Justin
9/11 Truth Organiser
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 500
Location: Cumbria / Yorkshire Dales
|
 Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 9:07 am Post subject: Green Party Spring Conference Swansea |
 |
|
I'm afraid to say that the Green Party ran out of time on Sunday and therefore could not debate and vote on Motion C14 to support the US Greens in their call for a new 9/11 inquiry. Myself, Ian Henshall along with Green Party members and 9/11 Truth activists Martin and Shane spent Saturday lobbying the conference attendees using the following leaflet:
| Quote: | PLEASE SUPPORT THE COURAGE OF THE GREEN PARTY OF THE UNITED STATES BY VOTING FOR MOTION C14
BUT PLEASE DON'T BELITTLE AND INSULT THEIR HARD WORK AND INTEGRITY BY SUPPORTING THE POORLY DRAFTED AMENDMENT TO THIS MOTION.
Motion C14. 9-11 inquiry:
Synopsis (provided by SOC) : The motion asserts that Bush's 'War on Terror' after 9/11 became an excuse for illegal pre-emptive military invasion and therefore commits the Green Party to support the Green Party of the United States in its call for a full inquiry into all the events connected with the attacks of 911.
Motion: “Bush's endless 'War on Terror' in response to 9/11 became an excuse for illegal preemptive military invasion, torture, and curtailment of freedoms, with many of the worst Bush policies endorsed by both Democrats and Republicans, as well as the UK Government. The US Green Party candidates and leaders, on the fifth anniversary of the September 11 attacks, therefore called for a new, independent, and expanded investigation of the attacks and the Bush Administration's response. The Green Party of England and Wales supports the US Green Party in its call for a full inquiry into all the events connected with the attacks of 11th September 2001, both in the USA and in the UK.”
Amendment 1 - Add new paragraph: "The Green Party does not, however, believe that there is evidence that any organisation other than Al Qaida was responsible for the attacks. Nor will it support or associate with fringe elements that espouse 'conspiracy theories' that attempt to suggest that the events of 9 September 2001 in New York were devised and perpetrated in secret by US security forces, finding these suggestions in poor taste. Rather, it supports the need for an inquiry into both the handling of intelligence prior to the terrorist attacks, and the political response, with its devastating long term effects on international security."
Original motion proposed by Janet Alty, Andrew Waldie, Bill Rigby, Shan Oakes
Amendment submitted by Jim Killock, Roger Creagh-Osborne, Darren Johnson, Ben Duncan
What follows is a major extract of the Press Release put out by the US Greens last year:
Green Party of the United States Press Release, Monday 11 September 2006. WASHINGTON, D.C.
Green Party candidates and leaders, on the fifth anniversary of the September 11 attacks, called for a new, independent, and expanded investigation of the attacks and the Bush Administration's response.
"We have a responsibility to everyone affected by 9/11 - especially those who were injured or who lost family and friends in the attacks and in the subsequent military invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq - to launch an intensive investigation, and to hold Bush officials accountable for numerous deceptions and evasions," said Rachel Treichler, Green candidate for Attorney General of New York State. Ms.Treichler has pledged to launch a comprehensive investigation if elected.
Greens cited numerous unanswered questions about 9/11 and the administration's reckless exploitation of fears in the wake of 9/11 for its own political and military purposes to support its demand for a new probe:
Why did the Bush Administration fail to heed numerous explicit warnings of an impending attack, as the 9/11 Commission proved?
Why did the administration attempt to obstruct the 9/11 Commission, and failing to do so, why did it restrict the Commission's purview? Who financed the attacks, and why did the 9/11 Commission decline to investigate this question?
Why did the White House so quickly change the focus from al-Qaeda to Iraq, despite the fact that Iraq and Saddam Hussein had no connection to 9/11?
Why has there been so little discussion of the role of the Project for a New American Century, whose membership included Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and other higher ranking members of the Bush Administration and neocon ideologues? The Project anticipated the 9/11 attacks in the late 1990s when it looked forward to a new "Pearl Harbor" that would provide an opportunity for the U.S. to impose "unquestioned U.S. military preeminence" on the Middle East .
Why did the administration, with the cooperation of Christine Todd Whitman's EPA, cover up severe health risks at and near Ground Zero in lower Manhattan?
Why has the Bush Administration avoided addressing urgent questions raised by 9/11 truth movement, including groups like 911Truth.org?
Why you must not vote for the Amendment to Motion C14.
Motion C14, as it stands without the Amendment, does not make any assumptions about what might or might not have happened. It is a carefully crafted compromise. The Amendment sets out to wreck this compromise. It would perpetuate the myth of an all powerful Al Qaeda and align the Green Party with the most warmongering elements in the UK, the US and Israel for whom the 9/11 attacks are the crown jewels.
The Amendment is divisive and will set the Green Party of England and Wales in open disagreement with the Green Party of the United States.
The Amendment makes a false distinction between people who believe that Al Qaeda carried out the 911 attacks entirely on its own and those who believe that they had nothing to do with it. The issue is collusion. The facts show that there was some sort of collusion and that is the view of many people in the US and increasingly in the UK. It is widely agreed (even by the FBI) that the anthrax postal attacks immediately post 9/11 came from a source in the US government. Mainstream polls show that at least forty percent of public opinion in the US supports the collusion approach. Only 20 percent of public opinion agrees with the tenor of this Amendment.
The use of language like "fringe elements" is abusive and an insult to the US Green party. It is reminiscent of 1970's trotskyist factions each calling the other loony lefties.
It is illogical to call for an inquiry and then say before hand what it is allowed to find. This is how governments rig things - it is typical of what people do not like about the main political parties. The Green Party should not behave like this.
The Amendment appears to be motivated by fear of what some mainstream journalists might think. However, the Daily Mail and the Sunday Times have both given positive coverage to Ian Henshall's best seller 9-11 Revealed. The Guardian has also run his letters on the subject. At tonight’s (Saturday) 9/11 fringe meeting in CRm5 starting at 7pm, Ian will explain in person what he sees as the murky complexities that require a new inquiry. He will give a preview of his new book 9-11 The New Evidence. He will explain that the US Government inquiries have been stymied in just the same way as this Amendment would operate - ie to rule out collusion without even investigating it. He will explain how (contrary to the recent hysterical claims of George Monbiot) the US government technical studies actually failed to explain the collapses of the Twin Towers and World Trade Centre Building 7, which all collapsed at freefall speed. By the way, The Guardian is very ambivalent on 911: it has already run highly sceptical pieces by Al Kennedy, Michael Meacher as well as by some Arab journalists.
9/11 also raises some key strategic issues: does the Green Party want to compete for the ageing, declining sector of people who broadly believe the propaganda put out by career politicians and the BBC? Wouldn't it be better to appeal to the young, the sceptical, those suspicious of the establishment parties, the asian and muslim communities rather than have these would-be supporters seduced by Respect, the LibDems and the Nationalists. The 9/11 Truth Campaign has recently been getting packed meetings across the UK - in Brighton, for example, the local paper devoted three pages to an attack on the official 9/11 story. How many votes does The Guardian deliver for the Green Party?
Finally, the 9/11 Truth Genie is now out of the bottle - later this year Loose Change 3 - The Final Cut goes into British cinemas all across the land. People are waking up and there is now no going back!
Justin Walker - Co-Chair The 9/11 Truth Campaign (Britain and Ireland) - Ecology/Green Party activist from 1978 to 1992. |
I think it is fair to say that we received a mixed response concerning 9/11 from the Greens. There was only a small number at the Conference (barely 160 people I would say) and my overall impression is that the Greens are losing out as the other Parties pinch their clothes and they are struggling to find new members (national membership is around 6,000). Indeed, things have barely changed since I left the Party in 1992 but they do have more councillors and two MEPs.
It was interesting to note that Party members were hugely distracted (once again) on the subject as to whether or not the Party should become like any other and have a 'leader'. It was also interesting to note that those who believe in leadership (and who walked around in suits and ties unlike the bulk of us who were in scruff order!) were the ones who were sceptical and hostile to motion C14 and 9/11 Truth - not good for the Party's image, you know! And as for the Amendment, even those who were supportive of it were embarrassed by the way it had been drawn up (including getting the date of the attack wrong!!).
George Monbiot's ridiculous Guardian article attacking 9/11 Truth activists was distributed by one of these sad 'leadership types' along with another article by Alexander Cockburn in the Monde Diplomatique. When this person, a Green Councillor in Norwich we are led to believe, was invited by Ian to come to our fringe meeting to debate the issues, he said he was too busy and scurried off - political cowardice at its worst!
Ian gave a very good talk at our fringe meeting in the evening about the new evidence he has uncovered for his new book which he is currently finishing. Seventeen people turned up but the indifference by conference goers towards 9/11 truth was clearly noticeable.
Leaflets produced by 9/11 Cult Watch were also distributed but I managed to have a friendly chat over a coffee with Larry O'Hara to discuss his concerns about the British 9/11 Truth Campaign. I assured him that his historical concerns about Annie and David were IMHO groundless and that those of us who worked closely with them had absolute confidence that they were both genuine in their pursuit to get the 9/11 truth out. I also assured him that the Campaign would not tolerate anti-semitism in any shape or form but there were many of us, including myself, who were anti-zionist. He objected to some of the posters who he felt were closet Jew hating fascists, but I assured him that our moderators were doing everything possible, especially Ian Neal, to prevent these people from gaining any foothold within our campaign. Larry along with one of his cooperatives said that they had a good deal of respect for Ian. As regards the actual evidence itself about 9/11, we just agreed to differ though I do find it hard to see how they cannot see anything about the physical evidence that is not compelling. They do have some doubts about the intelligence aspects to 9/11 and they would be sympathetic to some sort of new inquiry that particularly looked at this - at least we did have some common ground. Finally, I assured him that we were not a Cult and that any problems he may have with us we should just thrash them out in a friendly and constructive way.
To sum up. IMHO I feel the Green Party will continue to wither on its vine unless it takes up 9/11 truth as the US Greens have done. The Party is totally obsessed with man-made global warming and all the draconian policies needed to curb and reverse carbon emissions. Interestingly, when I talked to some of my old colleagues about this, they had no answers as to why Mars, Venus, Pluto and Jupiter were also warming up. When I suggested the common factor might be the sun and sun-spot activity they looked bemused and unsettled. If only they knew they were the unwitting servants of the hidden global elite and their stepping stone agenda for a fascist controlled world government.
Finally, there are a lot of good and nice people in the Green Party - and most of their manifesto is excellent, especially when it comes to green economics and the setting up of human-scale communities with spiritual and caring values. But they must wake up to the bigger picture and I do hope by their Autumn conference in Liverpool that they will embrace 9/11 truth with a new motion supporting their American colleagues.
_________________
Connect to Infinite Consciousness - enjoy the ride! |
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
