9/11 Truth Revelation Theory: If we are able to completely reveal 9/11 to the public, we not only demolish the worldwide network of corruption at their foundation, but we set the stage for revelation on a host of other even more important issues (poverty, environment, alternative energy and sustainability, end of war) and monumental untruths, and even more so, we might even change the very underlying consciousness and social fabric of the world.
Ok, I want to add that Truthmove has taken a VERY important step in all of this in that you guys are setting the stage for an 'International Truth Movement,' which in any case, is where we are headed. That you are raising awareness of and bring these other important issues to the consciousness of the world under structure of a unified ITM is good to see, finally!
It is my hope that you guys will slowly and carefully build on this with utmost integrity and professionalism and hopefully someday Truthmove will be known as the 'Birth of The International Truth Movement.'
...My opinion is that Truthmove will need to collaborate with and recruit all of these related (environmental, peace, anti-war, vote fraud, social reform & equality, poverty, health care system reform, alternative/sustainable, left and progressive, etc) groups to form this international movement. The ITM will provide for a 'Great Worldwide Alternative' to life as we know it currently.
Many leaders and activists didn't just latch on to the 9/11 truth issue, but carefully progressed to this issue from other social or environmental movements. You may be surprised by the number of people who share alarm about the environment and other social issues.
My own first taste of activism began at 30 as an environmental activist/graphic designer (to halt US Forest Service logging in the Shawnee) and then against siting of a waste incinerator (often located in economically depressed, minority areas). This led to becoming an media activist which led to 9/11 efforts. Many have similarly progressed here from peace organizations.
It is important that healthy feelings of empowerment are developed and encouraged by the community, rather than a sense of alienation.
It seems to me that the struggle for 9/11 truth is also a struggle for the Constitution of the United States. All efforts at social and environmental reform need this bedrock restored to stand a chance at success. Justice for 9/11 would allow for a sweeping of the house.
I am aware of one person's project that could have monumental reverberations. That there exists a great deal of brain power and creativity in the network translates into cause for hope, for all issues.
TruthandJustice:
I became invested in 9/11 research as a New Yorker grieving and seeking justice, but your "9/11 Revelation" theory is why I stuck with it through the years: as the potential key to the Doors of Perception, if I may. 9/11 isn't the whole house; it's only the key.
Since last year, I've been cynical about it, but it's still possible.
Hey... can you guys please add your insight to this thread....
http://www.911blogger.com/node/11646
Thanks.
I’m not trying to marginalize CD, I just think we should explore and promote ALL evidence on the subject, not merely one facet.
JonGold, you're right. ALL available and known evidence should and must be analyzed by our movement, not just CD. To me, CD is a foregone conclusion as it is for a lot of others;however, we must be strategic in how we promote our information. My opinion is that our strategy should be to reveal the majority of the other very important 911 information (i.e. - foreknowledge, FBI-CIA obstruction, US support and ties to OBL and Al Qaeda throughout the 80s and 90s, the resulting coverup, the MOTIVE behind 911 laid out by the neocons in the early 1990s, the use of 9/11 to push through an obvious agenda) and then when we have successfully proved to the public the lies and deceit of 9/11, we 'sweep the house' with proof of CD. I believe that mentioning the WTC CD as the first thing in revealing 911 to someone is a possible setup for failure. I have witness it many times. Someone asks 'So what do you think happened,' Response - 'Well ma'am it was bombs, - 'Oh OK then, you guys are nuts!' The proof we have of CD would be MUCH easier to ease into if we have the more believable 911 lies revealed first.
This movement at this particular time, does not even have the proper structure to lay out a good enough strategy to promote and market to the public. The majority (THOUGH NOT ALL OF US) of the movement is too loosely connected, disorganized, unfocused (instead, Ron Paul), and undisciplined to lay out this national strategy of professionally marketing our cause.
9/11 Truth may be the key to wakening the people to all the other pressing issues of the world. 9/11 Truth could be the turning of the lie upon itself. Trust me, I consider the effects, and I have banked on 9/11 Truth as the major watershed moment of this time.
But currently the sentiment is something I balk at, as it sounds like: the process of social transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, or never to be, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing ideas such as 9/11 Truth.
In this mode, do our thoughts become bombastic and dependent? I'm hoping for a sustainable mindset to encourage a sustainable paradigm to uncover the balanced world which we have eroded mainly for our need for massive distractions.
I'm concerned that 9/11 Truth as the "big one" theory is lock down to the clarity of our vision.
As I've said before, I think the environmental/systemic paradigm shift is much more profound and fundamental than the "Oh my god, 9/11 was an inside job!" paradigm shift. Since the beginning, TruthMove has been very consciously invested in the "9/11 revelation theory," as should be clear from our writing, activism, and the structure of our site.
But I too worry about 9/11 truth in a vacuum or being used to forward extremist ideologies. 9/11 truth is in many ways an indoctrinating opportunity for those facilitating the waking up. As the CIA brainwashing manual states, the best time for reworking someone's mind is after breaking down their existing worldview. I'm afraid that many people are either pointed towards "NWO Scum" and "Ron Paul 2008" or they're just simply left wading through the details of 9/11. There are very few leaders or resources which truly encourage people to think for themselves and point them in the right directions.
Of course, most of these "awakened" people are now activated towards skepticism, which is good. But from the general conversation I see going on in the movement not many people seem too concerned (or they're not spending much time talking about) with the bigger picture of a completely corrupt and unsustainable system.
Remember, if 9/11 truth "comes out," the same people, attitudes, ideologies will seek to control how it unfolds.
I feel less and less affinity with a community that can spend countless hours talking about thermite, Ptech, video mashups, Kennebunkport warnings, squibs, etc., and never mention the fact that we're in the middle of a mass extinction and global meltdown. (This is not meant as an insult to anyone, especially those on this board, all of whom do very important work, some it addressing the above issues).
Take a look at our priorities page:
http://www.911blogger.com/node/11724
Why is Pakistan's connection to 9/11 being "attacked" by so many? Same with Sibel... Same with anything not having to do with CD, the Pentagon, etc...
I think I'm going to try and avoid commenting at 911Blogger.com, and just post articles. The difference between here and there is night and day. There, people attack me day in and day out with insinuations, accusations, etc... etc... Here, people are nice.
I barely read 911blogger anymore.
Why is Pakistan's connection to 9/11 being "attacked" by so many? Same with Sibel... Same with anything not having to do with CD, the Pentagon, etc...
What are you, LIHOP or something? None of those things matter man; they blew up the towers and shot a missile into the Pentagon! Sibel Edmonds, Colleen Rowley, Cooperative Research--snore.
What are you, LIHOP or something? None of those things matter man; they blew up the towers and shot a missile into the Pentagon! Sibel Edmonds, Colleen Rowley, Cooperative Research--snore.
Ha. I got accused of talking about "shill-like minutia" when I talked about the incriminating, non-physical evidence at the Pentagon (but not the "missle" or "no 757 part").
Just wrote a review for the complete 9/11 timeline:
http://arabesque911.blogspot.com/2007/09/paul-thom...
LIHOP I believe is used mostly as an intentionally divisive phrase to create pointless infighting (the most prominent users of the MIHOP/LIHOP counter-labels are Webster Tarpley, and Nico Haupt). There are certain issues that are focus points for divisive attacks and battles. The Pentagon is another.
While I believe the distinction between LIHOP and MIHOP is somewhat important (but over-emphasized), the divisive battles over who believes what are completely irrelevant and pointless. What I mean is that civil critique of a position is valuable, personally attacking someone for what they believe is not.
http://www.oilempire.us/fake-debate.html
Within the 9/11 truth movement, there is a false dichotomy between whether 9/11 was LIHOP - Let it Happen on Purpose or MIHOP - Made it Happen on Purpose. This LIHOP / MIHOP debate was apparently created by a fringe member of the truth movement who vociferously claims that none of the plane crashes happened. This divisiveness keeps government critics from uniting and obscures the obvious: if there was a deliberate effort to allow the attacks to happen, then efforts would have been made to ensure that they happened as desired while avoiding outcomes that would not be mitigable (if the first planes hit Indian Point nuclear power station north of New York or the National Military Command Center in the Pentagon).
The powers-that-be knew 9/11 was coming for years (a previous effort was stopped in 1995), and had enormous intelligence warnings before the attacks. FBI efforts to investigate the flight schools before 9/11 were thwarted by senior management. It is likely the hijackers were allowed to complete their preparations and hijack the planes but then the "auto land" uninterruptible autopilot was used to "hijack the hijackers" (a double cross?).
from Nicholas Levis, summeroftruth.org:
"Staging 9/11 as an inside job is going to work best (in fact, is likely to work only) if there actually exists an active network of anti-American terrorists who are deeply committed to killing Americans in response to U.S. policy. In other words, those who would blame Qaeda need a (relatively) real Qaeda. A partly-real enemy is much better than an entirely fabricated one.
"The most robust way for insider masterminds to stage 9/11 and get away with it is to arrange for their agents to infiltrate among "real foreign terrorists." Let them come up with their own plots (or plant plots among them), choose a plot that will produce the results desired by the masterminds, and see that through to fruition. At some point, the masterminds and their agents will hijack the plot from the would-be hijackers, to make sure it happens. You won't risk the whole game on the ability of amateurs to get away with it, you will help them along or even replace them (with a remote control hijacking, for example). But it's best to have "real terrorists" in play. They leave a more solid trail of evidence internationally. Cops and agents and academics of two dozen countries can honestly confirm the existence of an al-Qaeda network. That way there is less need to initiate outside observers into the plot and you don't have to hope they are all stupid, as they would have to be to fall for a complete fabrication of "Qaeda." (Qaeda at this point is just a term of convenience for the Islamist extremist networks.)
"The best result would be for a whole bunch of Islamist extremists running around believing that their crew pulled off 9/11 all by themselves (how inspiring for them!). The patsies should believe they actually did it. This was the case with the Reichstag Fire and Marinus van der Lubbe: the patsy believed he had done it."
http://rigorousintuition.blogspot.com/2004/10/skin...
I've long thought that if we assume a decision had been taken to let it happen, then we should expect that measures were be taken to ensure it happened precisely as desired, and spectacularly so. With so much at stake, nothing would be left to the skill and luck of the 19 hijackers. Flight 77's 270 degree turn to hit the ground floor of the virtually unoccupied side of the Pentagon, while supposedly piloted by the grossly incompetent Hani Hanjour, is the most striking example. The recent report that the WTC black boxes were recovered after all, is suggestive of the same: that the data conflicted somehow with the received fiction. Perhaps the hijackers were themselves hijacked.
www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=22903415&post...
Rice Farmer said...
Allow me to emphatically agree with the non-endorsement of "Loose Change." I strongly feel this video and its popularity are detrimental to the 9/11 truth movement. Assuming the best of intentions on the part of its makers, the physical evidence approach diverts attention from the excellent evidence presented in "Rubicon," which is exactly what debunkers want. Because Bush cleaned up the crime scenes and destroyed the physical evidence as quickly as possible, the physical evidence approach is by nature highly speculative and even theoretical. This makes it an extremely easy target for debunkers, as everyone can see. Thus the "9/11 baiting" that is used to draw everyone into futile arguments about the towers. Further, many people in the 9/11 truth movement have fallen for the debunkers' non sequitur argument that proving planes brought down the towers also disproves US complicity. In fact, proving that planes brought down the towers proves only that planes brought down the towers. By contrast, debunkers flee from discussion of the evidence presented in "Rubicon." Their astounding claim is that this "is not evidence." And they get away with this because nine of 10 people in the 9/11 truth movement see only the towers and fall victim to this baiting. They foam at the mouth and argue about melting points and simulations, which are easily countered by plausible arguments from the other side. The whole thing is an exercise in futility.
There is probably a basis in legal argumentation for avoiding LC and the physical evidence approach. Mine is based on logic and strategy.
Ignoring the warnings, the changes in policy prior to the event, etc... because it's LIHOP is absurd. LIHOP and MIHOP mean absolutely nothing. If they knew of the attacks, and made a conscious effort to do nothing so they succeed, then they made it happen. However, the facts, and information about that day suggest a more active role. Maybe there was a legitimate attack happening on 9/11, and certain people, and countries stumbled across it, and tried to warn America, but little did they know that the powers in America were currently doing everything to make sure they succeed. Terrorism DOES happen. People in the 9/11 Truth Movement act as though that's not the case. On September 12th, 1970, 3 or 4 planes were simultaneously hijacked. They weren't crashed into buildings, but the fact that it happened, proves that a simultaneous hijacking could take place. Those who ignore certain information have no interest in seeking the truth, but instead, are more interested in proving whichever "pet theory" of the day is popular, right.
Aside from the labels of MIHOP and LIHOP having become a method of class orientation within the movement, the labels themselves do not really have much distinctive consequence. More importantly, the public at large harbors either the premise that the American government, especially at its highest levels, could not possibly be evil enough make 9/11 on purpose, or that it's just unfortunate or tragic that they let it happen on purpose. Any which way, the focus on MIHOP and LIHOP enters into moral speculation. We cannot prove their level of good and evil. It only comes back to the movement in the divisive effect that we discuss.
Any which way, even if 9/11 is framed as "just" incompetence, or even as an act of God or the devil, bottom line is that there was no accountability. Any which way, this administration proved to be an irredeemable liability to America in respects to 9/11, and in doing so they should have lost their position of influence. But they overwhelmingly spun it as their greatest achievement, even triumph, and in doing so created the most central form of cognitive dissonance that this country knows. MIHOP vs. LIHOP is a creation of that cognitive dissonance.
Ha, here is what I wrote in 2005, when I was really hyped up and thought 9/11 truth was going to inspire a revolution:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboa...
I still think taking action (educating and promoting) is vital. But it's too bad that some of the main examples people are getting of what action is seem to be calling people NWO Scum and campaigning for Ron Paul. On the other hand, we do have the Truthaction campaign, which seems to be mobilizing more diverse demographics.
Yes, LIHOP/MIHOP is pretty pointless
as i and others have said before, getting your head around the IMPLICATIONS of "9/11 Truth" or whatever you want to call it, is a pretty grueling process. the brain seems to latch on to specifics and labels rather than grasping the bigger picture. feeling like you've "achieved" LIHOP or MIHOP doesn't mean SHITHOP unless it propels you to start taking action and spreading the truth.
personally i like to reiterate that i don't claim to know exactly how it happened, but that there is a hell of a lot of evidence for government complicity and it is simply a FACT that there are huge, glaring LIES and OMISSIONS in the official story.
final point: do you think the US government's intelligence and military apparatus would let some islamic fundamentalist hop on some planes, hijack them and crash them into the targets of their choice!!?? oh, well maybe they just watched on radar and knew exactly where they were going!!!! fuck that, LIHOP=MIHOP=GET OUT IN THE FUCKING STREETS
To bring this all to a conclusion, it seems like many of us, in the "Enough is Enough" vein, agree that the movement needs a new found respect for researchers who refrain from speculation and declarations. We need to forward hard evidence first and foremost. We need to understand certain people's affinity for a LIHOP perspective, and encourage them to explore more evidence and feel what "they let it happen" really means.
I can't stand when people say, "Oh, well maybe they let it happen." as a sort of dismissal of the subject. Like that's OK with them? No, don't let those people get away with such a crude rationalization; offer them evidence and press them on whether letting it happen is really any better than making it happen. And whether the control freaks in charge of our country would really look the other way and let their enemies do something without knowing or controlling what it was.
This thread represents the moment at which Truthmod and I started working with Nick at NY911truth on the 9/11/05 march. We had spent a couple of years learning about the issue, and then felt compelled to take action. That necessity is expressed in my post from the same thread.
The Second Phase - Action
What you have roughly outlined here is the basis for the 'second phase' of this inquiry. The first involves our learning the uncensored version of our history, consideration of evidence, focus on prominent theories, social challenges, and psychological adjustments. For example, I have spent the last couple years asking questions about 9/11. I have learned a lot more about our history, I have looked at a great deal of evidence, I have become familiar with most of the major theories, I have faced great challenges attempting to share my skepticism with others, and I have faced a great personal challenge accepting that many of my long held assumptions have been wrong. For some time these explorations and challenges helped guide me toward a healthy skepticism regarding the 'official' story, and ultimately lead to my recognition of 'probable cause'.
This was the point of departure. When I decided that the case had been adequately made that we should strongly question the actions, motives, and assumptions of our leaders regarding the attack, and that no further 'smoking gun' was needed to demand a public inquiry, I realized that it was time to challenge myself to take action. For a time I was mired in the physical evidence with those who would distract us from the concept of 'probable cause'. Scared to take action, I prefered to believe that we were looking for proof that might justify action. Its was easier to feel that I need not take action until the case was made. However, I soon realized that this search for the 'ultimate proof' might never end, and only served to draw me away from my duty to educate others.
So now I've moved forward. Drawn my line in the sand. Crossed the Rubicon. And I'm ready to act. As you suggest, the internal debate regarding the level of complicity is hardly functional in this second phase or our inquiry. While I will not diminish the importance of these debates taking place within the movement, an outward focus requires that we decide on a unified front designed to welcome others into their own exploration of the facts. And to do this we only really need to present unresolved anomalies that require official response, or to create cognitive dissonance that inspires others to explore the evidence for themselves. The cover-up is certainly the most compelling evidence for the uninitiated.
So now that I'm in this second phase I require both the opportunity to educate others, and also a forum of those who have made this transition with whom I can plan and progress. Thankfully there are a number of people here at DU who are making this transition as well.
Thanks for the inspiring post. I hope that it helps some of us to focus our attention on what's most important. - R.C.
Nick's post and our responses are over 2 years old. And I can't say that our position has really changed during that time. We just understand it better though our experience. Many posting here have a similar story to tell.
So shall we spin our wheels in one place re-discovering and reiterating the problems we face, or shall we get to setting a good example?
TruthandJustice911 is working on a responsible conference. This is very encouraging. We're talking about hosting a Truth Movement event with diverse speakers in NYC before too long. What more can we do? How can we make it more clear to the public that there is a distinct part of this movement that is specifically concerned with sticking to the facts? Those who present only that which can not be easily refuted.
I don't know who else in the movement has got this covered, but I would say that the people posting to this forum may very well be those most capable of manifesting the positive example we need to set.
Has anyone taken a look at 91blogger.com's Oct 1st (yesterday) posts from MN and Seattle CHANGE? If you haven't take a look?
Why the hell is it that CHANGE is allowed to take over this movement? How did this come to be? This is not what I signed up for.
You must log in to post.