many people's eyes to the movement.

    If we can maybe coincide our 'advertising' with its release, I feel it could be of great help.

    Some people I know say that LC'07 will be the nail in the coffin. Is Hollywood buzz going to be the answer? This is the kind of stuff that concerns me. From what I've seen so far, Hollywood is primarily being used to push no plane at the Pentagon and in one case a drone at the WTC. Rosie thinks it's great to have belligerent yelling into a bullhorn at campuses to get the word out.

    911truthla.us doesn't help anything either - they link to Rense and strongly promote no plane at the Pentagon. I heard they are having another "Grand Jury" soon . . . I guess targetting the stars. The last GJ featured Chris Bollyn (a former radio guest on David Duke) and Barbara Honegger (claiming Richard Reid the Shoebomber is actually Osama).

    Posted 17 years ago #

Reply

You must log in to post.