DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
NavigationMore About This WebsiteUseful Links
From news feed:
Why Re-think 9/11?
Why Re-think 9/11?
Creating a Newbie-friendly Site07/21/2008 03:30 AMI recently had a conversation with an old friend who professed to be "too smart to watch television" yet thought I was self-deluding to find the 9/11 Commission Report anything less than fully credible. He really is extremely intelligent and for the most part a critical thinker. Where do you start with someone like that? Please add comments.
Evdokas promotes it at Lamadrid's front group list:
Petros EvdokasEvdokas ends with some sentimental crap implying he gives a shit about Jews:
member of the
Belly of the Beast Collective,
and
September 11 Affinity Group
petros@...
and, ttetpos@...
http://petros-evdokas.cyprus-org.net/Another-sort-of-Introduction.html
___________
Related:
We formed the September 11 Affinity Group in order to:
- help the radical and liberal sections of the Left to see that 9/11 Truth is a
key element for successful campaigns, especially for those engaged in the Peace
and Justice movement;
and,
- to participate within the 9/11 Truth movement in ways that allow us to
confront, expose, oppose and hopefully neutralize Right-wing influences such as
racism, sexism, homophobia, and their "evil sisters": applications that take the
form of Jew-hating, Zionism, anti-Islam Crusade mongering, gay-bashing, male
supremacy.
There's a bit about the September 11 Affinity Group here:
http://www.rethink911.org/
and here:
http://portland-or.net/911truth/
(Our pages are in the evolving stage)
Our email group archives are here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/911truthportland/messages
First they came for the Communists, but I was not a Communist so I did not
speak out. Then they came for the Socialists and the Trade Unionists, but I was
neither, so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Jews, but I was not a
Jew so I did not speak out. And when they came for me, there was no one left to
speak out for me.
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/biography/niemoeller.html
Would be much more believable if Evdokas wasn't pimping Jew Toaster Barrett every other fucking post. Or letting his list-serve be used wink wink to push candidate White Power Miller of American Third Position, apparently a fwiend of Toaster Barrett.
Evdokas also pushed Lamadrid's Rethink911.org at the closet Nazi website Lamadrid moderates(warning: tl'dr faggotry...scroll near end)
This is a good timeA weird exchange begins in comments, Lamadrid demanding answers to Evdokas' criticisms in other threads as if Life Itself is At Stake. Without missing a beat, Lamadrid shares with other readers she's set up a website:
Submitted by Annoymouse on Fri, 2008-07-18 19:35.
This juncture now should bring again to mind the need to improve this site,
http://wtcdemolition.com/blog/
with the following:
- clarify its editorial policy;
- state the goals being served by the website clearly;
- state clearly the methods by which those goals are to be achieved;
- clarify in plain words its relationship (stance) toward some of the major themes, organizations and trends within the 9/11 Truth movement.
- add a page titled "About Us", or something like it, that would include a short history of the website, its founders and main contributors, and the path of its development.
This is a good time - some spiritually minded people might call it the "acceptable year of the Lord" - to take care of these things.
Why clarify the editorial policy?
Even though some introductory remarks at the top of the front page (the blog homepage) state some intentions, it is clear that the major contributors here are oriented in other directions. Also, even though editorial decisions and actions are taken, they are not openly acknowledged.
The degree to which this happens here is minor, in comparison to other Truth movement nodes, but there's no reason we can't improve, and no reason to be complacent with lack of transparency or inconsistency.
My experience so far has been that when these happen on this website they are due to well-intentioned mistakes and mistaken policies, lack of experience with open publishing in the realm of politics, and with some unexamined inner personal dynamics. All these can easily be cleared with an open heart and good conversation. So far, evil intentions and malevolence have been absent from the management of the
website.
But we are involved here within the public arena, within the realm of politics, indeed, with the biggest, most burning issue of September 11 which is a pivot around which the US Peace and Justice movement revolves (and/or remains paralyzed), while huge numbers of people around the globe are getting butchered because of it. The nature of these realities calls upon us to be more responsible in what we do and say - editorial direction and visible, transparent editorial process is essential to retaining the community of this website within the fold of the liberation process.
It was written here (on another page):
"...there is very little by way of an editorial policy here. this is not a site for diplomats or politicians--it is for freethinkers, humanists, idealists, visionaries, freedom fighters, hopeless romantics, iconoclasts, and yogis. it reflects the insanity of the times in which we live, yes. it is a safe space for those who desire frank discussion of difficult topics in good faith. there are no ads, no endorsements, no dues, no meetings, and sometimes I'm sure no readers! It's not a club, or a political party, or any other kind of association."
http://wtcdemolition.com/blog/node/1231#comment-11719
There's good intentions running through the above statement, but the truth is a little more complicated:
1. There IS an editorial activity here and it should be made more obvious to readers and writers. This will build more trust among us. I'd be happy to help with it, but more volunteers will be needed.
2. Unfortunately, the gentle and playful spirit in the quote above is essential but not sufficient to deal with the work of open publishing on 9/11. Most people who are "active" online around 9/11 Truth - and even more so, those who are active within our communities, in person, offline - need more cohesiveness and community building than is generally acknowledged. Good editorial policies in the flexible age of internet's open publishing technologies are essential approaches to building good community.
As far as I know, there are no other online venues at the moment within the Truth movement with the potential to serve the community - but this potential needs to be cultivated to take root. And if the network of people who are congealing around this website don't do it, who will?
Why state the goals being served by the website?
It's always fair and good to accept at face value the self-expressed words and claims that a person, an organization, or a publication uses to describe themselves. But what if after a while those words seem to be only the surface of a deeper situation?
The same applies to this website. The words posted right at the beginning, on the top banner of the homepage, create a rather inviting and all-embracing approach. But as we read on, we find that some of the main contributors here have other goals which are not stated openly at the beginning. Those become more apparent by where and how emotional emphasis is invested on some issues, perceptions, ideologies.
For example:
Some regular contributors here are motivated by the goal to "liberate"
the Unites States from what they perceive is a financial, military, political and cultural domination by Israel. If that is a goal of the website, it should be clearly stated at the beginning, so that visitors and writers here know what we are participating in. If that is not a goal, then it should be stated clearly by the editors/managers of the site. The amount of material on this website which reflects the above mentioned political goal is so much, that the editorial team has no other option but to state a position on it.
It may choose to avoid the responsibility of taking a position on it, but the reality of that political ideology will continue to determine everything here, whether stated or unstated.
Another example:
Some regular contributors here often write as if it is a "given" that blind and cartoonish versions of anti-communism, red-baiting and red-bashing injected here directly imported from the McCarthy era are the "normal", acceptable, commonly perceived ideology of "everyone". If that is the ideology of those who operate this website, it should be stated clearly. If it is not, then it should be stated clearly by the editors/managers of the site. The amount of material on this website which reflects the above mentioned political position is so much, that the editorial team has no other option but to state its position on it.
It may choose to avoid the responsibility of taking a position on it, but the reality of that political ideology will continue to determine everything here, whether stated or unstated.
Of course, Truthers who find it so easy to ridicule others for accepting the Official version of 911 ("but I formed my opinion by watching Corporate Television") are accountable for their politics on other things, as well. Oh, you were able to "free your mind" about September 11 and that somehow gave you confirmation that everything you thought you knew about Socialism which you learned from Corporate Television, from Hollywood, from the US educational system and other forms of social indoctrination ...have always been correct?
Back to the goals: at least in regard to September 11 and the Truth on 9/11, what do we want?
Some people want a new investigation to be carried out by the US ruling class or US Government; some Truthers want Court trials; some want Court-martials. Some Truthers want new candidates to be elected who can change things - but what changes do we want to see in our society? Some Truthers want very sweeping reforms of the US political system; some
want reforms in wider areas like the economy, education, healthcare, immigration policy, the electoral system; some Truthers want a radical change at the very root of society, a transformation of the very foundations of social, political, economic structure and of all human relations within it. Others go even further and want to see the whole of the US Empire toppled, or even further, recognizing that the Empire is no longer an "all American" construct but a global system of interpenetrating financial, industrial, military and political interests, some Truthers want to see all of Imperium subverted and
replaced by a global peoples' democracy. All of the above spring directly from 9/11 Truth, depending how Truthers see and feel it: which of these goals (or others) are embraced by the operators of this website?
Why state the methods by which those goals are to be achieved?
There are endless variations of possible and feasible action within the realm of politics. There's elections, debates, journalism, publishing, there's community organizing, educational campaigns, boycotts, rallies and marches, protest gatherings. There's civil disobedience, direct action, labour strikes, occupations, street fighting, passive resistance, militant pacifism, armed struggle. Both reformist and revolutionary campaigns utilize all of the above.
Which of these methods are embraced by the editors and managers of this website?
There is constant commentary here by the regular community of participants at http://wtcdemolition.com/blog/ on every type of political methods being applied by various other activists, organizations and movements. But the point of view from which those are being addressed is not stated.
For example, some of us rightly support and embrace the armed resistance that was heroically put up against Israel by the people of Lebanon, and we also have the clarity to recognize that the moral and political leadership of that resistance, Hezbollah, needs to improve on its ideology and practices regarding gender politics, sexual liberation
and class politics. Its open hostility to gay people and its negative stance toward emancipated women and Socialists are less toxic than that of fundamentalist reactionary forces in Iran or the Talibans, but it needs to be seen in a clear light.
The same applies to the Iraqi Resistance. Regardless of whether the 9/11 Truth movement or the US Peace movement ever get their shit together or not, the Iraqi Resistance is real, it is an actual force active in the world right now, and it's going to win the war. Which elements of that victory do we support?
What exactly are the points of departure from which we critique other people's resistance to US Imperialism, Israeli Zionism, racism, sexism and homophobia within the US? What exactly is our point of departure for our own resistance to US Imperialism, Israeli Zionism, racism, sexism and homophobia? If we want our bonds with domestic and foreign
friends and allies of this website to be genuine, we need to take our politics with genuine responsibility as well.
Why clarify the relationship (stance) toward the major themes, organizations and trends within the 9/11 Truth movement?
If it's not clear from the title, this should clarify it: beams from outer space; UFO action against the Twin Towers; no planes at the World Trade Center; no planes at the Pentagon; no plane (or too many planes) in Pennsylvania; validity of physical evidence for the investigations; validity of circumstantial evidence; role of foreign Governments; role of domestic and foreign agents of the ruling class; role of the US Government; the role of George Bush ...all these and more are concepts, claims and issues begging to be reckoned with.
If the website is to better serve the wider 9/11 Truth community it needs to state in plain words (not just ironic or satyrical statements)what its positions are. They don't have to be perfect or eternal positions. But they need to be stated and easily accessible in order to help as a "reality check", and as a marker of progress. Above all such a set of clarifying statements has medicinal and morale-boosting value for all Truthers, even for those who might disagree - clarity, per se, is always of great value.
Why add a page titled "About Us"?
...or something like it?
A page like that should have a short history of the website, information about its founders and main contributors, and the path of its development. Also a Statement of Values and Principles - here's an excellent example of one:
http://rethink911.org/
It would also have links to pages with the Editorial Policy, the Goals and Methods embraced by the website management, and to a write up on its Relationship to various 9/11 Truth realities, issues, etc.
A page titled "About Us" is an immediate orientation tool that's very handy for new and old visitors to any website. Every site that respects its visitors and friends makes an effort to have something like it.
It also provides a challenge to its authors, something like a contract with our friends and visitors that includes a code of ethics and guidelines by which we pledge to operate.
* * *
The current juncture, during which mass expulsions of Truthers are taking place on other websites and campaigns of harassment and stalking are being aimed at some of us, is a good time to actualizing all of the above.
I'd be happy to help out with this work. Please write to me about it.
Thanks,
Petros Evdokas
petros@cyprus-org.net
http://petros-evdokas.cyprus-org.net/Another-sort-of-Introduction.html
Hey Jpass
Submitted by casseia on Mon, 2008-07-21 15:15.
I've been contemplating a new site for quite some time (no surprise to anyone who has noticed the strained relationship between me and gretavo ;p). Actually, what I've been thinking about is a very ground-up newbie-oriented informational site for folks such as my boyfriend of 20 years ago who bills himself on FaceBook as "too smart to watch television" but finds the 9/11 Commission Report "completely credible." I bought a domain for this a few months ago and have been hosting it at an expensive "modular" host since my web design skills are limited to very basic html. (Right now the only material on it pertains to the Portland activists I work with.)
I recently had a conversation with an old friend who professed to be "too smart to watch television" yet thought I was self-deluding to find the 9/11 Commission Report anything less than fully credible.Readers will also note Lamadrid does not admit the website Evdokas is promoting is hers. Making the "argument" Evdokas and Lamadrid are staging less believable than it is. Especially when Evdokas is moderating the yahoo group Lamadrid owns.
This drama is for the benefit of casual readers who are supposed to conclude, "Lamadrid's unhappy Evdokas is a commie baiter, derrrr."
Except...anyone visiting the Rethink911.org website can see Lamadrid posts under her same fucking user name:
Anyone reading from the WTC website was in on the con because they said nothing: "Uh, y u mad at petros if he's pushing ur website?"
Unless they bailed. It was a con but it's a really really dumb con.
Meh. No one said closet Nazis have to be smart. Evdokas wasn't:
The text:
2162
Two Hit, Three Down, By Lynn Margulis Petros Evdokas petros_evdokas
Prof. Lynn Margulis is a member of the U.S. National Academy of Science, and Distinguished University Professor in the Department of Geosciences at the...
Jul 1, 2011 2:22 pm
2161
Re: The 9/11 Commission Campaign - rollout July 4th letter Tim Titrud timtitrud
Mark: I did talk with Mike Gravel a couple of days ago. He will be in Portland next week and the Portland 911 Truth Alliance will meet with him to assist in...
Jul 1, 2011 1:33 pm
2160
The 9/11 Commission Campaign - rollout July 4th letter Jonathan Mark noflyby
This following includes information about our joining a citizens campaign for a real 9/11 investigation. Watch for our official letter on this on July 4th....
Jul 1, 2011 7:23 am
Neither was teafag Rich Iott:
LOL
The "Rethink911" brand is also found at other tin foil websites, possibly implying Lamadrid was part of a larger conspiracy propaganda network.
Confirmed in a strange twist April of 2013 when rethink911.org was snapped up by conspiracy con man Richard Gage:
Domain Name: RETHINK911.ORG
Created on: 12-Apr-13
Expires on: 12-Apr-14
Last Updated on: 12-Apr-13
Registrant:
richard gage
3527 Mt. Diablo Blvd, ste 370
lafayette, California 94549
United States
Administrative Contact:
gage, richard rgage@ae911truth.org
3527 Mt. Diablo Blvd, ste 370
lafayette, California 94549
United States
+1.4015785505
Technical Contact:
gage, richard rgage@ae911truth.org
3527 Mt. Diablo Blvd, ste 370
lafayette, California 94549
United States
+1.4015785505
Domain servers in listed order:
NS45.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
NS46.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
It's just one big incestuous conspiracy commune.
[under construction]
