Truth 
in politics. 
What a concept!

Call for Unity in the 9/11 Truth Movement 

By Kevin Barrett 

Physicist Steven Jones recently appeared on my 9/11 and Empire Radio show tonight, Tuesday June 27th, 8-10 pm Central, along with Rob Balsamo of Pilots for 9/11 Truth...and get this: Jim Fetzer, who founded Scholars for 9/11 Truth with Steve in 2006, then fell into an acrimonious dispute that split Scholars into two groups, is now admitting he was wrong when he cast aspersions on Steve's work and said it looked like a dead-end. 

Jim Fetzer writes: "I have tremendous admiration for Steve's recent paper 'Fourteen Points of Agreement with Official Government Reports on the World Trade Center Destruction,' co-authored by Frank M. Legge, Kevin R. Ryan, Anthony F. Szamboti, and James R. Gourley: http://www.911blogger.com/node/15081  I think it is brilliant the way the authors made their points by 'agreeing' with NIST and FEMA. While I remain convinced that conventional explosives alone cannot account for the nature and extent of the damage to the World Trade Center, I also welcome Steve's ongoing research on thermite and thermate residues. Thermate and thermite may well have contributed to the destruction of the Twin Towers and even been used to bring down WTC-7. I have invited Steve to return to my show for another interview, assuring him that I will let Steve get in a word or two now and then. I would like to do whatever I can to acquire a united front for 9/11 research, including urging us to support those rarest of animals, 9/11 truth candidates who are running for office. Someone like Kevin could make a huge difference." 

Jim also recently wrote: "I believe we can succeed if we show more tolerance and less disrespect for one another...As a philosopher, it pains me to see so many otherwise intelligent individuals savage one another for inappropriate reasons based upon ignorance and fueled by rumors.  We must be willing to exercise our minds if we are going to figure out what happened on 9/11 and make a change in our history." 

Please also note that Jim Fetzer (a) has stated his disagreement with the current direction of Judy Wood's research, and (b) does not argue that no planes hit the World Trade Center.  

Jim Fetzer has been bashed by many in the 9/11 truth movement for his handling of the Scholars split and his openness toward controversial research positions. I think that some of these criticisms have merit. But to the extent they've marginalized Jim, it has been a net loss to 9/11 truth, because Jim is among the best  (and best-credentialed) communicators in the movement, especially in his introductory lectures to general audiences. Here in the Midwest, much of the 9/11 truth movement is made up of people who were introduced to the topic by Jim's terrific introductory lectures.  

Here is David Ray Griffin's take, written in response to someone who had harshly criticized Jim Fetzer: 

"Jim Fetzer has done a lot of good work and did much to build up the scholarly component of the 9/11 truth movement.  

"It is true that I ultimately dropped out of his organization (Scholars for 9/11 Truth) and instead, along with many others, joined Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice, which is associated with Steven Jones. But my leaving involved issues of style rather than substantive matters (although it's also true that Jim had used his position as head of Scholars inappropriately, I thought, to promote some controversial theories, rather than remaining publicly neutral while allowing Scholars to be a place where these theories could be debated in a scholarly manner; but these are matters of judgment, on which sincere people can disagree).   

"Part of the good work Jim has done is the article he co-authored with Captain May and two other military men." 

I am very happy to hear major figures in the 9/11 truth movement saying kind things about each other. The way I see it, the 9/11 truth movement is like a family. We have our quarrels and our differences, and we definitely have a weird uncle or two. But when Bush comes to shove, we need to stick together - especially when we're under attack by outsiders, which is pretty much all the time. We can make it clear that we don't agree with our weird uncle on everything, without trying to drum him out of the family. 

Social scientists know that the most important factor that makes any group successful is what the world's first social scientist, Ibn Khaldun, called "assabiyah," which has been translated as "an intensified mode of social cohesion produced through biological and fictive kinship ties." When people feel like family, and work toward a goal, they succeed. When they fall into factions and quarreling, they fail. It really is that simple. 

The worst way a group can fall apart is when it starts scapegoating its own members, rather than attacking the outside enemy and focusing on the goal that unites. The scapegoat syndrome is brilliantly portrayed in Shirley Jackson's short story "The Lottery," which describes a community that randomly selects a member for human sacrifice each year. The 9/11 truth movement seems vulnerable to this tendency to scapegoat people on our own side, rather than fighting the anti-truth forces. 

I have consistently tried to promote unity in the 9/11 truth movement. During the Scholars split, I was the only person that both sides trusted, which is why I ended up as the neutral custodian of the domain name st911.org. I invite radio guests from all factions and outlooks, and try to treat them decently and listen to what they have to say. I have tried to mediate between Jews, Christians, and Muslims, hoping that each group would give the other a fair hearing - a hope that seems to have been in vain, since it has become thunderingly obvious to me that most non-Muslim Americans, including some in the 9/11 truth movement, don't have the slightest interest in what Muslims think about anything, because, deep down inside, they don't see us as full, equal human beings. (Indeed, I have been told by a participant in the search committee that I was disinvited from at least one 9/11 truth event because I was Muslim...just as I have been expelled from academia for sharing the views of 80% of Muslims on 9/11, falsely accused of sharing the views of the majority of Muslims on the Nazi holocaust, and so on.) Despite being regularly subjected to ad-hominem, implicitly and explicitly Islamophobic attacks, I have only returned fire in the case of three extremely obnoxious people who were harassing me in the most odious fashion imaginable: Nico Haupt, Mark Rabinowitz, and Rick Siegal, none of whom I consider genuine seekers of truth. Apart from those three people, I don't believe I have ever had a seriously unkind word to say about anyone in the 9/11 truth movement.  

I think many 9/11 truth activists have made a mistake by not recognizing how important it is to treat the whole 9/11 truth movement like family,  focus on defeating the anti-truth forces, and keep our eyes on the prize. Most of the issues that pro-truthers quarrel over are relatively unimportant, compared to the supreme importance of assabiyah, or "family feeling." Whereas most of us (correctly) think there is more evidence for thermite than for directed energy weapons as a causal factor in the destruction of the World Trade Center, the people we are trying to convince - the general public - think controlled demolition is itself kooky as all get-out. To them, no mechanism could possibly be kookier than any other. Likewise, to the general public, controlled demolition is just as wacky as no-planes or video fakery. The  mistaken notion that a few weird uncles and aunts pursuing controversial research agendas is a mortally-threatening PR problem has led sincere researchers and activists to waste time and energy in destructive infighting about issues that don't matter much - with profoundly destructive effects on the assabiyah of the 9/11 truth movement. If there are any disinformation agents out there, they are the ones promoting conflict, inciting witch-hunts against people in the 9/11 truth community, and generally trying to turn us into the People's Front of Judea versus the Judean People's Front: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gb_qHP7VaZE&eurl=http://donklephant.com/2007/12/10/on-ron-paul-libertarianism/ 

Many terrific 9/11 researchers  unintentionally damage the assabiyah of the 9/11 truth movement by virtue of their narrowly scientific education and outlook. Our educational system, especially scientific education, trains people in convergent thinking rather than divergent thinking. We are trained to think there is one right answer to every question - it must be either A, B, C, or D. Anyone who disagrees with us must be just plain wrong. If that person persists in clinging to the wrong answer, they are so damaging to the cause of Truth that they should be scapegoated and expelled from the community.  

While convergent thinking has its place, divergent thinking is far more powerful and vastly more important. Instead of testing for the one correct answer, a divergent-thinking test would ask you to come up with the ten best potential solutions to a real-world problem. If you came up with a bunch of great ideas, you'd get an A - even though nobody will ever perfectly agree on which ideas were best. Divergent thinking is holistic, values-drenched rather than value-neutral, approximative rather than exact...and, for most human endeavors, vastly more useful than convergent thinking. A good convergent thinker can sometimes help clarify certain disputed empirical and theoretical questions. But good divergent thinkers get things done in the real world.  

We need divergent thinking in the 9/11 truth movement - different strategies for pushing 9/11 truth to victory, different approaches to the various research topics, different perspectives on all of the many questions related to 9/11 truth. To fully encourage the best divergent thinking, and to build the assabiyah that will bring us victory, we need to treat each other like family, regardless of political tendency, religious or philosophical outlook, or any other factor that divides us. I hereby declare that all of you who are sincerely working for 9/11 truth  are and will remain like family to me. Don't be a stranger -  feel free to call in to my radio shows, and if you're ever in Lone Rock, Wisconsin, be sure to drop on by! 

Kevin Barrett

http://www.barrettforcongress.us 

Tuesday, May 27, 2008

Achieving Unity in the 9/11 Truth Movement

In Kevin Barrett's most recent newsletter and his show this evening on WTPRN, the theme was "reconciliation and achieving unity in the 9/11 Truth Movement".  

There is some really good news there concerning Prof's Jim Fetzer and Steven E. Jones. It is very positive and encouraging. (I am not sure if this is posted anywhere on the web, but if I find a link I will add it later).

Kevin stated in the newsletter: 

"I think many 9/11 truth activists have made a mistake by not recognizing how important it is to treat the whole 9/11 truth movement like family, focus on defeating the anti-truth forces, and keep our eyes on the prize. Most of the issues that pro-truthers quarrel over are relatively unimportant, compared to the supreme importance of assabiyah, or "family feeling." (ie theories) 

Barrett went on to discussing various theories and the attitudes of some of the proponents of various theories as being the divisive. The biggest challenges that I see, however, in achieving "unity" or consensus is defining exactly what the "9/11 Truth Movement" is, and what it is not - as well as defining the best means to achieving our goals. 

What is the 9/11 Truth Movement? 

It seems to me that there are three definitions of the 9/11 Truth Movement in circulation. Here is my take: 

1. We are a collection of "conspiracy theorists" who view the September 11th attacks as a "who done it" mystery examining various theories about who did it, how and why. As such, we are weird, sick and eccentric conspiracy hobbyists (as the MSM tries to paint us) who like to meet up and discuss these theories ad nauseum. 

2. We are a group of people who adamantly and arrogantly claim to "know the truth" (we know all there is to know, who did it, why and exactly how) about the September 11th attacks and we like to push our ideas on others, asserting our mental and/or moral superiority (or appearing as such). 

3. We are a collection of concerned citizens from numerous countries (laymen and experts from a variety of fields and backgrounds) who

(a) take issue with the unsatisfactory "official explanations" given for the 9/11 events (including about what precipitated the events), based upon verifiable facts and hard, physical evidence and eye-witness testimony to the contrary,

(b) who seek through peaceful means to educate the public and politicians in order to affect a new, fair and impartial 9/11 investigation into the September 11th attacks for the purpose of establishing guilt (for failures to act, omissions in testimony or in the exercise of duties or due diligence where a duty existed, blatant distortions or misrepresentation of the facts, and/or for participation in the planning and commission of crimes that led to the hijackings and destruction of 4 passenger jets, the destruction of WTC, and severe damage to the Pentagon, as well as all ensuing damages and deaths such as to WTC workers, first responders and local residents),

(c) who seek justice, according to the rule of law, for all injured parties on that day, as well as those killed, injured or harmed in the ensuing wars that were launched based upon the criminal events of September 11th, 2001,

(d) who peacefully seek to repeal or rescind unjust, unreasonable and hysterically enacted (often unconstitutional) laws and international agreements that were based upon the "official" explanations given about the 9/11 attacks, and finally

(e) who, through peaceful means and public education, seek to end an unjust "war on terror" (including illegal wars launched in Afghanistan and Iraq) as well as prevent further illegal, aggressive wars, based upon faulty 9/11 explanations, and future false flag attacks. 

My choice is number 3 and this is how I assume that most would choose to describe the movement they belong to (certainly those who I associate with do), but it certainly does not seem to be unanimous when one looks around at various 9/11 Truth sites on the web. 

Unity can only be possible when we not only get on the same page, but when we decide which page we are on - not in terms of theories, but rather in our "purpose" or "goals" as well as the best "means" to achieve our shared goals. If we agree that public education is the key to bringing about a popular demand for political and legal action and the necessary political will, then it also follows, that we reject confrontation, anger, hate, negativity, arrogance, pet theories, and put our best foot forward to attract people to our information and our movement. This of course, is what the 9/11 Civil Information initiative is about. 

Definition #3 is broad enough to include pretty much everyone with a sincere desire for truth and justice, while discussions of theories lose importance. The emotional trappings they entail should also disappear and leave no room for agents to stir up "theory" debates and the accusations which always ensue, which result in so much wasted time, energy and resources. The means (focusing on public education) is practical in terms of achieving the stated goals, and has the added benefit of preventing infiltration by agents promoting extreme and violent behaviors. This definition should also help to minimize discussion about who was ultimately behind 9/11 (Jews, Jesuits, Muslims, etc). Finally, this definition has the added benefit of eliminating the requirement that we be "fully qualified experts" in any particular field as, the contradictions in the official story and the existing, overwhelming, body of evidence that refutes it are THE focus - not theories - and not any particular, single aspect of 9/11 research. 

I think this is also pretty much in keeping with the Mission Statement of 911Truth.org. 

Feedback and discussion are most welcome. 

http://911civilinfo.blogspot.com/2008/05/achieving-unity-in-911-truth-movement.html
 

TOP