He gave Haupt a forum? When was this?
I remember that he hosted Fetzer long after he began promoting the most blatant of disinformation.
You can see some of his response to me regarding these issues here:
http://sander.gnn.tv/blogs/31263/The_Real_Change_a...
He is certainly willing to role around with the snakes and defend them if he isn't one himself.
http://www.mail-archive.com/cia-drugs@yahoogroups....
quote:
Are you familiar with Nico Haupt. I saw him at Fetzer's 911 book rollout event back in April 2007 at VOX POP in Brooklyn NY with Sander Hicks. Let's just put it like this: Nico is wrapped a bit too tight. He was gaunt and chain smoking cigarettes and claiming everybody was disinfo and CIA in a highly precise german accent. He has aligned himself with Webfairy and believes the planes crashing into WTC were not real, not possible.
Fetzer believes that in addition to the planes and explosives, there must have been something like scalar weapons or mininukes used because the towers collapsed too fast. Nico thinks Fetzer is making progress in having made this accomodation but is still far off the mark. I told Fetzer that the minute you bring in the miraculous and magical stuff into the equation, you turn people off - better to just state what could not be a sufficient cause and leave it at that.
sounds like one of those typical circus event.
and - he also hosted Webster Tarpley at his coffee house.
As is ever the case, the small minority in here know that Sander and Les are shady, and the vast majority out there have no clue.
As far as NYCCAN goes, I keep coming back to what kills the thing dead in it's tracks. No 9/11 truth organization has ever raised anything close to a million dollars, and yet the first year budget, which according the initiative needs to be secured BEFORE any action can be taken, is $10 million.
They inevitably got enough signatures taking two elections cycles to do so. And there is a slim possibility that it could get on the ballot and pass. But it would face insurmountable legal and financial challenges that would entirely prevent a productive outcome.
I guess these people think it's the thought that counts.
yes. 80 year old actor Ed Asner played Lou Grant on TV.
That was a good one . . .
and don't forget all the internal landmines waiting to explode - should this thing actually pass and $10 million actually materialize.
1 - the media will have a field day making a mockery of the initiative.
2 - the 'plants' will make sure to direct the investigation into embarassing cul-de-sacs of useless research.
3 - the disruptors in the movement will be out - in force - creating one division after another based on anti-semitism and Pentacon rubbish and no-planes and tv fakery and the kitchen sink.
4 - and these three problems above will all work in a sickening symbiotic relationship - the 'plants' bowing to pressure from the disruptors to investigate rubbish like PentaCon - that will in turn feed the media ammunition to embarass us - that will in turn divide the movement and discourage the public - that will in turn empower the disruptors even more, etc etc.
of course there are those who claim this initiative is our ONLY hope - its all we got - so we must support it.
well - let me say this. if this thing DOES pass - i had better hear the legitimate voices of this movement - EVERY FRIGGIN DAY - fighting tooth and nail to defend the integrity of the initiative. i had better see 911Truth.org and AE911Truth and Gold and Blogger and everyone else - ourselves included - lining up to make sure that this monster we created stays on its leash.
Truthmover and JohnA,
You summed it up. Funding and disruption. And the fact that no one involved with NYCCAN's actions reflect that disruption could be an almost definite possibility.
Funding is a very good point. Lets even give them the benefit of the doubt because the petition says that the budget is "not to exceed $10,000,000 per year for the conduct of its investigation and related activities." But they need to raise at least $800,000 annually just to cover the commissioners' salaries at absolute minimum. It would be near impossible, even without the current recession, to receive donations from the general public for any controversial 9/11-related function that even approached that amount. And there is no transparency as to how much these private, wealthy donors are contributing. They could not be contributing that much at all and then this is all a ruse because there will not be the money to let this happen. The lack of transparency for this is troubling.
The House Select Committee on Assassinations, where funding was not an issue because it was public, was derailed from having two honest lawmakers, Richard Sprague as Chief Counsel and Henry Gonzalez as Chairman, to having two dishonest ones, G. Robert Blakey as Chief Counsel and Louis Stokes as Chairman. Check out the chapter in the Assassinations called "The Sins of Robert Blakey" to see how this was accomplished.
With Jim Garrison, when he subpoenaed individuals from Texas, Ohio and California, the governors in each state either denied the request or it was conditional so that the person extradited would have to be granted immunity. So the subpoena powers that the initiative grants could be rendered useless by powerful people. The only thing that can save it from that is major nation-wide public support.
All this being said, if this thing does pass and does happen, I agree with John that we, especially us New Yorkers, need to watchdog the hell out of this thing.
For an overview of Uri Geller's public personality and a debunking of his "abilities," see here: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-339686992... I have mixed feelings on Randi, but I believe his debunking of Geller revealed Geller's "abilities" to be fraudulent.
Here, Uri Geller refers to Edgar Mitchell as his friend:
http://site.uri-geller.com/edgar_mitchell__gillian...
This is a portion of the bio page on Uri Geller's website:
In 1972, Uri left Israel for Europe, where he immediately attracted widespread attention. In Germany, witnessed by reporters and photographers, he stopped a cable car in mid-air using only the power of his mind. He then did the same to an escalator in a major department store. That same year he went to the United States at the invitation of astronaut Captain Edgar Mitchell of the Apollo 14 mission, the sixth man to set foot on the moon, and scientist, inventor and author Andrija Puharich MD. Among the notable scientists he met were Professor Gerald Feinberg of Columbia University physics department, Ronald Hawke from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Ron Robertson of the Atomic Energy Commission and NASA's Dr Wernher von Braun, " Father of the Space Age", who testified that his own wedding ring bent in his hand without being touched at any time by Geller.
Geller had ties to a high-level scientist in the DIA named Eldon Byrd who performed electromagnetic experiments. See:
http://www.urigeller.com/nypr.htm
I ask Geller if it's true: was he a psychic spy for Mossad? "Look," he says soberly, and I'm expecting him to say it's all nonsense. Instead, he says, "What I did in Israel for Mossad I cannot talk about. There were rumors. Some of them are real, some of them are not. Andrija wrote very powerful things in his book, which were true, about the Entebbe raid, where we knocked out radar systems. {This was not in Andrija's book 'Uri'. - Internet editor.} And probably, I believe, the whole thing with Andrija was financed by the American Defense Dept." Later on, he says, "People from Washington came to see me."
People?
"The CIA approached me personally to work for them," he says. This would've been 1975." After SRI, I was living in Mexico, and two CIA agents came over to me, in Zona Rosa. They showed me their credentials. They said they'd like to talk to me. They said they knew all about the SRI experiments. Then they started testing me in Mexico. And then they started giving me tasks. Like to spy on the Russian embassy, because it was this espionage center in Latin America. Like to erase the discs on the computer floors" of the embassy. They sat me many times on Aero Mexico flights between two KGB agents next to me, who were carrying diplomatic pouches chained to their wrists. My task was to erase the computer discs in the pouches, to tell them what was in the pouch, things of that nature. I did it. Of course, I wasn't paid for it, but they promised me a visa for America, so I could work [here] forever, which I did get later on."
He says it went on from '75 through '77. "Because I was young, naive, gullible, I did it for ideological reasons. I had a James Bond mind. I liked adventure, being a spy... Then, later on, I really got scared from some of the things they wanted me to do and I catapulted out of it."
By striking coincidence or, as Geller happily insists, synchronicity - Byrd happens to be staying at the Algonquin, too. Geller had asked him to come from his home in Illinois to help him give his twohour Learning Annex lecture, something they'd done only once before, Byrd tells me, in Japan.
Byrd's name has been linked to Geller's for years. Today, he tells me, he's an inventor. But from 1968 into the late 80s, he was an engineer for the Naval Surface Weapons Center in Silver Spring, MD (a suburb of DC), with an interest in what he calls "unusual and unexplainable phenomena." In the early 70s, when Geller came to DC to give one of his lectures, Byrd arranged to meet him and administer a little test.
At his Weapons Center lab, Byrd had worked with "shape memory alloys" metals that change shape only under specific conditions, like extreme temperatures. When you return them to those conditions, they "remember" that shape and go back to it. They're used, for example, in antennae for satellites. You mold them into their antenna shape at a temperature near absolute zero. Then, at room temperature, you can crumple them into a little ball and stuff them into a pocket on the side of the satellite. Out in space, where it's zero degrees, that little ball "remembers" and pops out of its pocket, back in antenna shape, ready to transmit. { Memory metals return to the pre - formed shape when warmed. - Internet editor.}
Byrd tested Geller's power to manipulate snippets of a filament of a shape metal alloy, figuring it'd be "pretty difficult to cheat." Basically, he says that Geller was indeed able to bend the wire with his mind, in ways that couldn't be reproduced physically.
I should also say that I feel that Randi successfully exposed Geller's abilities as fraudulent, but that does not negate who Geller is connected to.
From Mitchell's own book By the Way of the Explorer:
Endnote section Ch14 #2:
After the Geller work, I was asked to brief the then-director of the CIA, Ambassador (subsequently President) George H.W. Bush, on our activities and their results. In later years, I met with several Russian scientists who not only had documented results similar to ours, but also were actively using "psychic" technics against the U.S. and its allies during the Breznev period.
The following posting on the Education Forum connects Arthur Young, inventor of the Bell Helicopter and stepfather of Michael Paine (who housed LH Oswald and Marina Oswald before the assassination) to Puharich. Puharich introduced Mitchell to Geller.
Michael’s step-father, Bell employee Arthur M. Young, is also of interest here. Young was a member of the Round Table Organization, which was founded by Andrija Puharich. In the 1950s, the CIA sent Puharich to Israel to get the famous psychic Uri Geller, who was himself a Mossad agent. All the 1940s and 50s, Puharich was involved in Army Intelligence research into parapsychology for information gathering purposes, and the Round Table Organization was also a front for this. The RTO was also closely associated with the Armed Forces Special Weapons Project, which focused on Atomic research, and medical research on the effects of radiation was sub-contracted to the RTO. Funding for the RTO came from SRI, under the direction of Hal Puthoff. Puthoff was a friend of Luis Alvarez, who had used the Zapruder film to determine that Oswald killed JFK. The two had sat on the Robertson Panel, which debunked UFOs. Two others members included Frederick Durant, who worked at Bell with Dorenberger, Young, and Paine. Dornberger, Durant, Werner Von Braun, and another Nazi scientist named Krafft Ehricke worked together on a concept for a “moon baseâ€.
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/lofiversion/inde...
Were your colleagues at NASA suspicious when you returned?
Everything proceeded normally. I later became a standby pilot for Apollo 16, and retired from NASA in 1972. The reaction at NASA was very, very minimal! Except for Wernher von Braun and quite a few engineers, NASA management ignored the experiments. [While on board Apollo 14, he conducted a series of private ESP experiments that had not been approved by NASA. -c4s] Many people came to my office and closed the door and wanted me to tell them about it, which I did. Nobody else said a thing.
Wernher was very intrigued by it and was very supportive. He wanted me to do a survey of NASA installations to see if there was any place that would be useful and appropriate for us to do some more of this work, to further these studies in a deeper way. But we both left NASA before we ever got that really accomplished. He also came and spoke at a fundraising dinner for the Institute of Noetic Sciences.
How did you meet Uri Geller?
The gentleman who was originally doing work with him, Dr. Andrija Puharich, called me and asked me if I was interested in meeting him. Geller has been investigated many times all over the world by scientists and magicians who are trying to debunk him. You have to work with these people on their terms. You find out what their shtick is, so to speak, and you set up a science protocol that works within the parameters that they are comfortable with. We did not set up a controlled experiment to do teleportation, for example. We didn't really know how to do that.
Dr. Peter Dale Scott Endorses NYCCAN http://www.911blogger.com/node/20704
Well, like it or not, this effort now has the support of a good majority of prominent movement figures.
I should say that were this effort coordinated in a responsible manner and were the initiative itself remotely practical I would certainly support it as well.
But it's not.
And I'm just amazed at Mitchell being such a shady character! I'm assuming he won't end up on the commission if the initiative passes. At that point there will be greater pressure to prevent any bad press. But then again, dumber things have happened in this movement.
Thanks for the "deeper" Edgar Mitchell research! It's fascinating how there are several levels -- the obvious "UFO conference keynote speaker" level -- which would cause most to just stop there because it seems like enough! and then the rest that you are finding.
The challenge also is to put it into succinct terms that are easy to digest for people who have never heard of Uri Geller, etc.
This was just emailed to me:
July 27, 2009
9/11 FAMILIES, FIRST RESPONDERS AND SURVIVORS TO TAKE NEW YORK CITY TO COURT OVER NYC CAN PETITION
SEVENTY THOUSAND New Yorkers signed the NYC CAN petition, raising their voices in support of NYC CAN’s demand for accountability. They have chosen to place the decision to create a new 9/11 investigation – a REAL 9/11 investigation – exactly where it belongs: before the voters of New York City this November. The voices of SEVENTY THOUSAND Americans who believe in democracy and believe that government exists to serve the people – and not the other way around – have been GAGGED by ONE so-called “PUBLIC SERVANT†– The New York City Clerk – who denied the petition and the voice of the people.
Welcome to America. Democracy denied.
Did you REALLY expect those in halls of power to honor the WILL OF THE PEOPLE? Did you expect this demand for accountability to go uncontested by those who have forgotten the very meaning of the word? Perhaps this obstruction of democracy would go unchallenged in THEIR America. Not in OUR America.
9/11 family members, first responders and survivors expected nothing less than business as usual and ARE NOT HAVING IT. They are preparing to take the City of New York to court to challenge the wrongful denial of our right to decide on the creation of a new 9/11 investigation.
Friends, your determination and generosity have brought us to this crucial moment. TRUTH IS AT THE CROSSROADS, DEMOCRACY UNDER FIRE AND THE DEFINING MOMENT IN THE QUEST FOR ACCOUNTABILITY IS UPON US. This is YOUR movement and nothing may bring you closer to attaining truth than NYC CAN. Stand in the light and demand ANSWERS, not in the shadows of those who would deny you such answers.
THE BIG NEWS: the most experienced election lawyer in New York City stands ready to represent the 9/11 families, first responders and survivors in court in an HISTORIC FIGHT FOR DEMOCRACY AND TRUTH. BUT WE DESPERATELY NEED YOUR FINANCIAL SUPPORT TO MAKE IT HAPPEN. This is your chance – your ONE chance – to stand with the 9/11 families, first responders and survivors, and demand accountability. THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE WORKED FOR, AND WHAT WE CAN ACHIEVE IF WE STAND TOGETHER NOW.
Donate over $25 and we’ll mail you a free NYC CAN button. Donate over $50 and you will receive a free NYC CAN button and a well-made NYC CAN t-shirt.
ACT RIGHT NOW. Go to – http://nyccan.org/donate.php – and donate whatever you can to bring the quest for answers to the biggest stage it has ever had: THE NEW YORK CITY BALLOT.
interesting
someone on blogger asked me why i did not publish my endorsement of NYC CAN on TruthMove. i guess i just want to honor the feelings of those moderators here who have been gracious enough to let me participate on these boards - and not challenge their boundaries. it is quite obvious that there are rather strong feelings about all this.
but i DO think it is important to point out that i share ALL of the SAME concerns i see expressed about NYC CAN.
i just have a different angle on the overriding situation.
you can read it at length at http://nyccanwatch.blogspot.com
but, in short, i think the unity we have seen among activists who i DO respect - who have committed their names to this initiative - including 100+ victim's families, survivors and first responders - makes it imperative that we stand behind their efforts to lay claim to what is rightfully THEIRS. we cannot do this by simply standing on the sidelines and constantly feeding bad press about Edgar Mitchell and Les Jamieson.
yes - i know the dangerers of blind allegiance to ANY initiative that will turn a blind eye to known disruptors. hell - i practically wrote the book on that subject.
but - we have got to play the hand that is dealt to us. we cannot just throw away 70,000 signed petitions - and fail to back up Kyle Hence and Jon Gold and the Jersey Girls and ex-FBI agents and all the other legitimate and sincere activists who want to make this initiative succeed.
as i said in my endorsement: "NYC CAN affords us a very powerful public forum for determining for ourselves, once and for all, if we can discern fact from fiction -- and friend from foe."
and if you are correct - that 'certain parties' are setting this up for failure - i hope they realize how many people are now watching.
i see this as an opportunity.
don't you?
GAGGED by ONE so-called “PUBLIC SERVANT†– The New York City Clerk – who denied the petition and the voice of the people.
Anyone know the substance of this?
It's always fascinating how these things play out -- the bizarre rationale for deflecting ballot initiatives that someone doesn't want to happen -- generally Orwellian and unreal, ignored by MSM. As long as money is on the other side, they basically can do what they want. And it's not just this of course. Any ballot initiative that threatens those in power will be disappeared. There are a million and one reasons it can be blocked, and each reason can be unique and new and unimaginable.
is there a such thing as one city clerk?
None of this surprises me in the least. In order to combat this, you need major and vocal public support. The type of support that can effect electoral outcomes. In any NYC courtroom, this does not make me optimistic. See here for a similar experience involving JFK researcher Robert Groden and also involving Sonia Sotomayor:
http://www.ctka.net/2009/feinman.html
Another thing that really concerns me at this point is the We Demand Transparency Conference, its link to NYCCAN and who is involved with the conference. The involvement of Hicks, Barrett, CIT, Alten and others do not improve my confidence.
JohnA, I agree about raising the issue of Ted Walter as Executive Director and his inexperience. I have spoken with him on the street and he was not interested, at least when I spoke with him, about disinformation and infiltration. He seemed rather annoyed by me raising the issue. This could have been personalities. I believe he was considered at one point, or still might be, an interim Executive Director because NYCCAN wanted to have a family-member in that position on a more permanent basis.
I see NYCCAN as a decent house that was build with a shitty foundation. The shitty foundation is what you are stuck with on the ballot from Les' design. All these endorsements piling on improve the quality of the house, but do not effect the foundation. At this point we cannot dismantle the house to redo the foundation. We just have to live with it, see where it takes us and compensate accordingly wherever possible. Assuming this gets past the NYC City Council and onto the ballot, NYCCAN will only be as good as its ability to recognize its own faults.
In my opinion, expressed many times in many ways and places over the past couple years, the rejection of the initiative which I had previously anticipated is just the first of many problems this effort will encounter from both external and internal sources.
So, how much money donated to NYCCAN is going to go to challenging the city? Will the effort be able to generate some press for the movement? And if the initiative is rejected, what kind of frustration and burnout will result? All that effort over two years for so little outcome.
I'm not feeling like my concerns are less valid right now.
I see NYCCAN as a decent house that was build with a shitty foundation. The shitty foundation is what you are stuck with on the ballot from Les' design. All these endorsements piling on improve the quality of the house, but do not effect the foundation. At this point we cannot dismantle the house to redo the foundation. We just have to live with it, see where it takes us and compensate accordingly wherever possible. Assuming this gets past the NYC City Council and onto the ballot, NYCCAN will only be as good as its ability to recognize its own faults.
Very well said.
I just don't know who Ted Walter is. he could be extremely qualified - but - as far as Google goes the man is a ghost.
but that is neither here nor there at this point. if we can't get past this latest roadblock the point will be rendered moot.
but you would THINK that there is a real opportunity to embarass - and get some egg on the face of - the City Clerk's Office - by leveraging the fact that 9/11 victim's families and first responders (many of whom are sick and dieing) - with 70,000 signatures to back them up - are being 'disrespected.' at least that's the angle i would take. i would avoid the conspiratorial angle. i would stick to good old fashioned shaming.
but you would THINK that there is a real opportunity to embarass - and get some egg on the face of - the City Clerk's Office - by leveraging the fact that 9/11 victim's families and first responders (many of whom are sick and dieing) - with 70,000 signatures to back them up - are being 'disrespected.' at least that's the angle i would take. i would avoid the conspiratorial angle. i would stick to good old fashioned shaming.
This is one of the positive outcomes I anticipated from the get go. If they reject the initiative without due cause, it could be an opportunity for some great press. In fact, I kind of hoped it would be rejected, as did you John at one point, on the premise that passing would lead to dealing with all the initiatives internal problems, while unjustified rejection would lead to promotional opportunities that might be better for the movement than the new commission.
This is one outcome I could see being productive.
Mixed reaction over on 911blogger:
http://www.911blogger.com/node/20743
and a comment of mine:
One thing that might have given me more faith in those coordinating this effort would have been more realistic strategic planning. Was there a plan in place on the reasonable assumption that the initiative might be rejected.
We just kept on hearing that 70,000 signature would "force" the city to put in on the ballot. Turns out that wasn't true. Now what?
Was there a plan in place on the reasonable assumption that the initiative might be rejected. We just kept on hearing that 70,000 signature would "force" the city to put in on the ballot. Turns out that wasn't true. Now what?
They would say:
THE BIG NEWS: the most experienced election lawyer in New York City stands ready to represent the 9/11 families, first responders and survivors in court in an HISTORIC FIGHT FOR DEMOCRACY AND TRUTH.
is it true? i guess only time will tell. but - on the face of it - it looks like they had a plan in place. and - in all fairness - if it happens it would indeed be an exciting legal challenge.
if it happens it would indeed be an exciting legal challenge.
Agreed. However, it will be expensive.
Did anyone seriously think this would qualify for the ballot?
Lots of "activist" efforts are incompetent or deliberately sabotaged, so why should this be any different, especially given the freak show that the Truth Movement has become.
Most good ballot initiatives either fail to mobilize critical mass to be enabled, and if they do get on the ballot they get drowned out in a flood of propaganda. If by some miracle this "CAN" ever gets on a ballot you can be sure it will become a "vote for David Shayler and Nico Haupt" type media campaign, and would go down in defeat.
I hope to be proved wrong on that.
I'm no fan of "Screw Loose Change," although sometimes they accurately skewer some of the loonier stuff, but this is what they claim:
http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2009/07/yet-m...
The short version is that they didn't have enough valid signatures. Further, the whole cockamamie approach was found to be an overreach:
"First, the federal government has jurisdiction over an investigation into the attacks that took place on September 11 as well as the causes of those attacks. Establishing a local commission to conduct an investigation far exceeds the proper scope and purpose of the petition process of the MHRL (Municipal Home Rule Law). Second, the petition fails to provide an adequate financing plan for the Commission as required by section 37 of the MHRL. Third, the petition's method of designating Commissioners conflicts with state laws relating to the election or appointment of public officers and the residency of public officers, Fourth, the petition overreaches in its attempt to confer a range of law enforcement and prosecutorial powers on the Commission."
http://www.911blogger.com/node/20789
The reasons given [by the city clerk for rejecting the initiative] were:
First, the federal government has jurisdiction over an investigation into the attacks that took place on September 11 as well as the causes of those attacks. Establishing a local commission to conduct such an investigation far exceeds the proper scope and purpose of the petition process of the MHRL. Second, the petition fails to provide an adequate financing plan for the Commission as required by section 37 of the MHRL. Third, the petition's method of designating Commissioners conflicts with state laws relating to the election or appointment of public officers and the residency of public officers. Fourth, the petition overrearches in its attempt to confer a range of law enforcement and prosecutorial powers on the Commission. Fifth, the subject of this proposed amendment to the Charter does not relate to an existing Charter provision as is required by section 37.
I believe the words I used over and over again were "set up to fail."
The 'I told you so' is not about ego. I'm as upset about this too. It's about the fact that many payed no attention to those of us who have been pointing out some of these very problems for more than a year. These concerns were based on the content of the initiative itself and a lack of confidence in those coordinating the effort.
Are you all understanding what this means? The whole effort never had a chance from the time the initiative was formalized. Those involved didn't do enough research to determine whether their approach was viable.
AND...everyone who has jumped on the bandwagon was putting their faith in certain people who EVIDENTLY overstated their understanding of the situation and their confidence in success.
EPIC 9/11 TRUTH MOVEMENT FAIL!!!!
Now, well SOMEONE, EVERYONE, please start listening to the committed and skeptical voices in this movement who appear able to predict these kinds of problems.
so you see no victory in 70,000 new yorkers and over 100 victim's families and first responders and ex-FBI agents, etc etc all all uniting and going to court to demand answers to 9/11?
LOL!!
your skepticism about this initiative was valid - and had my full support. my writing on this is quite clear.
but... guess what... . there are 70,000 new yorkers and over 100 victim's families and first responders and ex-FBI agents, etc etc all uniting and demanding their voices be heard.
why are you having such a hard time getting that?
forget the logistics. i get it. they are not going to win. its not going to happen in the way that this initiative envisioned. Lou Grant will not be indicting Dick Cheney.
but you are really missing the forest for the trees here. if THIS is not a HUGE symbolic victory - i do not know what IS.
instead of gloating you should be working to promote this fact.
"Gee - i heard today that a bunch of rebels threw tea in Boston harbor - and called it a Tea Party. hmm... i must say i am skeptical that this is the correct way to make tea. First of all - the water is too cold. Second - who is going to want to drink it?"
symbolism is what we make it - and yes - by continually publicly describing this grassroots victory as a failure you are not exactly looking after the interests of the victim;'s families who are still fighting to have their voices heard.
You must log in to post.