 |
truthaction.org
9/11 TRUTH NOW
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Midnighter
Joined: 04 Oct 2007
Posts: 151
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 11, 2009 5:06 pm Post subject: A Lesbian Comes Out of the Closet About 9/11 |
 |
|
| Quote: | Okay, I’ve danced around it long enough while covering Cynthia McKinney. The reason I think a lot of people have a problem with her, is exactly one of the reasons she is such a hero to me. So I figure, I’m a coward if I just don’t stand up and say something already. Because I truly have felt, for years, like talking about my true feelings in public is dangerous for my health, freedom, and standing in society. And I can say from personal experience, that it feels just as bad as being stuck inside yourself about being gay.
So I’ll come out of the closet, so to speak. |
READ MORE:
http://lezgetreal.com/?p=15463 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Arcterus
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
Posts: 698
Location: New York
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 11, 2009 7:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | And you can call me a lone conspiracy theorist, but I’m not alone, and I’m not talking about bigfoot, or the loch ness monster, or faking the damn moon landing. I’m talking about the questions that many Americans want answered. |
I'd marry her but she's a lesbian.
_________________
http://arcterus911.blogspot.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Diane
Joined: 20 Oct 2007
Posts: 592
Location: New York City
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 16, 2009 10:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Question to Midnighter, who wrote the O.P. of this thread:
If 9/11 had happened, say, way back in 1980 instead of 2001, and if you had encountered an article like A Lesbian Comes Out of the Closet About 9/11, say, back in 1983 -- before the gay rights movement became nearly as fashionable as it is now -- how would you have felt about it?
I ask because you also wrote the following in another thread:
| Midnighter wrote: | | Unless maybe that person is a Satanist in a disco suit? Now I personally would never discriminate against someone's religion, but is "the general public" really known for such high standards? |
I'm very glad that the gay rights movement has come far enough that no one here on this board worries about lesbians discrediting the 9/11 Truth movement simply by virtue of being lesbians.
Some other people (not here in this board) have attacked Steven Jones on grounds of his Mormonism. (I've seen this in the JREF forum, for example, if I recall correctly.)
And, when We Are Change broke off from New York 9/11 Truth, one of the things Luke Rudkowski attacked Les Jamieson for was his past involvement in Urantia. Last year there was also quite a flood of Urantia-bashing here in this forum, to which I responded both here and in this blog post.
The 9/11 Truth movement clearly does need to be concerned about its image, in at least some ways and to at least some extent. At the very least, we need to do the best we can to make sure that the information we present is correct and that our arguments are sound. We should also try to make sure that any "experts" we present are genuine experts. And we obviously should avoid association with inherently divisive things like racism. But I sometimes worry that image-consciousness can be carried too far.
In some other political movements, too much image-consciousness can be deadly. An example is the GLBT rights movement. Every now and then, the more conservative gay rights activists have worried about the presence of drag queens and leathermen in Gay Pride parades. There has been lots of debate over how inclusive the movement should be. Usually, those arguing for greater inclusiveness have won out, at least in the long run. The only group I know of that has been permanently excluded is NAMBLA. And it is clear to me that the GLBT movement has benefited, in the long run, by being relatively inclusive.
Another example is the feminist movement. Back in 1970, various feminist groups tried to purge lesbians from their ranks. Luckily the feminist movement got over that pretty quickly, because quite a few of the movement's hardest-working activists were lesbians.
Of course, the 9/11 Truth movement is a different kind of political movement from the GLBT rights movement or the feminist movement. The GLBT rights movement and the feminist movement are about human rights, whereas the 9/11 Truth movement is about government accountability. Thus these movements have somewhat different needs.
Still, I think it might be a good idea to think a bit more deeply about the basis on which the 9/11 Truth movement should shun particular people.
Even regarding the publicly expressed political views of 9/11 Truth activists, there are some grey areas. For example, here in New York, the anti-environmentalism of Alex Jones would be a big turnoff to lots of people. On the other hand, in some other, more Republican-dominated parts of the country, the pro-environmentalism of some other 9/11 Truth activists might be a big turnoff, although that's not likely to be a problem here in New York.
_________________
Diane
New York City Activist |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Col. Jenny Sparks
Joined: 15 Aug 2007
Posts: 2329
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 17, 2009 3:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Diane--maybe you don't know, but the screen name this lad uses, "Midnighter", is from a popular '90's comic book character who is gay. *
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midnighter
It was a point of controversy at the time, being as Midnighter was a not so subtle Wildstorm twist on the Batman meme. Midnighter is ten times cooler--and I speak as a Batman fan--but that's beside the point.
The point is you seem to think our Midnighter might be being insensitive to gay issues or something(feel free to correct me). It isn't a rule but is generally reasonable to assume if someone takes a pop culture figure as as a screenname, they have some sympathy with the source material. Ergo it is doubtful our Midnighter is unaware of or insensitive to GLBT issues.
| Quote: | | The only group I know of that has been permanently excluded is NAMBLA. |
As they should be since they are basically advocating tolerance for criminal--or near criminal-- behavior.
I'd be very interested in digging into how NAMBLA even thought they had a chance. Is NAMBLA a psyop? A really slimy attempt to derail gay rights? Think, if YOU were a pedophile would YOU be motivated to organize in public for your "rights"? What would make you think that was a good idea? And if you did, how would you have so quickly found other so your sort--who also thought that was a good idea? How likely is this?
Anyway, yay for her.
| Quote: | | And you can call me a lone conspiracy theorist, but I’m not alone, and I’m not talking about bigfoot, or the loch ness monster, or faking the damn moon landing. I’m talking about the questions that many Americans want answered. |
Nice quote.
*Something missed by many people who jumped into online forums, have no understanding of computers, the net or geek culture--The Authority characters were VERY popular. There's at least five other "Jenny Sparks" out there I know of. Another thing that tends to happen is, if one geek screen name pops up it attracts others related to it. Normal in the culture actually. See Jenny's Myspace for an example:
http://www.myspace.com/46621578
This is not me--but according to boneheaded logic from some quarters, not only would it be me, but all her friends would be my socks too.
People pretending to be geeks to fit in have as a result made royal asses out of themselves over this issue.
_________________
___________________________________________________
http://coljennysparks.blogspot.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
truebeleaguer
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 654
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 17, 2009 5:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
re: NAMBLA, my understanding is that in ancient Greece women were considered from the male viewpoint to be useful for making babies but perfect love (including physical forms) was considered to be that which existed between a man and a boy.
When I read this at the age of thirteen I lost all interest in Western Civilization and decided to take up Noble Savagry. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Diane
Joined: 20 Oct 2007
Posts: 592
Location: New York City
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 17, 2009 8:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Col. Jenny Sparks wrote: | | The point is you seem to think our Midnighter might be being insensitive to gay issues or something(feel free to correct me) |
That is actually not my point. My point is to try to provoke a serious discussion on how far image-consciousness should be carried, and where one draws the line between valid image-consciousness and bigotry.
_________________
Diane
New York City Activist |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Diane
Joined: 20 Oct 2007
Posts: 592
Location: New York City
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 17, 2009 9:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Col. Jenny Sparks wrote: | | Quote: | | The only group I know of that has been permanently excluded is NAMBLA. |
As they should be since they are basically advocating tolerance for criminal--or near criminal-- behavior. |
I agree that the decision to exclude NAMBLA was proper. However, the issues were a bit more subtle than they might at first glance appear.
Technically NAMBLA wasn't advocating criminal behavior; they were advocating a lowering of the age of consent, and they advocated the economic and social empowerment of young people. The leaders of NAMBLA claimed to be celibate, if I recall correctly. They accepted the idea that sex between adults and younger people is problematic in today's world, and they advocated various social reforms which, they said, would make it less problematic.
Furthermore, the controversy about NAMBLA took place back in the early 1980's, at a time when a lot of states still had sodomy laws on the books, so the GLBT rights movement as a whole could be said to have been advocating "criminal behavior" in many states.
Back then, a friend of mine attended an event at which someone from NAMBLA was a speaker. My friend picked up some NAMBLA literature, including a few of their newsletters. Within the letters column, there was quite a bit of debate over how young the "boys" should be allowed to be. And the founders of NAMBLA included some respected early leaders of the gay rights movement, such as David Thorstad.
So, NAMBLA did manage to have a contingent in New York's annual Gay Pride parade in at least one year, maybe a few years, back in the early-to-mid 1980's. They were subsequently barred from the parade.
_________________
Diane
New York City Activist |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Diane
Joined: 20 Oct 2007
Posts: 592
Location: New York City
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 17, 2009 10:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Besides the question of where one draws the line between image-consciousness and bigotry, another question is the extent to which image-consciousness itself should be considered a key principle of the movement, relative to other principles. Comparing the following two statements:
The TruthMove statement says:
| Quote: | 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”)
|
The above statement could be taken, by some people, as suggesting that the only or main thing wrong with racism is that it's embarrassing. Of course, I'm sure that the leaders of TruthMove really do feel that there is much more wrong with racism than that. It might be a good idea for them to consider modifying their statement to add a more principled condemnation of racism, similar to the Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice statement.
_________________
Diane
New York City Activist |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
truthmover
Joined: 19 Oct 2007
Posts: 1550
Location: Los Angeles
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 17, 2009 7:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | 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. |
| Quote: | | The above statement could be taken, by some people, as suggesting that the only or main thing wrong with racism is that it's embarrassing. Of course, I'm sure that the leaders of TruthMove really do feel that there is much more wrong with racism than that. It might be a good idea for them to consider modifying their statement to add a more principled condemnation of racism, similar to the Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice statement. |
First of all, looking at the Declaration you will find that a number of people endorse it. Most of them also worked on it. We do not feel free to change in now without the consent of these people.
Second, it's been more than a year since it was published. We have not plans to change it now.
Third, I don't agree with your statement. It very obviously suggests that racism is damaging to the movement and offensive and has extremely negative connotations.
Forth, I won't be commenting any further on this matter here. You are free to post your concern on our forum, while I'd rather you didn't. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Diane
Joined: 20 Oct 2007
Posts: 592
Location: New York City
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 17, 2009 8:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| truthmover wrote: | | First of all, if you were to look at the Declaration you would find that a number of people endorse it. Most of them also worked on it. I actually didn't want it to be called the TruthMove Declaration for that reason. |
It is referred to as "TruthMove's 2008 Declaration ..." in a footnote on the Wikipedia page about the 9/11 Truth Movement. (Attention, Victronix: You might want to look into getting this changed.)
| truthmover wrote: | Second, it's been more than a year since it was published. We aren't going to change it now.
Third, I don't agree with your statement. It very obviously suggests that racism is damaging to the movement and offensive and has extremely negative connotations. |
Different people may get different impressions from the lumping of racism in the same category with UFO beliefs. I do agree with you that all the things the declaration lists as damaging to the movement are indeed damaging to the movement. If I were writing the statement, I'd be a bit more specific as to the reasons why these things are damaging, since the reasons differ quite a bit for different items on the list. But I guess there's no point in discussing this further if you're not open to changing it.
_________________
Diane
New York City Activist |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Midnighter
Joined: 04 Oct 2007
Posts: 151
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 20, 2009 9:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Diane wrote: | Question to Midnighter, who wrote the O.P. of this thread:
If 9/11 had happened, say, way back in 1980 instead of 2001, and if you had encountered an article like A Lesbian Comes Out of the Closet About 9/11, say, back in 1983 -- before the gay rights movement became nearly as fashionable as it is now -- how would you have felt about it? |
Peachy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
