truthaction.org

[YT]

Mission Statement

truthaction.org is dedicated to achieving justice for the crimes of 9/11. To this end our primary focus is promoting activism to raise awareness about the lies of the official 9/11 story and to push for an independent criminal investigation into those events.

It is our aim to grow the movement for truth on a global level through the promotion of International Days of Truth Action on the Eleventh Day of Every Month and to encourage and support everyday activism.

We aim to put an end to the global war on terror by exposing the truth about its foundational myth. 9/11 truth is the key to stopping the global war machine.

We aim to restore our rights and civil liberties and repeal all laws based on 9/11 propaganda.

The 9/11 Truth Movement is at the forefront of the global movements for justice and peace and we will continue to build bridges with our natural allies within these movements.

truthaction.org is a wholly peaceful organisation and we totally reject violence in activism.


Recommendations for 9/11 Truth Activism

Guiding Principles

We support the following:

1. A dedication to rational, dignified and nonviolent activism and debate motivated by compassion, justice and truth
2. Awareness of public perception and the need for a strategic and responsible promotion and presentation of our cause
3. A commitment to building credibility and encouraging constructive alliances with the peace movement and other natural allies
4. Adherence to the scientific method and journalistic standards with a focus on facts, substance, and sources
5. Continually reaching out to new people in new places and in new ways

Conversely, we will actively seek to counteract, minimize and withdraw from the following:

1. Motivations based on ego, hatred and personal agendas
2. Promotion of speculative and unsubstantiated claims
3. Disruptive, divisive, diversionary and irrational behavior
4. Damaging and marginalizing associations
5. Highly partisan representations of the movement and cults of personality
6. Ongoing debate on divisive issues (see section on divisive issues)

We will engage others in the movement to make them aware of our recommendations, developing constructive dialogue while raising awareness of them and the reasoning behind them, while being open to critique and revision. We will disengage from groups and persons that continue with destructive or divisive behavior.


Dealing with destructive and divisive behavior

1) Identify and critique behavior that is harmful to the movement (i.e. speculative theories without evidence and activists who engage in disruptive behavior, divisive incidents, etc). Challenge leaders who unreasonably continue to support and tolerate such damaging behavior.

2) Refuse to debate solidly debunked theories by simply referencing responsible websites, articles, and blogs which have already refuted such claims

3) Discourage unnecessary and unproductive antagonism (i.e. infighting, personal attacks, gossip, etc.) that wastes time and causes divisiveness.

4) Avoid the divisive labeling of individuals and groups.(i.e. shill, agent etc)

5) Be aware and vigilant concerning the presence of agent provocateurs within the movement. 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 avoided when possible. If appropriate, exclusionary action (banning from forums or groups, removal of links from websites, cancellation of speaking engagements 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 popularity.

In Summary: It is in our experience that group unity is not achieved by ignoring divisiveness. It is achieved through civil critique and a constructive response to the disruptive behavior.


Divisive Issues

1. Debunked Theories

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. For these reasons we do not support the promotion or debate of the following during activism or blogging:

1. No planes hit the WTC towers
2. Directed Energy Weapons were used to demolish the towers
3. Theories based on inconclusive video and photographic evidence


2. Off Topic Associations

Some associations that are damaging and marginalizing to the movement are listed below. It is a historical fact that the mere mention of these topics has been seen to cause us long term damage. Consequently it is considered by TruthAction.org that only a clear focus on 9/11 fact based evidence will achieve our goals.

1. UFO and alien theories
2. Holocaust revisionism
3. Religion based conspiracy theories
4. Moon landing hoax

Note: It is often a method of the media to bait us on various conspiracy theories in an attempt to discredit us. We suggest any questions on unrelated subjects should not be responded to; rather we should redirect the conversation back to the hard evidence regarding 9/11. This approach is also appropriate with the public.

3. What hit the Pentagon?

The question of "what hit the pentagon" has been the single most divisive issue within the movement, but we can all agree that absolutely nothing could have hit the Pentagon without those in charge allowing it to happen. While we support ongoing research into the event, we urge unity on our common ground; refocusing energy towards demanding accountability and away from endless debate. We urge framing our public presentation of the Pentagon issue around unanimously agreed upon issues such as the absent air defense, the missing 2.3 trillion dollars, the conflicting testimonies, the very low probability of an amateur pilot achieving the maneuver seen and the refusal by government agencies to release evidence.

4. Global Warming

It has become apparent during attempts to reach out to environmentalists in our communities that questioning the veracity of man made global warming has prevented many in this group from continuing dialog with us. We suggest these “off topic” assertions or debates should not be brought to the public domain during 9/11 truth outreach. truthaction.org as a group holds no particular view on this issue.

Conclusion

Many activists came together to make these recommendations possible. We have all had direct experience with behavior and information that has impeded our cause. Thus we hope this document will help the 9/11 truth movement to achieve greater unity and focus. We encourage activists to cite and link to these recommendations 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.



These recommendations were inspired by and contain large portions of the TruthMove Declaration 2008.
Thank you to TruthMove and the other activists who contributed to this document.

[John Bursill]

I fully endorse this document and it will be adopted by the new organisation Truth Action Australia as a member of world wide group truthaction.org.

We are also always looking to improve these recommendations together with truthaction.org and will be looking at the comments here closely.

I personally would like to call the "Mission Statement" the "Pledge", what is your view?

It has been a pleasure working with Cosmos on this document and I would like to thank TruthMove for inspiring us and providing the skeleton on which to build. Maybe TruthMove may now look to review their Declaration and get closer to a consensus on these very important issues.

Kind regards John
_________________
WE GOT TO TAKE THE POWER BACK!

[Kim]

[Col. Jenny Sparks]

Excellent!
_________________
___________________________________________________
http://coljennysparks.blogspot.com/

[John Bursill]

A Holocaust Revisionist and Jewish Conspiracy Theorist Christopher Brooks said at the 911oz forum about these recommendations.....

************************************************************

These type of dictates are not synonymous with
truth.

This is a recipe for control by high priests who
claim superior knowledge but will never have their
qualification tested.

Genuine free speech is tricky but there is no other path
to the truth.

The 9-11 event did not occur in a vacuum.

It is a thread in complex political fabric.

This type of broad "pronouncement" is anti-truth.

A constituted purpose for an organisation is valid but
to draw assumptions and limit the breadth of enquiry
is completely illegitimate in any scientific or academic
sense.

Yes, some topics are troublesome for some people but so is
the idea that the official story is not evidence based.

****************************************************

What do you all think about that?

It is also interesting that he is only around when something important is happening!

Regards John
_________________
WE GOT TO TAKE THE POWER BACK!

[Kim]

I think the person posting this needs to make exactly what they're talking about much clearer, e.g. by posting specific quotes from the recommendations they're not happy with, and then directly critique them in an informed and rational manner.

Until this person does that then (in my personal opinion, if I may have one), it's a nebulous rant that can't be responded to, because there's nothing of real substance to get to grips with.
_________________
"Another world is not only possible, she is on her way. On a quiet day, I can hear her breathing." - Arundhati Roy, Porto Alegre, Brazil, Jan 27 2003

[John Bursill]

This man has a history of doing very, very interesting things and has a great ability to sound very intelligent while he causes disruption and argument about highly contentious issues.

He is the voice of Irrational Reasoning pushing free speach over all, including our credibilty.

regards John
_________________
WE GOT TO TAKE THE POWER BACK!

[Kim]

[YT]

[Kim]

[YT]

[Kim]

_________________
"Another world is not only possible, she is on her way. On a quiet day, I can hear her breathing." - Arundhati Roy, Porto Alegre, Brazil, Jan 27 2003

[peter stuyvesant]

This move forward was being mocked in tandem, as a double act by Hereward and Shiizaa

http://www.911oz.com/forum/public/viewtopic.php?t=1753

Then, when i posted this message they deleted the double act posts and denied they were doing it!!!
unreal

[Kim]

No worries.

If anyone wants to quote a specific point/s from those recommendations, and critique that point/s in a rational, focussed manner, I think that approach would be entirely appropriate, fair and possibly constructive. However, this type of thing is (personally speaking), water off a ducks back.

If people wish to be taken seriously, then it's wise (and necessary), to act seriously - and that includes critique and comment.

And for me personally, this post from JohnA (from another post), just about said it all:

[President Ford]