Look at who signed the 9/11 Truth Statement

[DemonFighterLives]

http://www.questionsquestions.net/docs04/911truthstatement.html

A look at the 9/11 Truth Statement signers

Brian Salter, questionsquestions.net
31 January 2005 (updated 1 February)

On October 26 2004, "100 prominent Americans" signed their name to a petition calling for "immediate inquiry into evidence that suggests high-level government officials may have deliberately allowed the September 11th attacks to occur." This was aimed, among other things, at the now-moribund effort to bring about an investigation by New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer.

http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20041026093059633

Without getting into an analysis of the petition itself, I think some attention is due to some of those who signed it. Obviously, there is a wide variety of viewpoints among the 100 signers, and they can't be lumped together. In fact many of them are opposed on various other issues. However, there are some individuals and groupings which raise questions about what kind of issues and agendas are being piggybacked opportunistically onto the 9/11 Truth Movement, and even a few who one would not expect to find on such a petition in the first place. So what is going on? What is also notable is the absence of many of the serious heavy-hitters of 9/11 research.

-------
I started a thread in GD about following the terror money which isn't getting much traction, but I ran into the link above.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4299710

I thought some of my friends down here would like it or maybe have seen it before.
:shrug:

[JackRiddler]

1. please

Brian, who (back in 2002) entered the public fight for truth a few weeks before I did and who has produced some great work, can sometimes get a bit too reactive.

The 911 Truth Statement was written by a now-departed board member of 911Truth.org who intentionally toned down so as to get a lot of big names for the purpose of generating publicity and mainstream "legitimacy". It worked pretty well.

Anyone who has an opinion on anything other than 9/11 might be accused of "piggybacking" their other opinions by signing this statement, but in fact the reverse is true: the people who signed this statement were asked to allow their names to be used so as to push the 9/11 issue. If they come from diverse viewpoints and backgrounds, so much the better!

Thus the questions posed do lead to inside job, but do not compel it.

Another fallacious point: "the absence of many of the serious heavy-hitters of 9/11 research" was also intentional. The idea was to mainly get people to sign this who had NOT said anything about 9/11 until then.

[DemonFighterLives]

2. Jack, I appreciate your reply, but I was more interested in the stuff

at the questions link below what I posted.
Did you check the link. Diverse viewpoints to say the least.
I'm talking about depopulation, new world order, world government etc. I got to this when checking out Rachel Ehrenfeld who was on Dobbs show. She was almost completely blaming the Saudi's for all the terror and I smelled something fishy. She is a big Neocon Hawk as listed on the site.

[JackRiddler]

3. well the way it worked

is that several of us went and got whoever they could to add their name, as long as they were at least medium-prominent in their respective fields. The guy who landed Ehrenfeld (and Abernathy) is no longer associated with 911Truth.org (he went on to "other projects"). Knowing about them now, I wouldn't have included either.

But those of us who are still around at the penniless 911Truth.org are proud of getting Nader, Badnarik, McKinney, Fitts et al. along with 50 relatives of 9/11 fallen, all on one statement. However, you should realize that their signing it indicates no further association with either 911Truth.org or the 9/11 truth movement at large.

I don't think anyone has to apologize for this effort at this point. Do you see Abernathy or Ehrenfeld running around talking about 9/11 truth nowadays? Have they achieved leadership positions, either moral or formal?

This is more of the personal distraction that prevents us from uniting - even as the regime reaches the cusp of a new, 9/11-inspired hot war in Iran that will turn into a world war, should it happen.

I think to prevent that we should be worrying less about who might be associated with what, and instead work to make it obvious to everyone that something like 20 percent of the US population thinks 9/11 is a giant fraud.

That attitude has gotten me and others who think that way a lot of shit and baseless accusations.

[DemonFighterLives]

4. You must know that I also think that 911 was a giant fraud

I also admire the 911 truth movement and the premise of the statement.
I guess maybe I got off track checking out Ehrenfeld. It really is nobody's fault for "who" signed. The fact that so much stuff has been dug up on a few of the signers leaves many questions in my mind.
What is their agenda? Was it to discredit the statement or somehow throw everyone of track. Some of the questionable signers should indeed be supporting dubby's war on terror to further their one world govt and depopulation and protection of Israel.
It seems to me that Ehrenfeld in her drive to whack Saudi's has got to be stepping on dubby's toes.

[JackRiddler]

5. that's no doubt it

To Ehrenfeld and not a few others, "9/11 skepticism" amounts to "we bombed the wrong country" or (if they support the war) "we need to bomb a few more countries who were also responsible."

They and most 9/11 skeptics do agree on certain premises: for example, that nothing is an "investigation" that doesn't follow the money. A few of the 911Truth Statement questions go that way, while others point to items less compatible with any neocon view, like the standdown.

Many of them are hot on the insider trading issue (which, for example, was common knowledge in Israel almost immediately after 9/11). If that money leads back to Americans or anyone other than Islamist extremists, they tend to suddenly lose interest in the unthinkable.

They want to add Saudi blood to Iraqi blood.