Forum

TruthMove Forum

TruthMove Forum » TruthMove Main Forum

1 2

(Updates) "The Shell Game" and the "Week of Truth" - A critical view (34 posts)

  1. truthmover
    Administrator

    I know I'm pushing into very unPC territory here. Some of the people promoting this book are people who have been longtime activists, posters to this forum, and even people I like personally a great deal. But this is what TruthMove does best. Call it like we see it.

    I don't think this is good for the movement. How could people in the movement so much more respected than I be wrong while I think I'm right? Its certainly possible. I'll try to explain. However there is a bit of a gut feeling in this.

    First of all, to refresh our memory. "The Shell Game" was considered by many in the movement to be not responsible in a number of ways. Many of these concerns were covered in a thread on this forum.

    http://www.truthmove.org/forum/topic/882?replies=3...

    But a couple of things come immediately to mind. Its stereotyping or irresponsible portrayal of people from the middle east. Its use of fear to emphasize its thesis. Its repeated assertion that a nuclear terrorist incident was inevitable.

    As my final opinion after having read the book, reviewed it, and read other reviews was that the book was not responsible it follows that I would consider promoting the book to also be irresponsible. That would be my initial bias when it comes to critiquing the manner in which the book is being promoted. But I have more to say.

    The "Week of Truth" is promoting a week during which all 9/11 truthers buy and get others to buy a copy of the book. While Alten is donating some small portion of that to the FealGood Foundation, the whole effort, generally speaking, puts a lot of money in his pocket. Now Alten is doing a book tour, and in the process is helping to promote Peak Oil and 9/11 truth. That is certainly a good thing. However, we must keep in mind that before the issues, he's promoting the book.

    http://www.weekoftruth.org/

    We, the undersigned, urge everyone seeking truth, peace and justice, to not only purchase this new novel, "The Shell Game," but also to email out this appeal to all you know who seek truth, peace and justice in the form of 9/11 truth coming out. In turn, please urge them to do the same with all their contacts and urge them to do the same. We can break 9/11 truth open if we work together and focus on this project for the next 30 days.

    Yours in 9/11 truth, peace and justice,

    Dr. Steven Jones; Janice Matthews (911Truth.org); David Ray Griffin; Kevin Ryan; Dr. Robert Bowman; Rob Balsamo (Pilots for 9/11 Truth); Carol Brouillet; Mike Berger; David Kubiak; Kevin Barrett; Michael Wolsey; Peter Dale Scott; Bill Douglas

    With a list like that, minus Kevin Barrett, how could I possibly be right? I will acknowledge that maybe I'm missing something. Maybe I don't have all the facts. But with so much promotion, that would fall in their court, would it not?

    Then we have this:

    http://www.truthmove.org/forum/topic/905?replies=4

    This was a thread on our forum in which we offered a strong critique of a message sent out by Alten in which he exaggerated and even directly lied in the interest of getting people to promote his book. Before this point I had some hope that the promotion of this book would do us some good. But as I no longer trust his intentions, I can not feel optimistic about the outcome of this promotion.

    And then this from the Week of Truth site:

    New York Best Selling Author, Steve Alten, is appearing on national corporate media educating millions of the importance of the 9/11 TRUTH MOVEMENT. We can get him on more and more media, and perhaps stop a false flag attack that will launch war with Iran. Seymor Hirsch and Scott Ritter are predicting the neocons will launch an event in April. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE.

    More false flag hysteria! That's it for me. The problem with this has been very well documented and discussed here. We simply need no more of it. Can anyone even confirm whether or not Hirsch made this assertion. I can't image he would say something so cavalier. He's far too responsible a journalist. And that quote above is the very first paragraph on the website.

    Well, so this all brings me to my conclusion. This all stinks to high heaven. I honestly think that people with ardent hopes and hidden biases have been duped into pushing this book. I think many of those people have simply decided to look past some of the very concerns expressed here, telling themselves that no one is perfect, or that we can't pass up such an important opportunity.

    And while I'm not sure that this whole episode will come to hurt the movement, and may end up doing some good in the end, I very simply can't endorse this book or the actions surrounding it. And I encourage others to be as critical and willing to question those around them who share the same profound commitment to promoting the truth.

    We all get it wrong some times. Maybe I'm off base this time. I obviously don't think so.

    Edit: I changed the title of this thread as it was pointed out to me that it could be used by people to easily dismiss its contents. Bleh.

    Posted 16 years ago #
  2. Kim
    Member

    Truthmover, I respect your instincts - and I think you put your concerns very lucidly and reasonably. Whatever the source and backing of anything, we should never be afraid to civily express our misgivings. That's the essence of Truth . . . Further, I also share your doubts about the Iran thing. Here's a thread to which I've just contributed (re an imminent attack on Iran), at the Truth Action forum (Australia):

    http://www.truthaction.org.au/index.php?name=PNphp...

    (I've made 3 posts in that thread)

    Posted 16 years ago #
  3. casseia
    Member

    The article linked to at the .ru site is a Webster Tarpley article from 2007. I believe Tarpley has been issuing similar warnings since 2006.

    Posted 16 years ago #
  4. cosmos
    Member

    Julian... you are not alone.

    Posted 16 years ago #
  5. NicholasLevis
    Member

    "New York TIMES bestselling author" (ugly phrase, four-word adjective). SeymoUr Hersch. And that's the first paragraph. Can someone please learn to edit?

    I have heard from a couple of people on the endorsers' list that they were simply drawn into the book like no other. Haven't read it, but I doubt it would have the same effect on me, from the plot as given in the reviews.

    I wonder if all endorsers knew it was going to go out with KB's name on it as well. He's had Teflon on him like no one else (not even Les J).

    Promotion has been in a terrible vein, as we all here seem to agree. Classic sales blackmail: buy this or everything blows up, doom coming soon.

    A novel was needed - but a fictionalization of Sept. 11 and 9/11 truth, not of some supposed coming plot.

    Posted 16 years ago #
  6. truthmover
    Administrator

    The article linked to at the .ru site is a Webster Tarpley article from 2007. I believe Tarpley has been issuing similar warnings since 2006.

    Thanks for pointing that out Casseia. Webster Tarpley certainly has a history of promoting the next attack. I suppose if he does this often enough he might eventually get lucky, if you could call it that. No one should be listening to the boy who cried wolf.

    Kim, this backs up your point over at the TAA site that we need to see the source of a story in order to assess its relevance. In case you never caught wind of the Kennebunkport Warning fiasco, you should know that Webster Tarpley defended those who issued the warning by presenting his opinion on stage at the "Ready for Mainstream" conference that people like Cosmos, Arabesque, Jenny Sparks, and Michael Woolsey, are government agents working against the movement. He lost all credibility at that point, if not before then, for most serious movement participants. And his previous warnings were no better founded or accurate.

    I'd like to point out that the wording of the paragraph in question implies that Hirsch and Ritter are predicting a false flag attack. If they did not make that prediction, this is a very irresponsible use of attribution which totally disrespects these two individuals.

    My biggest question in all this is why people that we respect for their dedication to the truth appear to be missing all of these details. Even if the facts are different that they appear, that still leaves a serious problem of how this is being promoted. That's why I called this an 'ugly bandwagon.' It appears as though many got on board and just feel like they can't get off, or possibly haven't been very critical since they decided to participate. I always want to assume people are doing their homework, but I really wouldn't be surprised to find that some of the people on that list hadn't examined the website very closely.

    That's not what I would like to be able to expect of people in this movement who should be rather vigilant when it comes to how we are promoting ourselves and this cause. We've simply had too many negative experiences to be less that cautious when it comes to endorsing something. We have to always be willing to withdraw our support.

    Posted 16 years ago #
  7. truthmod
    Administrator

    rw

    http://www.theloch.com/

    THE TRUTH ABOUT LOCHNESS MONSTER

    The creature described in The Loch seems to be the real thing. Ground-Breaking events have blown the lid off all Loch Ness Monster theories and the scientific premise in The Loch is proving true. Highland authorities want this 1500 year legend to remain unsolved for another 1500 years and are blocking our attempts to unlock the truth.

    http://www.stevealten.com/

    Posted 16 years ago #
  8. Kim
    Member

    Yuck . . . .

    And aside from the now obvious trashing coming this high-profile "Truthers" way (can we already hear the snide remarks?), it's a fact that if there WAS a monster in the Loch, the canny Scots wouldn't be hiding it - they'd be falling over themselves for the tourist dollars . . . ;-)

    Posted 16 years ago #
  9. JennySparks
    Member

    It's also dead irritating how the no-planes crowd is trying to spin this as a major shill operation of the "planehuggers" when most of us have been underwhelmed at best.

    t's a fact that if there WAS a monster in the Loch, the canny Scots wouldn't be hiding it - they'd be falling over themselves for the tourist dollars . . . ;-)

    Too right.;-)

    Posted 16 years ago #
  10. jan
    Member

    Collection of ongoing editorials that may clarify The Shell Game promotions. New editorial published today. http://www.opednews.com/author/author2170.html

    Naivete is Killing the 9/11 Truth Movement's Hope for Media Breakthrough ! http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_bill_dou_0... "The old veterans of the 9/11 truth movement recognized the potential of “The Shell Game” from the very get-go. An ad hoc coalition formed around it immediately by all those who had been in the 9/11 truth trenches from the beginning, as indicated by their joint statement..."

    Support of this book seems to have become a litmus test for Bill. Truly an ironic situation to witness.

    Posted 16 years ago #
  11. truthmover
    Administrator

    Thank you Jan!

    Rational folks! I think this may have transcended this forum and casual conversation. This is looking more and more like a real problem for the movement. The message above about naivete is really disturbing to me. Its very divisive, manic is subtle ways, and like the previous message from Alten linked to in my original post, full of self-serving exaggerations.

    I've seen Bill Douglas heavily promoting the book over at 911blogger, but I hadn't realized the extent to which he was behind its promotion in the movement. He's really putting himself on the line for this. But more troublesome is that he appears to be pushing others to put themselves on that line as well. Let me address his message specifically before I get back to the big picture.

    First two paragraphs from page one and then page two of the message about naivete:

    If “The Shell Game” had become a cause celeb in the 9/11 truth movement, and spidered out in a fever pitch campaign throughout all the facebook, meetup, and multitudinous 9/11 truth websites, with “permanent” ads running on the top of their home pages, to create a mass buying of “The Shell Game” we could have, and still could drive it to #1.

    HOWEVER, had, if, the 9/11 truth movement had put permanent ads for “The Shell Game” on every 9/11 truth website, and every 9/11 truth communication had had a short blurb at the bottom for “The Shell Game” and if every 9/11 truth meetup, or facebook burned with a fever pitch campaign to drive “The Shell Game” to #1 on the New York Times Best Seller List . . . it would have, will happen.

    Evidently, we will win the entire battle for 9/11 truth if this book makes it to #1. :-/ First of all, anyone who knows the movement well, knows that it is not unified. You couldn't get all of us to do anything. Certainly not promote something so subjectively received as a novel. Second, for what reason did he include nearly the same paragraph twice? Why is he pushing this point so hard? The answer is nearly obvious when you look as the quotes below. He's setting up point he wants to make. A very divisive point.

    The old veterans of the 9/11 truth movement recognized the potential of “The Shell Game” from the very get-go. An ad hoc coalition formed around it immediately by all those who had been in the 9/11 truth trenches from the beginning, as indicated by their joint statement

    However, too many of those new to 9/11 truth movement actions, although very effective at what they are doing, hadn’t been beaten up by the six long years of public protest, petitions, lobbying Congress, media, etc. etc. . . . enough to know that something new, fresh, and unusual was our only hope at breaking the 9/11 corporate media blockade.

    Only hope? Getting beat up leads you to understanding that a book you don't like from an author with a reputation for writing pulp fiction and conflating it with reality is a good thing for this movement?

    What's missing here is any respect for our intelligence. Evidently the book is objectively good and good for this movement. Evidently, according to Bill Douglas, the fact that Alten and those promoting his book have been less than honest in doing so is something that we are supposed to ignore in the interest of the movement. Ummm...truth movement I should add.

    I strongly object to the tone of this message. I think its really condescending and inappropriate for Bill Douglas to suggest that anyone who disagrees with his position is naive. And I'm starting to become very alarmed at the direction this is all taking.

    As I indicated at the beginning of this thread, there is a PC mist surrounding all of this. The support of all those movement elders makes it feel like being critical will look divisive. But I have argued for a number of weeks now, and I think with a lot of references and a level head, that the book and its promotion are more divisive than critiquing it.

    Can I get a shout out for principle before association? Its making me feel brave right now.

    If anyone else agrees with me that the whole thing is starting to look like a brewing fiasco, please let others know how you feel and why. I can't take this on as my own personal crusade. But I do know that many in the movement did not like the book, and I hope they are paying attention to how it is being promoted.

    Posted 16 years ago #
  12. casseia
    Member

    I suspect many of the "movement oldtimers" who endorsed this book did so without reading it or without reading it attentively. It is a brewing fiasco, because while my central objection is its promulgation of Islamophobia, it is also poorly written/ badly edited schlock. It's an embarrassingly bad book.

    Posted 16 years ago #
  13. Arabesque
    Member

    New York Best Selling Author, Steve Alten, is appearing on national corporate media educating millions of the importance of the 9/11 TRUTH MOVEMENT. We can get him on more and more media, and perhaps stop a false flag attack that will launch war with Iran. Seymor Hirsch and Scott Ritter are predicting the neocons will launch an event in April. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE.

    There's something very distasteful about the tone of these messages, and I it's probably not wrong to question whether it really is in our best interests to promote the book.

    However, too many of those new to 9/11 truth movement actions, although very effective at what they are doing, hadn’t been beaten up by the six long years of public protest, petitions, lobbying Congress, media, etc. etc. . . . enough to know that something new, fresh, and unusual was our only hope at breaking the 9/11 corporate media blockade.

    This is nothing more than wishful thinking. Wishing and hoping something will happen will not make it happen. There is a MSM "blockade" for a reason. There is a reason why the MSM repeatedly attacks advocates for 9/11 truth rather than debates them. Why would the Shell game in any way change this? The false assumption here is the relevancy of the MSM. How many years have we "waited" for the MSM to do anything? We have to assume that they will never do anything, and that we have to do it ourselves. I really don't see this as being cynical--but being realistic.

    Apart from the perceived merits and drawbacks of the book, (and there are both), I am not exactly thrilled with the way that this is being promoted. If there was no false flag fear-mongering I would be more inclined that this is really about 9/11 truth, and not about selling a book.

    As a comparison, the 2nd loose change film has had viral and mass exposure. Does the promise of exposure outweigh any negative drawbacks? Yes and no. Reality is far more complicated, and I'll give you an example. My exposure to 9/11 truth came from this film. I was not completely convinced by it, but it led me to investigate and research on my own. The strength of the 9/11 truth movement is that the amount of research and quality work exists. It's just a matter of getting it at the forefront of what is being presented. Criticism of 9/11 material that is below expectations is a part of the process. We have to make the best of what the real situation is. How does the Shell game fit into this? As like most 9/11 material it has its flaws and strengths. But it is not the be-all and end-all of 9/11 truth. Could it waken some people up? No question. But there are a thousand ways to wake people up, and the Shell Game is not the best one.

    Posted 16 years ago #
  14. truthmod
    Administrator

    Why should something called "Truth Week" be all about buying one book (by a sci-fi writer, nonetheless)? And why is there no other suggested action/activism other than buying a book?

    Posted 16 years ago #
  15. truthmover
    Administrator

    Arabesque said:

    As like most 9/11 material it has its flaws and strengths. But it is not the be-all and end-all of 9/11 truth. Could it waken some people up? No question. But there are a thousand ways to wake people up, and the Shell Game is not the best one.

    As I indicated above, I agree with this. I wasn't trying to suggest that no good might come of this. But we can't take all the aspects of what is happening around this book and analyze them separately. The book is being promoted in a specific manner by specific people with specific intent. And whether we think the book is good or not, we might also think that the manner in which it is being promoted could have a very negative impact on the movement.

    Bill Douglas said:

    However, too many of those new to 9/11 truth movement actions, although very effective at what they are doing, hadn’t been beaten up by the six long years of public protest, petitions, lobbying Congress, media, etc. etc. . . . enough to know that something new, fresh, and unusual was our only hope at breaking the 9/11 corporate media blockade.

    You don't find this a bit disrespectful? I agree that its wishful thinking as I indicated that most people really into 9/11 truth know that the movement is divided. But what about people who have been in the movement for a median number of years. Let's say four. What about people who aren't naive about the movement, and have been participating for a long time who disagree? What about people who don't like being called "naive" because they disagree? That's not what I expect from people in this movement, and that's not what I expect from people trying to convince me of something.

    That is very simply divisive. Us against them. And I don't accept it at all. If I don't agree with Bill Dounglas, I'm naive, and may be squandering all hope for the future of the movement. ???

    If this was simply the ramblings of someone at one of our less well respected websites, or coming from Jim Fetzer, for instance, I wouldn't be so concerned. But it is being suggested that many of the most respected people in the movement are behind this, and I feel like I'm being coerced.

    I think this issue is a bit more messy than 'could be good, could be bad, let's wait and see.' I think we really need to ask some questions and get some answers.

    Posted 16 years ago #
  16. JennySparks
    Member

    Why should something called "Truth Week" be all about buying one book (by a sci-fi writer, nonetheless)? And why is their no other suggested action/activism other than buying a book?

    Shades of Bush's call to "go shopping" after 911. Always sounded like activist "busy work".

    This is nothing more than wishful thinking. Wishing and hoping something will happen will not make it happen. There is a MSM "blockade" for a reason. There is a reason why the MSM repeatedly attacks advocates for 9/11 truth rather than debates them. Why would the Shell game in any way change this? The false assumption here is the relevancy of the MSM. How many years have we "waited" for the MSM to do anything? We have to assume that they will never do anything, and that we have to do it ourselves. I really don't see this as being cynical--but being realistic.

    Spot on. There is no magic bullet, and the combination of the manipulative way this continues to be pushed, as well as some behind the scenes dodginess I won't go into now, gives this the feel of a carnival show.

    This:

    However, too many of those new to 9/11 truth movement actions, although very effective at what they are doing, hadn’t been beaten up by the six long years of public protest, petitions, lobbying Congress, media, etc. etc. . . . enough to know that something new, fresh, and unusual was our only hope at breaking the 9/11 corporate media blockade.

    Is not just disrespectful, but it's arrogant tot. "Our only hope"? This is 911 Truth activism, not a sodding Star Wars movie. There are loads of techniques, which, if done properly, produce fab results among them:

    http://truthaction.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3303

    Buying and waiting/hoping/praying for a (bad)work of fiction to "make it" in the MSM for 911 Truth is a daft way of going about it.

    I think this issue is a bit more messy than 'could be good, could be bad, let's wait and see.' I think we really need to ask some questions and get some answers.

    Make a list. Seriously. ;-)

    Posted 16 years ago #
  17. Kim
    Member

    Jenny, love your Star Wars comment. As usual, you pick analogies with the precision of a laser . . . Always entertaining an informative to read.

    Posted 16 years ago #
  18. truthmover
    Administrator

    Make a list. Seriously. ;-)

    Good challenge to put my money where my mouth is.

    • Regarding the following picture and list:

    Dr. Steven Jones; Janice Matthews (911Truth.org); David Ray Griffin; Kevin Ryan; Dr. Robert Bowman; Rob Balsamo (Pilots for 9/11 Truth); Carol Brouillet; Mike Berger; David Kubiak; Kevin Barrett; Michael Wolsey; Peter Dale Scott; Bill Douglas

    How many of these people have officially endorsed the "Week of Truth?" Of those people, how many have actually read "The Shell Game?" The list is from the Week of Truth website, and the image is a group of people who participated in a conference call about it. The conference call is mentioned here:

    http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_bill_dou_0...

    • How many of those people know about this:

    rw

    And does this give them cause for concern?

    • Do any of these people recognize the one-sided/insensitive portrayal of people from the Middle-East in "The Shell Game?"

    • Do these people agree with and support the grandiose assertions made by Alten and Douglas regarding the significance of the book and the opportunity it represents for the movement?

    • Do these people agree with Douglas that people who aren't supporting the book and its promotion are simply naive?

    I guess that's a start. I'm sure I'm missing a couple of good one's. I guess my personal question is whether or not any of these people ever look to the movement's more prominent forums to see what people are thinking about things like this.

    Posted 16 years ago #
  19. truthmover
    Administrator

    Many of you already know this as you have commented, but I posted about these concerns over at TruthAction and 911Blogger. I figured I'd provide links here in order to make reference easier and also to make this thread a bit more comprehensive.

    http://truthaction.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3309

    http://www.911blogger.com/node/14779

    Posted 16 years ago #
  20. jan
    Member

    Controversy about the "Week of Truth" campaign presents important opportunities for very necessary consideration and reflections.

    • Big Tent vs. Critical Thinking - which leadership philosophy most influences decisions? which philosophy has the best chance at long-term success? the greatest risk? Critical thinking and logical critique are continually referred to in condescending and/or insulting tones, even by leaders of the 9tm. Many of the brightest minds continue to be alienated.

    • Does the identity as the "9/11 Truth Movement" serve as a positive stereotype? Standard practice seems to be reference citizens largely motivated by 9/11 questions as "truthers", generally not a complementary or fair stereotype. This controversy sheds light on the public perception of the "9tm" as essentially a singular identity (minus any democratic voice or control) and questions about association and viability.

    Given the choice, would you describe yourself as: a) a real Truther b) a fake Truther c) not a Truther, but simply a concerned American citizen who believes that there are legitimate questions surrounding the September 11th attacks and the subsequent cover-up d) an American citizen formerly mainly active or concerned about the September 11th issue; increasingly concerned or active with other issues. (fwiw, my own current choice is d)

    Have a great Monday!

    Jan Hoyer

    Posted 16 years ago #
  21. truthmover
    Administrator

    Another message from Bill Douglas. Big news for the whole movement here.

    Thanks a lot Jan. That actually makes me feel a lot better. I've been really frustrated about all this mess. I think all of the few people involved in TruthMove would choose "d" as well. I still feel like we have a commitment to the issue. But by principle before association, we are very willing to critically examine what is more important for us to be doing, and to be quite honest about how we feel in regard to decisions made by others in the 9/11 truth movement.

    As of right now, I'm personally feeling very uncomfortable about how this whole "Week of Truth" thing has been going down. It feels like everyone is getting swept up in something that is quickly getting a lot bigger than they intended and appears to be run by someone who at this point I have no reason to trust.

    Nobody get me wrong here. I would like to find out that this was becoming a positive thing. It very well may. But many things about this make me feel highly cautious and a bit skeptical.

    Here's the latest:

    DATE: Monday April 7, 2008

    AN URGENT MESSAGE TO ALL 9/11 Truth & Peace Activists

    Last Monday night, leaders in the 9/11 truth and peace movement participated in the first in a series of nationwide conference calls to organize the first in a series of monthly events leading up to the November election. By working to mobilize the masses in a monthly FOCUSED effort, we can penetrate the mainstream media and achieve our goals.

    Participants in last week's inaugural call included: Dylan Avery (Producer of the "Loose Change" Documentary); Daniel Sunjata (Star of FOX TV's "Rescue Me" series, and 9/11 activist); Richard Gage (Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth Founder); Professor Steven Jones (BYU Physicist who pioneered WTC research); Kevin Ryan (Underwriter Labs whistleblower); Paul Craig Roberts (the Father of Reaganomics, and past Editor of The Wall Street Journal); Bob McIlvane (Father of 9/11 victim Bobby, who has traveled the world demanding a 9/11 investigation on national TV); Peter Phillips (Director of Project Censored), Janice Matthews (Director of 911Truth.org), and the list goes on. Nearly 40 national leaders of this truth movement were on last week's conference call. We hope to add more celebrities and leaders Monday night.

    GOAL # 1: APRIL 16-22

    Our APRIL goal is to launch THE SHELL GAME onto the top 10 NY Times best-selling list by organizing a nationwide buy-in week.

    WHY?

    The novel is a 1984-like cautionary tale that convincingly alerts mainstream readers that 9/11 was a false flag operation, perpetrated by the Bush Administration, to push us into a war in Iraq...and soon Iran! As a best-selling author, Steve Alten has the ability to bring our message to the mainstream, but he needs our support. Ten thousand copies sold during the week of April 16-22 will vault the book onto the top 10 NY Times list, which appears in the top 100 newspapers in the U.S. A top 10 best-seller carries mainstream media weight -- allowing the author to be booked onto major shows like LETTERMAN, LENO, GOOD MORNING AMERICA, and THE DAILY SHOW (this is how haters like Ann Coulter get so much TV time). In our case, Steve Alten will carry our shared message.

    We need your support!

    Join us for our activist leader conference call Monday night, April 7th, at 10 PM EST. The call will be 40 minutes, featuring leaders of both movements, along with celebrities.

    Working TOGETHER we can accomplish great things!

    Bill Douglas, activist leader
    wtcqd2000(at)aol.com

    So, according to that message:

    • Bill Douglas is now an 'activist leader.'

    • Our primary goal is to penetrate the mainstream media.

    • This new coalition is now planning on coordinating a series of monthly actions.

    • We now have celebrities involved in the coordination of our events.

    • "The Shell Game" is "1984 like."

    Hey, maybe I'm missing the boat. This message was addressed to me as an invitation to participate in the latest conference call. I suppose that participating would give me a chance to feel this thing out a bit better. But I don't think I'd feel all that comfortable voicing the extent of my concerns.

    Any suggestions?

    Posted 16 years ago #
  22. JennySparks
    Member

    "The Shell Game" is "1984 like."

    Give us all a break. No disrespect to Alten, but I'm sure there are loads of books that are more worthy of this comparison. "A Hand Maiden's Tale" comes to mind. I may not have read "Shell Game", but sounds like Bill didn't read "1984".

    I suppose that participating would give me a chance to feel this thing out a bit better. But I don't think I'd feel all that comfortable voicing the extent of my concerns.

    I understand your discomfort, but that's not a bad idea. You don't have to take the direct "WTF are you doing" approach(not that I thought you were going to). You could say, "I really am supportive of this idea of bringing 911 Truth more visibility, but I'm really uncomfortable about the way this book was promoted." And while you're at it you can point out this:

    This new coalition is now planning on coordinating a series of monthly actions.

    Is already being done by Truthaction.

    Not that there's anything wrong with other monthly actions, but the mainstream media is still ignoring it like crazy. Why is Douglas so sure this is going to be different? May be because he is being set up to be knocked down?

    Just a thought.

    Posted 16 years ago #
  23. cosmos
    Member

    There's certainly room for much more action! I floated the idea of having action weeks about a year ago but didn't have the ability to organize it while simultaneously organizing, promoting and representing the Eleventh. Hopefully the 'Week of Truth' will evolve into something good for the movement. I definitely share many of the above stated concerns. Also, the line "first nationally co-ordinated campaign" is lifted directly from The Third Stage...

    I'll be sure to get on that conference call tonight and add my 10 cents.

    Posted 16 years ago #
  24. NicholasLevis
    Member

    Well, it's true Bill Douglas is an activist leader going back to almost the beginning, the founder of this:

    http://www.septembereleventh.org/

    I haven't always agreed with him or his ALL CAPS STYLE, but you can grant him that much.

    Posted 16 years ago #
  25. truthmover
    Administrator

    I suppose I thought the title "activist leader" a bit inappropriate considering the following statement from Bill Douglas.

    Naivete among those newer to 9/11 truth is crushing the life from the lungs of hope for our movement breaking through the media blockade.

    http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_bill_dou_0...

    This statement is very 'my way or the highway' and totally divisive, as I've been saying. It's also self-contradictory as it is very naive to think that you could strong-arm 9/11 activists into cooperating with you by insulting their intelligence.

    I think that Bill Douglas owes many people an explicit apology.

    Posted 16 years ago #
1 2

Reply »

You must log in to post.