Sat11Sep - LONDON - Passing Clouds 9/11 conference/party

[TonyGosling]

Sat11Sep - LONDON - Passing Clouds 9/11 conference/party
www.passingclouds.org
http://www.facebook.com/passingclouds

[Mark Gobell]

From Reinvestigate 911

Advance Notice. Saturday September 11 2010.

911 - Made in Washington?

A Celebration of Nine years of the 9/11 Truth Movement

For the corporate media September 11 is an almost sacred day, when the victims of the 9/11 terror attacks are remembered. But for ordinary people across the planet it is the day that launched the 9/11 wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, wars that we now know were in the pipeline before the terrorists struck. Many have become aware that Al Qaeda was originally an asset of the CIA, and wonder whether the extraordinary "intelligence failures" that allowed 911 to happen occurred by accident or design. The global 9/11 truth movement is still demanding answers to the key questions and its influence is still spreading.

To commemorate the victims of 9/11 and the 9/11 wars and to celebrate 9 years of resistance, Passing Clouds, the London arts club, is holding an all day event with seminars during the day organised by Reinvestigate 911 and bands in the evening.

For updates go to the Facebook page "we, the people, seek truth for September 11"

Passing Clouds are particularly keen to contact the top rank acts who have come out as 9/11 sceptics. If you can help in this, with publicity for the event, or in any other way,
email we@passingclouds.org
or call 07903 443849

Here is what Passing Clouds has to say about 9/11...

Whilst time remains the greatest enemy of Truth, the fact that 9/11 this year falls on a Saturday lends itself as an unmissable opportunity to celebrate all those who have sought Truth in the last nine years as well as an end to war and the creation of a peaceful, sustainable world community.

The aim of the event is to bring together many different organisations, many not necessarily connected to the Truth movement, as well as well-known and respected artists and speakers. We hope that this will help movement make greater steps towards penetrating the consciousness of mainstream society.

We intend to brand the event to be visually attractive, much along the lines of an event like Love Box or Bestival, moving away from the more ubiquitous and stark red/black/white truth imagery to something lighter and more representative of 'Truth', which after all is a positive and spiritual concept.

Passing Clouds is currently working on securing a line-up of as many well-known artists as possible in the hope of encouraging others also to speak out and support the movement. It will also generate publicity for the movement, hopefully attracting the attention and interest of the mainstream.

The event will consist of films and talks during the day, then progress to live music showcases in the evening. It will also provide a launch pad for a number of new 911 Truth incentives, such as the 911 Statement list.

We would be very grateful for any support in the organisation of this event, either in publicity, production or in helping us establish contact with suitable speakers and artists. If you are interested in getting involved, please contact us at

we@passingclouds.org>we@passingclouds.org / 07951 98 98 97

About Passing Clouds

Passing Clouds is a grass-roots community venture with a venue in Hackney which seeks to facilitate a true meeting of minds, cultures and creativity through events and activities which reflect the attitudes of conscious people across the world. In addition to providing a regular platform for high-caliber musicians from the conscious music scene, much of our work is in supporting ventures and organisations which seek to empower people to step away from the system towards alternative infrastructures more in tune with our natural and spiritual selves. Passing Clouds fully supports the Truth movement in educating people in the urgent necessity of this transition and see it as the most expedient route to achieving support for unilateral disarmament and the cessation of war.

Peace, love, solidarity to you all.

ENDS

[TonyGosling]

But apparently no time or space for UK 9/11 Truth activists at Reinvestigate 9/11 to share their knowledge - presentations etc.
At least that is what Eleanor from Passing Clouds told us at last Monday's meeting.
Bizzare!


9/11 Truth Rising party at Passing Clouds
Passing Clouds invited you · Share · Public event

Time 11 September at 13:00 - 12 September at 05:00
Location 1 Richmond Road, London
Created by: London Truth Rising
More info Freethinking people of the world!

SATURDAY 11TH SEPTEMBER:

On the 9th anniversary of 9/11 Passing Clouds, in association with We Are Change UK and Reinvestigate 9/11 will be uniting with venues across London to spread awareness for new evidence compiled by scientists, experts, professionals, witnesses and the media which contradicts the official narrative of events.

Still a country at war and having suffered considerable infringements of our civil liberties, knowing what really happened on that day is more important than ever.

Join us for an all-day and night event to promote this body of evidence, as part of a worldwide campaign calling for a reinvestigation of 9/11

Join us and spread the word....

Tickets £8 pounds all night in advance (10 after)from
http://www.eventsbot.com/events/eb592185577

All money raised will be going towards 9/11 awareness building projects in association with We Are Change and Reinvestigate 9/11.

THE EVENT

DURING THE DAY
1-7pm Talks and films curated by Reinvestigate 9/11 UK featuring sessions hosted by journalist IAN HENSHALL, author of 9/11 The New Evidence including a talk by DR NAFEEZ AHMED, political scientist and acclaimed author of The War on Truth: 9/11, Disinformation, and the Anatomy of Terrorism.

Evening:
7-9pm: MC ANGEL hosts LYRICALLY CHALLENGED featuring some of the best spoken word artists, MCs and rappers including

ZENA EDWARDS***MICHELLE MADSEN***OFF KEY*** SONORITY ***DEAN ATTA***CONSCIOUS MINDS CREW***
***LADY MC***CONNIE BELL***YAP***CLAPPER PRIEST***

9-5am: All night party featuring live performances, DJ sets, freestyling jam and MC sessions with

***ARUBA RED ***
*** PEYOTI FOR PRESIDENT ***
*** 12 TONE ***
*** MUNTU VALDO (Camaroon)***
*** YAABA FUNK (Ghana)***
*** ZENA EDWARDS ***
*** LATIN DUB SOUNDSYTEM ***
*** PLANETMAN & THE INTERNATIONALZ ***
*** MC LOGIC ***
*** SARAVAH SOUL (Brazil)***
*** EARL 16 (Jamiaca)***
*** LIAM BAILEY ***
*** URGENT UNION ***
*** MC ANGEL + DJ SHORTY ***
*** CLAPPER PRIEST ***
***WILLIAMS CUMBERBACH (Venezuela)***
*** SELECTA MR FOUNDATION ***
*** DJ MR WILSON (Dub casting) ***

Plus other artists passing through during the evening to show support including Soweto Kinch, Dennis Bovell, Roots Manuva...

SUPPORTING VENUES
Notting Hill Arts Club, Hootenany, Inspiral Brixton Jamm, The Comedy Cafe, Arcola Theatre, Rio Cinema, Inspiral Lounge, People, Zigfried's, Three Blind Mice, Cordy House, Child of the Jago, Junction Bar, The Old Boy's Club, The Others, Junction Rooms, Trolley Gallery, Visions Video Bar, 512 Bar, The George Tavern, The Pattern Market, Visions, Cordy House, 303, Coffee Plant, Tina We Salute You, The Bird's Nest, Juno, Off Broadway.

MEDIA PARTNERS
The Mahogany Blog, Happenstance Radio, Conscious FM, Positive TV, BBC5.tv, Run Riot, Paradigm Shift TV, Media Roots, Jungle Drums Magazine, Guestlist Network Magazine.

SUPPORTING ORGANISATIONS
We Are Change UK, Make Wars History, Reinvestigate 9/11 Campaign, The Zeitgeist Movement UK, 9/11 Truth Bristol, 9/11 London Truth Action, One Taste, Reggae Roast, Humanitad, Amaru Global Hemp Solutions, Naturewise, Kew Ecovillage, The Forum (Secret Garden Party), Satsang Collective, Antic Establishment, Movimientos Latin American Network, The Hackney Globetrotter, 12 Tone Collective, Tree House Cafe, United Diversity, Little Blue Ball Records, Stranger Than Paradise, Small World, Urgent Union, the People's United Community.

Tickets £10 pounds all night in advance from
http://www.eventsbot.com/events/eb592185577

For more information on 9/11 and the alternative evidence we suggest the following films:

9/11 Press for Truth
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5589099104255077250

Blueprint for Truth
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4617650616903609314

Zero
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2296490368603788739

[David Rose]

9/11 Truth in the UK has become an anti-democratic organization. Make of that what you will. Ian Henshall goes onto US radio shows calling himself 'the leader of the UK 9/11 Truth Movement". I never voted for him!

This is fascism pure and simple and goes against everything that 9/11 truth is supposed to be for.

I will not be attending the Passing Clouds event. There are much more constructive things to do .... like getting a democratic and dynamic 9/11 truth movment going in the UK?

[blackbear]

I am confident that the Passing Clouds event will get the Kosher seal of approval.

.. moving away from the more ubiquitous and stark red/black/white truth imagery to something lighter and more representative of 'Truth',

[Ian Henshall]

Ian Henshall here. I see that crazy dave is described as a validated poster but actually everything he saysin this post is extremely invalid. I did not call myself a leader of the 9/11 truth movement in the UK or anywhere else and certainly not "the leader". Kevin Barret as I recall introduced me as "a leader". Maybe crazy dave would secretly like to be "the leader" but his bitter divisive posts (this is not the first) of course rule him out even as a leader.

It's just stupid to say that having leaders is fascistic. It's also an insult to the victims of fascism past (and present, depending on how you define it).

Crazy Dave has glimpsed one piece of truth though. Reinvestigate 911 is a campaign and like most campaigns it does not subject itself to democratic control by just anyone who says they are a supporter. This is for the simple reason that people like Crazy Dave could (especially if organised by the bad guys - who do you work for Dave?) take it over, discredit it (eg by the moronic use of language like facsist) and waste what little resources we have.

Crazy Dave is free to start his own campaign, I seem to recall that he tried but no-one turned up.

Sorry if this sounds arrogant but I probably won't bother to reply to any other comments that might follow. With the anniversary coming up I have better things to do.

I would question the system that gives Crazy Dave the title of validated poster though.

[David Rose]

Dear "UK 9/11 truth leader",

If you Google "Kevin Barret Ian Henshall" you get this:

"Kevin Barrett's radio show schedule Joshua Blakeney and Ian Henshall on the Kevin Barrett Show ... UK 9/11 truth leader Ian Henshall, who knew Hitchens when they were both at Oxford, ..."

.... but if you go to Kevin's radio listing, Ian is now billed as "Re-investigate 9/11 coordinator". Funny that? The listing been changed but because it takes time for Google to re-cache , the Google search has still got our "dear leader's" billing as "UK 9/11 truth leader Ian Henshall".

So may I repeat, I never voted for Ian Henshall to be leader of UK 9/11 Truth (and nor did anyone else) ......so why on earth is Ian telling Kevin Barrett (and the rest of the world) that he is our "dear leader"?

This is a valid argument, Ian. Didn't they teach you that at Oxford? I'm not being bitter or divisive.

Despite being pinned to the wall of a night club in Bristol and interrogated by Scott Hudson about if: "I work for 5", (the answer is still no, don't be so ridiculous, childish and such a paranoid conspiracy theorist! And no Scott, I will not "prove myself" to you either....whatever that involves......).

At least Ian is admitting that 9/11 Truth in the UK is an undemocratic organisation. That is progress. What I am saying is that this is a very bad idea and leads to the sterile and impotent state of the 9/11 Truth Movement in the UK at the moment. Nothing has happened for a couple of years guys! What have you been doing? If we don't believe in democracy .... what do we believe in, Ian? Of course our 'dear leader' has said he will not reply to a mere 'supporter" like me but the question is still very valid. How can we as a movement demand transparency from the state over 9/11 and 7/7, when we cannot even hold open debates between mere supporters and the 'leadership" on the 9/11 anniversary do at Passing Clouds (as Tony Gosling so rightly demands in this thread)? Why won't you even discuss the campaign with supporters of the campaign, Ian? Are you afraid of democratic debate and accountability? Are you a self appointed un-elected leader? Sounds a bit fascist to me?

"Crazy Dave is free to start his own campaign, I seem to recall that he tried but no-one turned up." Honestly, I do not know what you are talking about? Can you be more specific?

May I repeat: 9/11 Truth in the UK is an undemocratic movement .... so despite thousands, if not millions of people in the UK who are sceptical about the official story of 9/11 .... the UK 9/11 Truth Movement for the last 2 years has done virtually nothing, has made no impact and is sterile and impotent.

Why is this? Who is to blame and who is accountable? Who can supporters of 9/11 Truth in the UK talk to about this outrageous and depressing situation?

If supporters of the campaign are involved in all decisions, then they are energised by that power ......and the movement grows. All supporters start to own the decisions and the power of the movement... if they are ALL involved in a real democratic process and decision making. This is "How to build a new social movement 101" guys! Think: consensus decision making.

If a small unelected leadership controls all the power then supporters loose interest and become disheartened. That is what has happened to 9/11 truth in the UK and Ian Henshall is totally out of order for attacking me for pointing out this obvious fact. The whole point of 9/11 Truth is that democracy was high jacked by a group of fascist corporartists on 9/11 (Bush, Cheney, Blair etc) and we need to claim democracy back for the people .....and to re-claim democracy we must believe in it ourselves and practice democracy in our movement.

Simple and valid points, Ian?

lots of love

Dave X

[Frazzel]

dave seems to forget that the reason why reinvestigate 911 has to keep itself a tight knit invite only group is because of past problems with holocaust revision/denial stuff that some wanted to mix in with 911 which will of course only serve to discredit us.
we needed reinvestigate 911 to appeal to the mainstream. to present a credible well researched academic cross referenced analysis of why the oct of 911 cannnot be true.
there are different groups to suit different approaches/views/ folks. But the reality is that the average journalist m.p scientist jo public traditional left, etc will not be reached by groups also discussing whether aliens exist or whether beam weapons brought the towers down etc etc.
the london truth action and we are change is for those fit and healthy enough to be involved in street or direct actions. also they have a wider remit than reinvestigate 911.
no group is perfect as no human being is perfect.

[Frazzel]

it would be nice if we could have a democratic 911 group dave, but we did try that before and it ended up splintering into seperate groups with different raison detres. this was because there was too much disagreement ie supporters of judy woods and fetzer versus those who did not support her theories and preferred to support richard gage for yet another example.
how do you reconcile all the differences that ive mentioned and others have, in one 911 group? its impossible.

[David Rose]

A long as the UK 9/11 truth movement (Re-investigate 9/11, Truth Action etc) are organised via undemocratic and anti-democratic principles and practices, I cannot (in good conscience) take part in the campaigning and activities of these groups.

We claim there was a cover-up on 9/11 and that the true story has not been told to the public. We claim that a powerful elite hide behind the shadows and manipulate our so-called democracy, economy and public life .... yet as a truth movement we reject open debate and democratic practices, instead preferring organisation and control by tiny clique and the exclusion of those who dare to question the leadership by unproven innuendo and mud slinging.

Dear God! .. you are no better than the people and political practices you are criticising! Why don't you see that the ONLY way you can solve the problems that have plagued 9/11 truth in the UK is by more democracy within the movment rather than by giving up on democracy and giving into the despair of dictatorship by an small clique of insiders?

I will not be associated with a group that is not organised with at least some degree of democracy. I will not be associated with a group that suppresses free speech and open debate within the truth movement (see Tony Golsing's post about the Passing Clouds event this September 11th in this thread).

[Andrew.]

I would say let every one have their say, keep them separate but as Tony does here let it be clearly known that many consider the “beam; ashes to ashes dust to dust” as mostly state sponsored shills.

With aliens, (greys, lizards, etc) let people have their say again and do likewise. Is not a part of all of us Alien?

With the “Holocaust revision/denial stuff” again do likewise and turn it around being truthful that a certain group have and will murder their own brethren.

This way people new to the subject will see more clearly the disinfo.

Any one claiming that it’s allied to such subjects to try and discredit it when it’s been clearly pointed out that it is not allied to those ideas; people can then see the purpose of the disinfo.

[David Rose]

Precisely right Andrew.

Democracy, free speech and open debate will expose and drive out the disinfo agents and crazy theories.

The secrecy of the present set up is the worst of all worlds.

You can include me out. I'm sick and tired of banging my head against a brick wall and wasting my time.

[blackbear]

hello crazydave

The aim of Re-investigate 9/11, Truth Action, We Are Change, etc is to airbrush from 9/11 Truth the involvement of the following:

Zionists, Jews, Israel, etc.

The evidence of their connection is well documented on this site. Try reading the posts of Blackcat, Kbo, and myself.

I would recommend you read the postings of Alice the Kurious on the Rigorous Intuition site.

Good Luck.

[Andrew.]

[David Rose]

As Tony Gosling suggested ... speakers, panels, debates (both in the conference hall and online - great idea!).

Also this event will be televised and streamed over the web.

Hope everyone has a nice party at Passing Clouds! Enjoy!
...................................................................... ..........................

How the World Changed After 9/11 http://www.howtheworldchanged.org/
A made for television event in lower Manhattan on September 11th and 12th, 2010
.
We invite you to join us as we host 8 panel discussions over 2 days which will explore the important changes in our world since the attacks of 9/11 and the ever increasing need to understand its relevance. On the 9th anniversary of these attacks we can look back on 2 wars, 2 U.S. Administrations, a world financial crisis and the impact on culture both home and abroad. Of particular interest will be the changes in the face of the military, the surveillance state, the media, the economy, politics and corporatism that have been cast by the official government narrative of the attacks and the struggle against empire embodied in these changes.
At this 9th anniversary symposium produced by INN World Report you will hear from a stellar array of speakers who have gained global recognition for having engaged and challenged these changes.


Format — Each panelist will make a presentation following a brief topic intro by the moderator, who will then question and challenge each panel member. There will be Q&A for each panel with the studio and online audience.

Note: Click on speakers names to view their bio and photo.

Saturday, Sept. 11
SESSION 1
9/11/2010 Saturday Morning Plan


Keynote Speech - TBA, 12:00pm - 12: 15pm
PANEL 1 — 12:15pm - 2:15pm: The 4th Estate Fails In Its Duty And The Birth Of Alternative Media
It has often been said 'The first casualty of war is truth'. What about truth in the never ending war on terror? This first panel will look at modern reporting, military censorship, taboos, and techniques often used by media to hide the truth. A look at spin and sell and the false legitimacy added by today's mega networks. Panelists will also explore the use of revisionist news as events are entered into the history books. The panel will explore the birth of the citizen journalist movement, open publishing, and alternative broadcasting.

Moderator: Priya Reddy


The Panelists:
Robin Andersen: Professor of Communication and Media Studies at Fordam University.
Danny Schecter: author, filmaker and commentator on economic issues.
Lynn Landes: publisher of The Landes Report, contributing writer to the Philadelphia Inquirer
Christina Borjesson: award winning journalist and author of 'Into the Buzzsaw, Leading Journalists Expose the Myth of a Free Press'

PANEL 2 — 2:30pm - 4:30pm: Truth and Consequences: 'Resistance is Futile' , Or Is It?
A look at gains and disappointments of different social and political movements since 9-11. Four leaders of the anti-war and social justice movements speak on their experiences and the struggle to mobilize people against war, oppression, and government policies after 9-11. Panelists will look back at the Bush years and examine the current difficulty of mobilizing against the new friendly face of war under Barak Obama, as Bush's policies remain unchanged. This panel will also look at how differing analysis between leftist scholars and independent researchers on the events and repercussions of Sept. 11th, 2001 have split the left.

Moderator: Sam Husseini

The Panelists:
Cindy Sheehan: American activist
Elaine Brower: Military families for Peace and 'World Can't Wait'
Matthis Chiroux: Iraq Vets Against the War
Sara Flounders: movement organizer: Answer,IAC

SESSION 2
9/11/2010 Saturday Evening Plan



PANEL 3 — 4:45pm - 6:45pm: Goodbye 4th Amendment: Your Government is Watching You!
9-11 and the Rise of the Security State. A look at the Patriot Act and other laws, as well as new interpretations of the law which have eroded privacy and the ability to travel freely without fear of unlawful search and seizure. Panelists will recount how decisions, often politically motivated, have thwarted and hindered vital investigations which may have changed the course of history. This panel will also address the unregulated and expanded use and sharing of databases amongst newly formed private quasi-security agencies.

Moderator: Daniel Sunjata

The Panelists:
Ray Mcgovern: former CIA analyst
Katherine Albrecht: leading privacy advocate, co-author of Spychips: How Major Corporations Plan to Track your Every Move with RFID
Coleen Rowley: former FBI agent and whistleblower
Annie Machon: former British MI5 agent

PANEL 4 — 7pm - 9pm: Rule of Law: Speak Truth to Power and Pay the Price
In a democracy debate is essential, unless, of course, you object to the ever more profitable war machine. Three leading American politicians and a former member of England's Parliament will look at how their governments and their own parties ousted them and others like them for taking a stance against war and equality.

Moderator: Tom Kiely

The Panelists:
Mike Gravel: former Democratic Alaska US senator and presidential candidate
Don Siegelman: former Alabama governor falsely convicted and jailed in a Bush era political prosecution.
George Galloway: former member of Parliament for 23 years , and international Antiwar leader. Ousted from Britons Labor party for his antiwar stance.
Cynthia Mckinney: former Democratic Georgia congresswoman targeted questioning the official 9/11 narrative and for her anti war views.

Sunday, Sept. 12
SESSION 3
9/12/2010 Sunday Morning Plan



PANEL 5 — 11am - 1pm: Islamophobia and the Rise of Hate in the US
As the human rights of Muslims were sacrificed in wars outside the U.S.A., Muslims inside the U.S. began to experience overt attacks and persecution fueled by a misguided and generalized hate. In this panel, representatives of several major Muslim organizations discuss the rise of hate against their communities and its effects on all communities and on the world. After 9/11 many experienced what seemed to be a coordinated effort to legally justify racial profiling, police brutality and economic boycott. We'll take a close look at state sponsored fear and media sanctioned hate. Was 9-11 the end of equality for Muslim citizens and the end of freedom to worship wherever and whenever you please if your not a Christian or a Jew? This panel will also look at the Ground Zero Islamic cultural center controversy.

Co-Moderators: Ryme Katkhouda and Enver Masud

Ryme Katkhouda: is a member of the National Council of Arab Americans, Director of the Peoples MEDIA Center in Washington and a Sr. Producer at Pacifica Radio.
Enver Masud:is founder and CEO of the Wisdom Fund and the recipient of the 2002 Gold Award from the Human Rights Foundation for his book The War on Islam. He is also a co-author of Islam: Opposing Viewpoints, and 9/11 and American Empire.

The Panelists:
Wright Mahdi Bray: Executive Director of the Muslim American Society's Freedom Foundation
Abed A. Ayoub, Esq.: is the American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee's Legal Director.
2 more TBA


PANEL 6 — 1:15pm - 3:15pm: Distrust Your Government: How Conspiracy Theorists Become Conspiracy Realists
This panel will peer behind the scenes of events that shape our world. The real motives of power are often hidden behind noble pretexts. This panel will shine light into the archives of historical and future plans for managing and handling societies.

Moderator: Brian Madden

The Panelists:
Peter Dale Scott: professor at U.C. Berkely, author of American War Machine: Deep Politics, the Global Drug Connection, and the Road to Afghanistan
Mark Crispin Miller: Author, NYU media professor, recent books include Fooled Again
Michael Parenti: award winning, internationally known American political scientist, historian
1 other tba

SESSION 4
9/12/2010 Sunday Evening Plan



PANEL 7 — 4:15pm -6:15pm: Are We Patriots or Are We Terrorists? Have We Grown Afraid of Our Own Government?
Why have we grown afraid of our own government? A look at racial profiling, the home grown terror legislation movement, the merging of the war on terror and the war on drugs, and the threat of collapse of civilization.

Moderator: Tony Bates, WBAI

The Panelists:
Wayne Madsen: investigative journalist former NSA analyst, publisher of 'The Wayne Madsen Report'
Mike Ruppert: investigative journalist, fouunder 'From the Wilderness', author of Crossing the Rubicon, center of the documentary 'Collapse'
Hank Albarelli: author of A TERRIBLE MISTAKE: The Murder of Frank Olson and the CIA’s Secret Cold War Experiments.
Ralph Schoenman: author of The Hidden History of Zionism; Iraq and Kuwait, and co-host of Taking Aim with Mya Shone on Pacifica Radio and the Progressive Radio Network
Gary Franchi: founder of the Lone Lantern Society of America and current head of RestoreTheRepublic.com

PANEL 8 — 6:30pm -8:30pm: The Science Of 9-11: Myths And Miracles
If 1+1=2, somebody's lying here. Reports have emerged in accredited journals from scientists presenting evidence which contradicts the official version of 9/11. A close and fair look at the government's science and that of independent professionals who disagree.

Moderator: Lenny Charles

The Panelists:
Kevin Ryan: former UL labs technician fired for leaking the steel stress tests of the twin towers
Richard Gage, AIA: Founder of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth
Niels Harritt: associate professor of chemistry at the University of Copenhagen and author of a recently published scientific article in The Open Chemical Physics Journal
Crockett Grabbe: Caltech astrophysicist, and University of Iowa research professor who worked on the starwars program.

Check back often for program updates.

[TonyGosling]

Lumping these three together is just lazy
All have very different approaches.

[Andrew.]

[ian neal]

[Andrew.]

From Reinvestigate 911?

[David Rose]

Hi Ian,

I'm up to my neck in work at the moment and will reply to your post at length at a later date. Seeds of Change run courses on activist training and know allot about consensus decision making. We could ask them for some advice?

The problem with 9/11 Truth at the moment is that no one trusts each other and everyone seems to suspect that everyone else is an MI5 agent!
This is insane and very counter productive eg: http://911truthnews.com/a-response-to-kevin-barretts-attacks/ Great people like Mike Ruppert (who was holding public lectures in November 2001 about 9/11 and has written the classic text, Crossing the Rubicon) have got so pissed off with this insanity that they have left the movement (but it is good to see that Mike will be at the NY conference this year).

Because the official story of 9/11 has proved to be a lie, the 9/11 truth movement is beginning to win the argument but we cannot make much more progress if we cannot organise some kind of consensus and common front, to present our arguments for a new investigation, to the mainstream.

As long as everyone is throwing these 'MI5' accusations around, we will always be a fringe and fragmented movement?

What I'm saying is that its time to grow up and win the argument in the mainstream and to do that we need a some sort of democratic organisation and a forum to allow activists to communicate with each other in an open and respectful way without all this paranoia and name calling.

We cannot make 'their conspiracy' (the elite's conspiracy) make us so paranoid that we cannot trust each other? The only way we can trust each other is by creating an open democratic forum that can make decisions in the open (ie: in public) and put forward a common front that is supported by everyone who is bothered to turn up to meetings and gatherings to vote on whatever decision making process we can all agree on.

I will write more soon.

D

http://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/free/shortconsensus

Seeds for Change - workshops and training for grassroots campaigners

Consensus decision making is a creative and dynamic way of reaching agreement between all members of a group. Instead of simply voting for an item and having the majority of the group getting their way, a consensus group is committed to finding solutions that everyone actively supports - or at least can live with. This makes sure that all opinions, ideas and concerns are taken into account. By listening closely to each other, the group aims to come up with proposals that work for everyone.

Consensus is neither compromise nor unanimity - it aims to go further by weaving together everyone's best ideas and most important concerns - a process that often results in surprising and creative solutions, inspiring both the individual and the group as whole.
Working together

At the heart of consensus is a respectful dialogue between equals. It's about everyone working together to meet both the individual's and the group's needs - working with each other rather than for or against each other, something that requires openness and trust.
an onion being peeled - layers marked want, really want, actually need

Consensus is looking for 'win-win' solutions that are acceptable to all - no decision will be made against the will of an individual or a minority. Instead the group adapts to all its members' needs. If everyone agrees to a decision they will all be much more committed to making it happen.

Consensus decision making is based on the idea that people should have full control over their lives and that power should be shared by all, not just concentrated in the hands of a few. It's about having the freedom to decide one's own course in life and the right to play an equal role in creating a common future. This is why it is used widely in groups working towards a more just and equitable society such as small voluntary groups, co-operatives and campaign networks.
Conditions for consensus

* Common Goal: Everyone in the group needs to share a clear common goal and be willing to work together towards it. Work out together what your goals are and how you will get there. If differences arise later, revisit the common goal to help to focus and unite the group.
* Commitment to reaching consensus: Everyone needs to be willing to really give it a go. This means being deeply honest about what it is you want or don't want, and properly listening to what others have to say. Everyone must be willing to shift their positions, to be open to alternative solutions and be able to reassess their needs.
* Trust and openness: We need to be able to trust that everyone shares our commitment to consensus and that everyone respects our opinions and equal rights. It would be a big breach of trust for people to manipulate the process of the meeting in order to get the decision they most want.
* Part of this is to openly express both our desires (what we'd like to see happening), and our needs (what we have to see happen in order to be able to support a decision). If everyone is able to talk openly then the group will have the information it requires to take everyone's positions into account and to come up with a solution that everyone can support.
* Sufficient time for making decisions and for learning to work by consensus. Taking time to make a good decision now can save wasting time revisiting a bad one later.
* Clear Process: It's essential to have a clear process for making decisions and to make sure that everyone has a shared understanding of how it works.
* Active participation: In consensus we all need to actively participate. We need to listen to what everyone has to say, voice our thoughts and feelings about the matter and pro-actively look for solutions that include everyone.

Facilitation

In most meetings, there are one or more facilitators. Their role is to ensure that the tasks of the meeting get done: that decisions are made and implemented. They also help the group to work harmoniously, creatively and democratically.

The facilitators might take steps to keep the meeting focused, or make sure a few people don't dominate the discussion. They might suggest a break when people are getting tired; they might have prepared an agenda and process that will help the group achieve its goals.

The facilitators shouldn't have any more power than anyone else and should stay neutral on the issues under discussion. They're not there to make all the proposals and decide things for a group. They can only do their job with everyone's support and co-operation.

If a small group doesn't give anyone the role of facilitator, then everyone can be responsible for making the process of the meeting work.
The decision making process

The diagram below shows how a discussion evolves during the consensus process. At the beginning it widens out as people bring different perspectives and ideas to the group.

This provides the material needed for a broad-ranging discussion which explores all the options and helps people understand each others' concerns. This can be a turbulent and sometimes difficult stage - people might be grappling with lots of competing or contradictory ideas - but it is the most creative part, so don't lose heart!

Then the group moves on to synthesise a proposal. This means finding the group's common ground, weeding out some ideas and combining all the useful bits into one proposal. Finally, if the group agrees on a proposal a decision is reached and implemented.
diagram showing how a discussion opens out, has a middle discussion phase then is synthesised into one proposal
A consensus flowchart

There are many different ways of reaching consensus. This model outlines the common stages and will work well with up to about 20 people.
consensus flowchart
Agreement and Disagreement

At the decision stage people have several options:

Agreement with the proposal.

Reservations: You are willing to let the proposal go ahead but want to make the group aware you aren't happy with it. You may even put energy into implementing it once your concerns have been acknowledged.

Standing aside: You want to object, but not block the proposal. This means you won't help to implement the decision, but you are willing for the group to go ahead with it. You might stand aside because you disagree with the proposal, or you might like the decision but be unable to support it because you don't have the time or energy.

The group may be happy to accept the stand aside and go ahead, or they may work on a new proposal, especially if there are several stand asides.

A block always stops a proposal from going ahead. It expresses a fundamental objection. It isn't "I don't really like it," or "I liked the other idea better." It means that you cannot live with the proposal. The group can either start work on a new proposal, or look for amendments to overcome the objection.

In an ideal consensus process a block wouldn't happen since any major concerns about a proposal should be addressed before the decision stage. However, sometimes people aren't able to express their concerns clearly enough, or aren't heard by the group. In such situations the block acts as a safeguard to ensure that decisions are supported by everyone.

Being able to block is an integral part of consensus, but it comes with a big responsibility. A block stops other people from doing something that they would like to do, and it should therefore only be used if serious concerns are unresolved.

Make sure everyone understands the different options for expressing disagreement. Often people are confused and block when they'd actually be happy to stand aside. Sometimes people are scared of blocking, even if they are deeply unhappy and use a milder form of disagreement instead.
Guidelines for reaching consensus

* If you don't understand something, don't be afraid to say so.
* Be willing to work towards the solution that's best for everyone, not just what's best for you. Be flexible and willing to give something up to reach an agreement.
* Help to create a respectful and trusting atmosphere. Nobody should be afraid to express their ideas and opinions. Remember that we all have different values, backgrounds and behaviour and we get upset by different things.
* Explain your own position clearly. Be open and honest about the reasons for your view points. Express your concerns early on in the process so that they can be taken into account in any proposals.
* Listen actively to what people are trying to say. Make an effort to understand someone's position and their underlying needs, concerns and emotions. Give everyone space to finish and take time to consider their point of view.
* Think before you speak, listen before you object. Listen to other members' reactions and consider them carefully before pressing your point. Self restraint is essential in consensus - sometimes the biggest obstacle to progress is an individual's attachment to one idea. If another proposal is good, don't complicate matters by opposing it just because it isn't your favourite idea! Ask yourself: "Does this idea work for the group, even if I don't like it the best?" or "Does it matter which one we choose?"
* Don't be afraid of disagreement. Consensus isn't about us all thinking the same thing. Differences of opinion are natural and to be expected.
Disagreements can help a group's decision, because with a wide range of information and opinions, there is a greater chance the group will find good solutions. Easily reached consensus may cover up the fact that some people don't feel safe or confident enough to express their disagreements.

Key skills for consensus

Active Listening: When we actively listen we suspend our own thought processes and give the speaker our full attention. We make a deliberate effort to understand someone's position and their needs, concerns and emotions.

Summarising: A succinct and accurate summary of what's been said so far can really help a group move towards a decision. Outline the emerging common ground as well as the unresolved differences: "It seems like we've almost reached agreement on that bit of the proposal, but we need to explore this part further to address everyone's concerns." Check with everyone that you've got it right.

Synthesis: Find the common ground and any connections between seemingly competing ideas and weave them together to form proposals. Focus on solutions that address the fundamental needs and key concerns that people within the group have.
Consensus in large groups

In large groups it's a good idea to delegate issues to smaller groups, such as working groups or local groups. However, sometimes the issues will be so important that they have to be discussed and decided by everyone. This will often be done in a spokescouncil, which enables hundreds and thousands of people to work together by consensus in an efficient way.

In a spokescouncil the meeting splits into small groups, which start by discussing the issue(s) to come up with concerns and ideas. Spokes (delegates) from each group then meet up in a spokescouncil to feed back these thoughts.

The spokescouncil uses this information to create one or more proposals. These are discussed back in the small groups to check for any amendments and agreement. The results of these discussions are taken to the spokescouncil who should be able to either confirm agreement or draw up new proposals for further discussion. In this way the power to make decisions lies firmly with the small groups, not the spokes.

Fishbowl spokescouncil

The groups sit in an outer circle around the spokes.
diagram showing spokes in a circle, with their groups sitting behind them

This makes the spokes more accountable and reduces the need to repeat information.

The small groups are often based around pre-existing groups such as work teams, local groups or affinity groups. Alternatively, a large group of people might split into smaller groups randomly.

The spoke's role is to feed back information between the small group and the spokescouncil. The spoke needs to act as a voice for everyone within the small group, communicating the breadth of collective thought rather than just their own personal point of view. Being the spoke carries a lot of responsibility to represent information accurately and not to manipulate the process.

Generally spokes don't make decisions for their group but always check back for agreement before a decision is finalised. However, an individual small group may empower their spoke to take decisions within agreed parameters.

Rotating the role of spoke from meeting to meeting is a good idea, as is having two spokes, one of them presenting the viewpoints and proposals from their small group, the other to take notes of what other groups have to say. This helps to ensure that ideas don't get lost or misrepresented.

Why small groups? Some people don't see the need to split into small groups - they want to hear the whole discussion, and have everyone else hear their point of view. However, large plenary meetings make it very difficult for everyone to participate - there's not enough time for everyone to speak and many people feel too intimidated to talk in front of hundreds of people. Breaking into small groups creates safer, more dynamic spaces to work in, includes more people and saves a lot of time. Small groups can also allow several tasks to be done in parallel.

[ian neal]

[quote="Andrew."]From Reinvestigate 911?

[Andrew.]

[quote="ian neal"]

[Whitehall_Bin_Men]

I'll be coming along for the drinking, dancing... and spook spotting ... not for any other form of enlightenment.
Fat Larry O'Hooligan and 9/11 Cult Watch will be down there filming evidence of 9/11 lunacy no doubt, I'll trip him over if I see him.

[outsider]

[Whitehall_Bin_Men]

r911 isnt perfect but it is doing an important job.
Crazy Dave hasnt answered how he would keep people like N.Kollostreom and his holocaust denial nazi apologising out of such a broad group.
other activist groups have had similar problems with holocaust revisionism denial nazi apologists and had to kick them out.
You would have to begin at least with a small group of people who draw up a constitution, the wording of which would exclude such people.
and of course it is acceptable to criticise the israeli govt/mossad the israel zionist lobby. Lets not forget there are plenty of jewish people who put their life on the line in israel by protesting campaigning and breaching the apartheid wall to get provisions and help to the palestinians.
gilead atzmon is wrong to say he is proud to be a self hating jew. He ignores these Israeli and Jewish activists against zionism.

[Disco_Destroyer]

There were over 20 venues as listed as putting on truth events. Search London Truth Rising Some of our Brethren were at a gig featuring Embed
I myself was sporting my Investigate T-Shirt at a local beer festival.
Unfortunately didn't cause a stir or even an eyebrow lifting but although not a good sign, it is a sign people have gotten used to the idea

[outsider]

Further 9/11 meeting at Passing Clouds today at 19.30:

From Reinvestigate 911 US 9/11 Researchers in the UK This Thursday Citizen's Investigation Team have tackled perhaps the most controversial single topic for 9/11 sceptics - what really happened at the Pentagon. Gore Vidal says we don't know and our government won't tell us, some say the Pentagon was hit by a missile not a plane, others fear the apparent lack of evidence of a plane hitting the Pentagon is a disinformation sting. Nobody can understand how the plane was flown by amateur pilot Hani Hanjour with the skill of a fighter pilot. CIT have put in years of hard work, tracking down witnesses and interviewing them and have distilled these accounts into a controversial video, to be presented in person on Thursday by organiser Graig Ranke who is on a tour of Europe. Here is the press release from CIT.

Venue: Passing Clouds, 1 Richmond Road, Hackney, London, E8 4AA> >> > Time/Date: 19:30, Thursday 16th September 2010> > he event is the final leg in the European Tour of the Citizen > Investigation Team (CIT). It comprises is comprised of a screening > of National Security Alert - a condensed video summary of the most > salient evidence uncovered by CIT during their ongoing three year > investigation into the Pentagon attack on 9/11.> >> > After the screening co-founder of CIT Craig Ranke will be on hand > for a Q&A and discussion of the evidence, and the conclusions CIT > have drawn from it.> >> > CIT's work is close to unique when it comes to 9/11 research in > that it is first hand evidence; the team travelled to the scene of > the crime in Arlington VA, home of the Pentagon, and interviewed as > many witnesses with a good view of the attack as they could > find. Not everyone knows that the Pentagon is sited in Arlington > VA, rather than Washington DC.> >> > Using the scientific method of corroboration they focused in only > on major details in the testimony which are heavily corroborated > from multiple view points. This is the exact method used in crime > investigations by the authorities who know too well that > uncorroborated eye witness testimony is unreliable and any claims > need to be made independently by more than one witness to become > strong evidence.> >> > In the case of CIT's investigation we are now looking at > corroboration well into double figures of a scenario which > comprehensively disproves the official government account of the > Pentagon attack. The film will take you through the accounts of the > best placed witnesses the team spoke to and asks you to judge for > yourself whether the admittedly shocking conclusions the team has > come to are justified.

This research, endorsed by Barrie Zwicker, David Ray Griffin, > Richard Gage, Pilots for 9/11 Truth and many other highly credible > 9/11 researchers and needs to be seen to be believed. CIT hope you > will join them at Passing Clouds this Thursday to judge it for > yourselves and ask questions of CIT yourselves.

There is also a meeting with Kevin Annette launching his new book at passing Clouds today, 19.00 in a different room.

[outsider]

Further 9/11 meeting at Passing Clouds today at 19.30:

From Reinvestigate 911 US 9/11 Researchers in the UK This Thursday Citizen's Investigation Team have tackled perhaps the most controversial single topic for 9/11 sceptics - what really happened at the Pentagon. Gore Vidal says we don't know and our government won't tell us, some say the Pentagon was hit by a missile not a plane, others fear the apparent lack of evidence of a plane hitting the Pentagon is a disinformation sting. Nobody can understand how the plane was flown by amateur pilot Hani Hanjour with the skill of a fighter pilot. CIT have put in years of hard work, tracking down witnesses and interviewing them and have distilled these accounts into a controversial video, to be presented in person on Thursday by organiser Graig Ranke who is on a tour of Europe. Here is the press release from CIT.

Venue: Passing Clouds, 1 Richmond Road, Hackney, London, E8 4AA> >> > Time/Date: 19:30, Thursday 16th September 2010> > he event is the final leg in the European Tour of the Citizen > Investigation Team (CIT). It comprises is comprised of a screening > of National Security Alert - a condensed video summary of the most > salient evidence uncovered by CIT during their ongoing three year > investigation into the Pentagon attack on 9/11.> >> > After the screening co-founder of CIT Craig Ranke will be on hand > for a Q&A and discussion of the evidence, and the conclusions CIT > have drawn from it.> >> > CIT's work is close to unique when it comes to 9/11 research in > that it is first hand evidence; the team travelled to the scene of > the crime in Arlington VA, home of the Pentagon, and interviewed as > many witnesses with a good view of the attack as they could > find. Not everyone knows that the Pentagon is sited in Arlington > VA, rather than Washington DC.> >> > Using the scientific method of corroboration they focused in only > on major details in the testimony which are heavily corroborated > from multiple view points. This is the exact method used in crime > investigations by the authorities who know too well that > uncorroborated eye witness testimony is unreliable and any claims > need to be made independently by more than one witness to become > strong evidence.> >> > In the case of CIT's investigation we are now looking at > corroboration well into double figures of a scenario which > comprehensively disproves the official government account of the > Pentagon attack. The film will take you through the accounts of the > best placed witnesses the team spoke to and asks you to judge for > yourself whether the admittedly shocking conclusions the team has > come to are justified.

This research, endorsed by Barrie Zwicker, David Ray Griffin, > Richard Gage, Pilots for 9/11 Truth and many other highly credible > 9/11 researchers and needs to be seen to be believed. CIT hope you > will join them at Passing Clouds this Thursday to judge it for > yourselves and ask questions of CIT yourselves.


Also two more events:

Thursday, September 16:

11 am, outside Westminster (RC) Cathedral, downtown London: Public vigil and press conference to proclaim launching of the International Tribunal into Crimes of Church and State;

7 pm, Passing Clouds centre, N. London: Public talk and book launch/readings from Kevin Annett's new book "Unrepentant: Disrobing the Emperor"