9/11 Scholars Forum

Exposing Falsehoods and Revealing Truths

What's wrong with this picture? "Guidelines" from a new 9/11 truth organization . . .

http://www.truthmove.org/content/2008-declaration/

 

We aim to foster reason and responsibility within the global movement for truth. We base this in the following values:

  1. Awareness of public perception and the need for strategic and responsible promotion and presentation.

  2. A commitment to building credibility and encouraging constructive alliances with the anti-war movement and other natural allies.

  3. Adherence to the scientific method and journalistic standards, with a focus on facts, substance, and sources.

  4. A dedication to rational, respectful, and nonviolent debate and activism. Fundamental respect in discourse with all individuals, including those within the government and military, journalists, and supposed “opponents.”

  5. A faith in the honest democratic process and our ability to come to meaningful and actionable conclusions (truths).

  6. Motivations based in compassion, justice, and truth.

Conversely, we seek to counteract and minimize:

  1. Promotion of speculative and unsubstantiated claims.

  2. Disruptive, divisive, diversionary, and aggressive behavior.

  3. Damaging and marginalizing associations.

  4. Organized and intentional sabotage.

  5. Highly partisan representations of the movement.

  6. Motivations based on ego, hatred, and belittlement.

We will engage others in the movement who break these guidelines with constructive dialog, raising awareness of these issues. Those who are unresponsive to reason, and have a clear history of disruption, combativeness, or excessively poor judgment, will not be engaged.

We recognize an important distinction between private speculation and public promotion. Speculation, hypothesis, and experimentation are the basis of the scientific method. However, the promotion of highly speculative claims is irresponsible and damaging to our credibility. Instead, verifiable fact-based research must be primary in our search for and promotion of the truth.


Guidelines

  1. Critique destructive behavior that can harm the movement (i.e. speculative theories without evidence, prominent activists who engage in disruptive behavior, divisive incidents, etc). Challenge leaders who unreasonably continue to support and tolerate damaging behavior.

  2. Critique, marginalize, and/or ignore unnecessary and unproductive antagonism (i.e. infighting, personal attacks, gossip, etc.) that wastes time and causes divisiveness.

  3. Avoid the divisive labeling of individuals and groups (i.e. MIHOP, LIHOP, Shill, planehugger, agent, etc.)

  4. Refuse to endlessly debate debunked theories by simply referencing responsible websites, articles, and blogs which have already refuted such claims. Or cite this document itself.

  5. Be aware and vigilant concerning the presence of agent provocateurs within the movement. But do not engage in witch hunts or unsubstantiated accusations. Treat those who continually, and despite consultation, act in word and deed in the manner of agent provocateurs, as such. While these people can rarely be proven to be agents, they should be treated as counterproductive and untrustworthy. Such groups and individuals should not be engaged in unproductive ways, such as aggression, name-calling, personal attacks, etc. Instead, the substance of their destructive behavior should be detailed, after which they should be ignored as much as possible. If appropriate, exclusionary action (banning from forums, venues, etc.) or, in extreme cases, legal action, should be taken.

  6. Do not allow the proliferation of irresponsible information or damaging behavior simply because the individuals or groups in question maintain a certain reputation or notoriety within the movement. The fact that someone may “have done good work in the past” is never a valid excuse to tolerate damaging participation in the present. The movement must be about truth and justice rather than character and ego.

Unity is not achieved by ignoring divisiveness. It is achieved through civil critique and a constructive response to the disruptive behavior. Repeated and continuing behavior should result in comment moderation, temporary, long-term, and if necessary permanent bans from activist groups, removal of links from websites, cancellation of speaking engagements, etc.


Below is a list of theories and claims which do not have a convincing basis in verifiable facts. Such claims have served as a distraction for many honest activists and have ultimately damaged the credibility of the movement. This is a partial list, only meant to demonstrate some of the more prominent examples:

Below is a list of associations that are damaging and marginalizing to the movement. Some are offensive and baseless, others may simply be speculative or fringe. The common thread is that all of these topics/attitudes/assertions have extremely negative connotations for the general public and they should not be paired with concrete, fact-based research. This is only a partial list:

  • UFO and alien theories

  • Holocaust denial/revisionism and Jewish conspiracy theories

  • All forms of racism

  • Moon Landing “Hoax”

  • Anti-environmentalism (i.e. “global warming is a hoax” or “the environment is fine; humans aren’t causing significant damage”)


Conclusion

Many activists came together to make this statement possible. We have all had direct experience with behavior and information that has impeded our cause, and we hope this document will help the community to achieve greater unity and focus. We encourage activists to cite and link to the statement as a standard response to diversionary and disruptive behavior. Hopefully, this will allow us to move beyond some of our major obstacles to spreading truth and securing justice.

Views: 49

Comment

You need to be a member of 9/11 Scholars Forum to add comments!

Join 9/11 Scholars Forum

Comment by sandy rose on March 2, 2011 at 10:17am

yeah, they sound worried about no planers.  as they should be, right?

when ya got it, ya got it.

Comment by Dean on February 24, 2011 at 8:45pm
Why is anyone saying what theories are a "distraction" or "marginalizing" without telling us how they came to that conclusion?  This comes across as a "get with the program or get out of here" message.  The program implicitly elevates a specific theory and labels anyone who doesn't agree or who questions it.
Comment by Thoth II on February 24, 2011 at 4:35pm
"However, the promotion of highly speculative claims is irresponsible and damaging to our credibility. Instead, verifiable fact-based research must be primary in our search for and promotion of the truth."
Here we go again, this statement gives me the creeps. The criteria is not "highly speculative claims" but rather does the advanced hypothesis explain the evidence the best. "Credibility" is a human concept and has nothing to do with which "H" hypothesis eventually becomes the accepted one. These cretons who did 911 could have done ANYTHING they darn well pleased, as long as it was a technology within their pervue, who is to say it is "speculative"? Does this movement work within the bowels of this technical military-industrial complex?
Comment by Shallel Octavia on February 24, 2011 at 1:41pm

I just sent this message to the truthmove termites:

 

Go back to school!

You must go all the way back to elementary school and learn what the scientific method is. Scientific proof cannot by found when you pick and choose what facts to look at according to popular opinion. You are the ones who are doing a disservice to the truth by dictating talking points rather than following proper experimental procedure.

Comment by Ben Collet on February 24, 2011 at 1:20pm

"Such claims have served as a distraction for many honest activists and have ultimately damaged the credibility of the movement."

 

I keep hearing the above statement, and It's always stated as if it was self-evidently true.  But, really, where's the evidence?   What evidence is there that no-planes theory, for example, harms the movement?  I have never seen any evidence provided that would support their assertion.  And they talk about opposing, "unsupported theories" and "speculation"?!

  There is also the important consideration that we are interested in the truth, not what may or may not be palatable to the general public.  If the concern of the 9/11 truth movement becomes only, "What theory sells the best?"  then we would be a PR movement not a truth movement.

Comment by Shallel Octavia on February 24, 2011 at 1:16pm

My first problem with this is their "values" are mutually exclusive. 

1. Awareness of public perception and the need for strategic and responsible promotion and presentation.

3. Adherence to the scientific method and journalistic standards, with a focus on facts, substance, and sources.

 

The scientific method cannot be followed when public perception is a factor in your experiments.

The termite movement has dislocated its mind. It is left to those who actually examine ALL the data and not just that which is popular to solve this heinous crime. 

© 2019   Created by James H. Fetzer.   Powered by

Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service