Forum

TruthMove Forum

TruthMove Forum » TruthMove Main Forum

NY911Truth [engineered not to be] Ready for Mainstream Conference (22 posts)

  1. truthmod
    Administrator

    It was pretty bad today. I'll write more later. Disinformation left and right. It was sad to see Fetzer and Tarpley being touted as the leaders of the movement. Kevin Barrett was also in the house. There were many flyers for Nico's video mashup event being handed out, as well as Pentacon DVDs.

    Tarpley's attack on some of those who have done the best job at combating disinformation was disgraceful. He actually put up a slide in his powerpoint presentation for each person he was "outing." He also claimed that the people who said they didn't sign the Kennebunkport warning were lying "because they had been pressured."

    It's too bad the NYC anti-war/progressive/WBAI crowd was subjected to this mess. I felt embarrassed for this movement. Maybe tomorrow will be better. It's going to be kind of ironic to hear William Pepper speak at this event.

    Wake up people! Les Jamieson has been containing, subverting, and mediocritizing this movement for years.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  2. truthmover
    Administrator

    More Looney Tunes

    Went to some of Day 2 of the conference. We've also got someone there this evening to see William Pepper, so there is more to come. I saw Alfred Webre speak. He spoke a great deal about space weaponization and he shouted Judy Wood twice in his lecture making her out to be a hero of the movement.

    But my least favorite and yet most amusing part of the presentation was when he stated that someone had measured electo-magnetic energy outside of Cooper Union, and determined that an exotic weapon was being used to attack attendees, and that this was likely responsible for the low turnout. He made no indication that he was joking.

    He went on to mention "chemtrails", and then to suggest that every hypothesis in the movement should be advanced with the intent to let the public decide on its merit. As if people in the movement should have no similar capacity?

    Beware the 'big tent'. Principle before association.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  3. christs4sale
    Administrator

    I just got back. I wish I could report on Pepper, but I ended up talking with Robin Hordon, who is an ex-air traffic controller and long-time activist, for a while. He is definitely someone who should be heard more than he is, both about the lack of air defense on 9/11 and approaches to activism.

    We discussed Webster Tarpley and his meltdown yesterday and he described at the Vancouver conference how he talked with Tarpley and Tarpley said that he was more interested in concepts and was not the person to go to for "facts." I think Tarpley is attacking the two primary things that are going to make or break the 9/11 movement. He is going after the key people who are exposing the disinformation, like Arabesque and Michael Wolsey, and he is attempting to hurt links between the 9/11 truth movement and the anti-war movement. Hordon, as do I, feels that bridging the anti-war movement with 9/11 must be our next step and his slogan was "9/11 Truth Leads to Peace." His advice regarding techniques to do this is be non-confrontational, forget about the leadership and be very persistent and he has found that it has worked where he is from.

    Hordon was originally going to speak at Ready For Mainstream, but he said that he will not share the stage with people like Tarpley and Fetzer and I found this most honorable. I think what we need to do in NYC is to find a way to give a forum to the right people while cutting the fat at the same time.

    Concerning We Are Change he said we should ask a member, "Change to what? And how are you going to do it?" I really liked this. I can imagine the answers we would get. Overall, he is someone who is one of the most optimistic and experienced people I have been fortunate to meet in this movement and I chose to end my weekend on that.

    Listen to him here: http://visibility911.libsyn.com/index.php?post_id=...

    Posted 9 years ago #
  4. truthmod
    Administrator

    Glad to hear there was an upside.

    I was appalled to hear Fetzer listing various evidence for Israeli/Mossad responsibility for 9/11 as we entered the event today. American Free Press newspapers were also being widely distributed, which had a clear focus on "9/11 was a Zionist job."

    Overall, I think the people responsible for this event all should have known better and deserve to be blacklisted from any future responsible efforts for 9/11 truth.

    As I was glad to hear Jon Gold remark, I have no more tolerance for these people. They've had their second, third, fourth, etc. chances already. There's a well organized campaign to destroy this movement, those who further this campaign should be barred from participation by the genuine activists and researchers. If certain individuals "don't see" the damaging nature of these "pieces of evidence" and these particular researchers, after an honest explanation, they too are agents of disinformation. There's nothing left to be said on that issue.

    Les Jamieson Kevin Barrett Webster Tarpley Jim Fetzer Alfred Webre ...

    Posted 9 years ago #
  5. Victronix
    Member

    Thanks for these posts and descriptions.

    What I'm finding is that it seems that key people in organizing and leadership positions never see these discussions or know anything about them. I write to them and they are in the dark about the issues most in discussion. The KW exposure came to lists I was on via individual activists, but I saw no leaders understanding what was going on or daring to take a position on it and speak out. The pressure to "all get along" and support each other, forget about any such "distractions," stay loyal to friends, etc., is probably large.

    A summary of the worst examples of this conference should be put together into a small piece as a review.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  6. Arabesque
    Member

    I think this issue is really important, and it needs to be taken seriously if we want 9/11 truth to succeed. However, it's a huge question about how to accomplish this.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  7. Diane
    Member

    truthmod wrote:

    I was appalled to hear Fetzer listing various evidence for Israeli/Mossad responsibility for 9/11 as we entered the event today. American Free Press newspapers were also being widely distributed, which had a clear focus on "9/11 was a Zionist job."

    Overall, I think the people responsible for this event all should have known better and deserve to be blacklisted from any future responsible efforts for 9/11 truth.

    Practically speaking, it doesn't seem to me that you're in any position to blacklist anybody. It also doesn't seem to me that a demand that someone be blacklisted would be the most effective way to communicate with the rest of the 9/11 Truth movement about such issues as the promotion of an Israeli/Mossad connection.

    It seems to me that it would be far better to write and widely distribute a concise pamphlet refuting the Israeli/Mossad connection and explaining why it's irresponsible to make such arguments. (I'm not yet knowledgeable to write such an article myself.) Such a pamphlet would, in turn, make it much easier to build up a network of local NYC 9// Truth movement people who agree with you.

    One thing you're up against is the fact that American Free Press has, apparently, been raising money for 9/11 family members and first responders. One conference speaker who was a family member mentioned the support she has been receiving from AFP in speakers' fees, and how she would not have been able to survive without that. Obviously these people would not consider cutting off ties with AFP until such time as TruthMove and its allies manage to build a network equally capable of doing fund-raising events around the country.

    I would suggest that, at the next major 9/11 Truth event, some TruthMove members stand outside distributing leaflets or pamphlets voicing your various concerns and presenting evidence for your point of view. In my opinion, such leaflets or pamphlets should NOT demand the resignation of Les or demand that particular people or groups be ostracised, but, instead, should simply urge people to talk to Les and to other 9//Truth movenent leaders about these issues, and should also urge people to get involved with TruthMove if they agree with TruthMove's concerns.

    The latter will be effective only after TruthMove has, in turn, gotten its act together enough to hold regular public meetings that are announced well in advance.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  8. truthmod
    Administrator

    Frank Morales has been repeatedly approached on the topic of disinformation and damaging associations, yet he continues to go along with Les Jamieson's program. If he doesn't get it by now, I'm afraid I don't have any energy to try to explain it to him. He's a great guy otherwise, but I can only put up with so much. Frank Morales gives Les Jamieson his platform/venue and Jamieson uses that to promote some of the worst stuff possible.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  9. JohnA
    Member

    just curious....

    a few months back Les and Luke R had a very public disagreement and split, in which Luke accused Les of stealing NY911Truth funds - and Les accused Luke and Tom Foti of being infiltrators. Luke publicly admitted that he was now barred from St Marks church.

    I'm just curious if anyone is aware that Les and Luke have reconciled? because at the recent Cindy Sheehan rally in Union Square they were together holding up the 911 Was An Inside Job banner.

    i find it interesting that so many of these public displays that serve to discredit the movement - divide - embarass - appear to contradict the facts on the ground

    Posted 9 years ago #
  10. jfal
    Member

    Hi. Jfal here. I just registered to the site.

    Just got back from the NYC We Are Change event, with Loose Change preview. This Sunday event was not well organized. Scheduled to begin at 3:00, they finally started letting people in by about 4:00. Then, we the $35 attendees all sat around for another hour watching the organizers set-up the event. I got frustrated and left for something to eat. Most of the evening was a waste, having to wait through a bunch of really bad rock bands. But I was happy to see Loose Change Final Cut. It was merely a preview, with several technical malfunctions, and an incomplete end - no conclusion. No Charlie Sheen voice either. The film is good, improved as far as solidity of content, helped quite a bit by interview clips of several of the recent professionals and scholars who have jumped on board in the last couple years.

    Saturday night I saw the new Alex Jones movie, "Endgame", which was scary. He's really right-wing. I hadn't realized how much so until last night. The film portrays the environmental movement and pro-choice advocates as fronts intent on killing off 80-percent of the human race. At both We Are Change events, Saturday and Sunday nights, Ron Paul is treated like the savior. Ron Paul t-shirts, postcards everywhere. It's scary to see the "9/11-truth movement" being usurped by right wing libertarians. It looks like they are really driving the populist wing of whats happening in NYC. I was really surprised by the size of the crowd.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  11. truthmod
    Administrator

    Hey jfal, welcome to the forum. You'll definitely find a sympathetic perspective here on TruthMove: we are also dismayed by the clear right wing, libertarian direction of Alex Jones and friends. While they all seem like genuine activists, and most of them are very responsible on the evidence of 9/11, marrying 9/11 truth to Ron Paul and the right wing NWO conspiracy crowd doesn't bode well for our continued growth and acceptance among the population. I've always felt that the anti-war, progressive demographic was a more fitting ally.

    The film portrays the environmental movement and pro-choice advocates as fronts intent on killing off 80-percent of the human race.

    If this is true, it's a lot worse than I thought. I hope some people start to realize how off-base these attitudes are. Environmental issues are not all hoaxes. Something like 70% of Americans are pro-choice, so this is not the way reach out to people. On top of that, all the studies, and a compassionate morality will show you that giving women the right to choose is the right thing to do.

    For some info on science, birth control, statistics, and abortion, see this video (fast forward to 33:30).

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4669234885...

    And check out some threads on libertarianism here:

    http://www.truthmove.org/forum/tags/libertarians

    Posted 9 years ago #
  12. NicholasLevis
    Member

    jfal:

    What was the surprising size of the crowd?

    Posted 9 years ago #
  13. mark
    Member

    it would take a lot more than an improved technical presentation and some more interviews to salvage anything useful from "Loose With Truth."

    As for Alex Jones, he has been anti-environmental for a long time, promoting the fraudulent idea that peak oil supposedly doesn't exist.

    www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/060706_question...

    THE NY TIMES PUTS 9-11 QUESTIONS IN THE GRAVE As Sad As It Was Predictable Story Marks the End of a Sequential and Planned Campaign to Discredit Authentic 9/11 Research by Michael C. Ruppert and Jamey Hecht

    I have watched “Loose Change” and in my expert opinion it is a very fine piece of CIA disinformation, one that fits an astute maxim by Professor Peter Dale Scott: “Disinformation, in order to be effective, must be 90% accurate.” Even though the film opens with some of my original research (including images taken from the FTW web site), it quickly sinks into a repeatedly debunked and confabulated hypothesis that no airliner hit the Pentagon. This film is so slickly produced (and on such a large budget) that it is hard to believe that amateur filmmakers could have made it. Once the audience buys into all the credible research at the front, they are quickly swept away in a flood of easily impeached high-tech nonsense, and that was the film’s intent.

    UPDATE 3/24/6 - flight77.info

    i hate sort of beating-up on certain segments of the collective of people who are skeptical about the official version of happened on 9/11... but here i go again: scholars for 9/11 truth: another just provocative web site. how can you tell? among other things, on their home page, they promote the 9/11 music video called 'loose change' that offers up every crack pot pod missile theory in the book. 'loose change' is out there just to provoke people emotionally. its substance is in its appeal to teens and twentysomethings. so why are the 'scholars for 9/11 truth' aligning themselves with a tin hat munching 9/11 music video? why are the 'scholars for 9/11 truth' also promoting the no 757 theory? answer: the web site is just provocative. it's using the blanket (AKA 'big tent'; throwing enough shit at the wall) approach to attract more people to the concept that 9/11 was an inside job. then by magic, one of these new people will uncover the proof we need to hang the true conspirators. what's wrong with this 'scholarly' approach? anyone? anyone ? bueler? bueler? once bush & co reach the end of their reign - that's the finish line, they win. once those powers-that-be are out of power, people lose interest. we need to get 'em for 9/11 while they're in office if we're going to end this endless war on terrorism. so the problem with the scholars for 9/11 truth's throw-enough-shit-at-the-wall approach is that they're spinning a new generation of 9/11 skeptics into 9/11 goofballs who are going to spend the next 2 1/2 years looking at the same old pictures of the pentagon going, 'gee, that IS a small hole...' and who will spend endless hours replaying the WTC video trying to see the missile pods. what does it gain the 9/11 truth movement if everyone is a member - but we're all full of shit reciting misinformation? the purpose of the 9/11 truth movement isn't to have more members - it's to end the war on terrorism while it's still possible. and time is really running out.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  14. jfal
    Member

    The Saturday evening "Endgame" event at Webster Hall, by the time I got there at about 6:00 or so, was packed. They filled the main stage room, standing room only. I'm not a good estimator of people numbers, but probably well over 1000 people. The Sunday "Loose Change" event at New World Stages by the evening was crowded, but I think a bit smaller - maybe 800.

    I attended "Ready for Mainstream" Saturday evening and Sunday afternoon. Attendance was not high, probably about 100 or so. Though, this was more like an academic conference, so lower attendance is to be expected. Unlike "We Are Change", it was almost all formal presentations, not entertainment, not a political rally, no movies, no celebrities, no rock bands.

    My overall impression of this weekend in NYC, attending parts of both the "We are Change" and "Ready for Mainstream" events, is that "911-truth" has grown a lot in the past year, but also splintered. Sadly, the most popular wing is a tool to suck naive people into right-wing libertarian politics.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  15. NicholasLevis
    Member

    According to what you write (I am avoiding these events as they make me sick physically) the numbers are similar to those in 2003 and 2004, when saner people were running things, and a bit down from last year.

    However, in 2003-4 it was the "academic conferences" with no stars (at least none bigger than Mike Ruppert or Greg Palast) that were drawing crowds of 500, 800 and 1000-plus, because New Yorkers were actually interested in figuring out what happened, demanding real answers (instead of hearing dark fairy tales from preachers) and doing something about it. In that context, the turnout for "Mainstream" is pathetic, and it is largely thanks to the soporific "big empty tent" approach of one Les Jamieson, and, sadly, the man who enabled him, Frank Morales, who knew better but ultimately lacked for intellectual courage.

    "We Are Change" meanwhile is pulling in about the number of people one would expect at an Immortal Technique concert headlined by Alex Jones, which is what it is - a wrestling match, a pose. As you say, 9/11 is no longer the subject; it has turned into a promotional for "NWO" fantasy politics, with the testosterone aesthetics of Battle of the Monster trucks.

    We should be grateful to these frauds for having maneuvered themselves into a completely irrelevant niche, I suppose. There's still a year or so left for something real to fill the vacuum, before the departure of the Bush regime makes 9/11 strictly historic; although my attitude at this point is mainly one of indifference. When people who made real and voluntary sacrifices to get this movement going are shat upon by their moral inferiors and it causes no stir amongst the majority of movement activists, who prefer to keep organizing and attending their little consumer-oriented revival meetings, I become increasingly content to just watch the train derail. Even at the bitter price of the human and historical disasters to come, now that the perpetrators have gotten away with 9/11. What comes may after all be beyond anyone's ability to change it.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  16. jfal
    Member

    However, in 2003-4 it was the "academic conferences" with no stars (at least none bigger than Mike Ruppert or Greg Palast) that were drawing crowds of 500, 800 and 1000-plus, because New Yorkers were actually interested in figuring out what happened

    The reason why I'm suggesting that the movement is growing is because it looks to me that there are more events this year, less centralized, but more going on across the country, and in other countries. Anyone agree?

    NYC is a splintered mess. I'm curious to know attendance of the other locations.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  17. truthmod
    Administrator

    According to what you write (I am avoiding these events as they make me sick physically)

    Les' Ready for Mainstream gave me an acute pain in my stomach.


    "New Truth" on display over the last few days in NYC was pretty sad.

    http://rigint.blogspot.com/2007/09/no-one-saw-carn...

    Posted 9 years ago #
  18. truthmover
    Administrator

    Who do you trust, and why?

    Truthmod makes a point that should be emphasized. Yes, it was Les Jamieson's "Ready for Mainstream" event. And it appears that he made no comments during the whole proceeding in any effort to temper the wild theories or personal attacks being presented.

    His flyers up on the street before the event began with, "What's the best way to commemorate the anniversary of 9/11?" A bit arrogant, wouldn't you say?

    Well, attendance was low. In fact it seemed to be mostly those who attend meetings at St. Mark's church and their friends. It doesn't look like this event drew the attendance of people outside the movement. And it seems that its impact is mostly being felt right now within the movement.

    So the question at hand is whether we intend to hold Les accountable for this event or not. If this was his first attempt, I'd have nothing to say. Maybe even his third. But please hear the testimony of my experience and so many others. Many of us were not surprised by anything we saw. Upset, but not surprised. In all fairness, Les Jamieson is an adherent to the 'big tent' strategy. According to Alfred Webre this involves presenting all evidence and speculation with the intention that the public will decide for themselves what has merit. Sound lofty for a second, but it practical terms this leads to muddying of the water as people are genuinely confused about which sources have greater logical merit. We present many of the facts, and some of the fallacies regarding 9/11 truth here on TruthMove. But they are kept quite distinctly separate from one another.

    To be clear, the strategy here at TruthMove has always involved our critique of the 'big tent.' Principle before association. Broad values before personal interests. Quality before quantity. And on a very basic level, this movement is far too obviously infiltrated for the 'big tent' strategy to be practical. Possibly with very strong moderation, but without it, we find our wells being poisoned.

    So, the lack of moderation provided by Les Jamieson over a long period of time, and in many circumstances, has allowed for the poisoning of our well, yet again. If this is merely due to his being convinced that the 'big tent' is the best way to go, then he needs to be held accountable for his poor moderation. However, as this is just the latest example of this behavior, and very much in light of the thousands of constructive e-mails that he has received over the years, and quite apparently ignored, we should consider whether or not this person, very much like Fetzer, has insulated himself from critique.

    If so, he has marginalized himself along with the rest. After all that time being attacked by Nico, he's actually ended up supporting the very same people that Nico associates himself with.

    WHO DO YOU TRUST??? Who seems reasonable and relatively humble before their values? Who seems to spend most of their time trying to promote the best this movement has to offer? And...Who seem friendly? Concerned citizens have a lot of love for their community.

    Les is missing something. And maybe what he is missing disqualifies him as the point man for 9/11 truth in NYC. Pointing to his long service and consistency is moot. You could look to Tarpley for a similar long term commitment gone sour. For some time Les has been promoting the best we have to offer with our worst. He is free to do so. However, he is not free to represent us all as a leader of the movement if his actions serve to undermine our collective efforts.

    Something has to change.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  19. John(A), Regarding Luke and Les, having personally gone through that whole saga, i'm not suprised. They are so alike, despite their seeming differences in idealogy and the fact Les is on the quiter side and Luke is up in your face. They are the yin and yang of the same disease.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  20. jfal
    Member

    Steve Jones is reporting 650 attendance at the Inidana conference.

    http://www.911blogger.com/node/11303

    Posted 9 years ago #
  21. Diane
    Member

    mark wrote:

    once bush & co reach the end of their reign - that's the finish line, they win. once those powers-that-be are out of power, people lose interest. we need to get 'em for 9/11 while they're in office if we're going to end this endless war on terrorism

    People won't necessarily lose interest, especially if the next President continues the endless war on "terrorism." The 9/11 Truth movement may need to change its approach, but there will still be plenty of good reason to examine the alleged basis of the war. Not only that, but it seems to me that bringing the perps to justice would be easier once they are out of office.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  22. truthmod
    Administrator

    NY911Truth

    Les, in his grand follow up to 9/11/07, showed "9/11 Eyewitness" to a room of about 15 hobbling, over-60 types at St. Marks Church last night. We went by and checked it out, I even filmed it for a second. Les smiled and waved at the camera. As he was doing his intro I noticed that he seemed to have lost all humor and effort, barely making an attempt to seem like he's really cares about any of this. It must not be fun being so alienated; his supportive base shrinks every year and the Ready for Mainstream BS was the final straw for a lot of his former friends.

    Is it worth one more attempt to salvage the venue by reaching out to Frank Morales?

    Posted 9 years ago #

Reply

You must log in to post.