Inquiry campaign and overall truth network - which first?

[Keith Mothersson]

The Inquiry demand first arose in a context where
a) we didn't know half as much as we do know; and
b) we were afraid of putting people off by stating as much as we did know; and
c) we didn't want to fall out with each other over arguments about what the 9-11 truth movement should adopt as its position on specific facts.

However
a) by now we do know that the Triple Towers couldn't have come down other than by explosions, and we are also confident about the existence of several other smoking guns. Whatever our continuing concern over presentation, does it really help if we pretend not to know what we do in fact know now? (even though of course there are still many very open questions).
Concerning b) we are as likely to put people off by boring them with vagueness (need for an inquiry) than for goiing for it and saying our maximum truth(s), always granted that we each make it clear that none of us 'represents the movement', which should continue to take care of (c).

I think that the scientific breakthroughs of recent months
http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=753
mean that some of the reasons for prioritising our Inquiry campaign are now longer valid - specifically we don't need to pretend to uncertainty where there is no longer any - and that this should find reflection in the way we structure the broad relationship between Inquiry campaign and Network (which is what is still undecided and has probably been holding Alan Firminger and other constitution people up from drafting a revised constitution).

In my opinion the Network should be the broad matrix from which working and regional groups arise and co-operate and into which they doubtless fade back at times.

I think that our Campaign for a Credible 9-11 Inquiry should indeed have its own constitution in due course, but at this time it is more important that the Constitution group help us finalise a draft for the Network as a whole.

I see the Inquiry campaign as a stand alone annexe or neighbouring building, which can seek the support of many 'official' people.

However so far as most people are concerned it is much more interesting and engaging to be approached by someone saying something like: 'There is undeniable scientific proof that the Tiple Towers came down because of explosions' than sommeone saying: 'The 9-11 Commission didn't get at the truth, we need an independent investigation.' The former leads to 'Yes, wow, a honest Inquiry would really lead to lots of change' whereas the latter as our main lead in leads to 'yes, I suppose all this spy stuff is very complicated, someone else's business, (Yawn )'.

Therefore so far as 9-11 truth campaigning goes it is best if we each go right ahead and just say what we think happened, or can now be proven to have not happened, and in the wake of that cutting edge from individuals and groups in the Network we hope to filter people through to
a) active resistance to the whole War of terror * now threatening iran with nuclear war, with minimal response by the left and established peace orgs;
b) support the Roll of those who are in formal support of the Inquiry campaign - and indeed some may become active in building that campaign on its own separate basis, where it is important that no impression is given to civil society and diplomatic bodies (etc) that those calling for the Inquiry have prejudged the issue.

The no-endorsement line applies to both the network and the campaign, but the former is maximalist regarding the truth(s) we think we know, whereas the latter is minimalist.

In short I am concerned that the Inquiry campaign gets constituted before the network, which is where the real energy of interest in the movement is for most of us and for most of our listeners. The fact that we now know and can scientifically prove/defend a bunch of stuff that we didn't know 18 months ago woiuld make it even more of a mistake to primarily exist around a necessarily 'unjuicy' inquiry campaign (call really).

_________________
For the defence of our one worldwide civilian Motherland
May all beings be happy

[ian neal]

Further to Keith's post and Noel's thread here, there are calls to establish a credible professional campaign in this country: us with suits if you like, as proposed at last year National Conference.

I would definately support the formation of such a campaign. Obviously this website has a campaign statement on the front but primarily this site is a network or on-line community that v deliberately does not endorse any particular speaker or presentation of the evidence and to my mind it is all the better for it.

The proposed campaign (proposed by amongst others Keith and Ian Henshall) would differ in that it would have spokespeople and an agreed message and media and campaigning strategy. It would complement but be separate from this site. It would have a bank account and seek to fund campaigning activities. The exact details of the campaign, its message, its spokespeople, its management would be decided by a meeting of those interested in being involved as well as those people appointed as 'interim management committee members' at last year's conference who have an interest. It is hoped that if there is interest in making this happen to hold a meeting probably in Blackpool in the next few weeks

The purpose of this post is to invite anyone who has the interest, ability and time to make this happen to contact Noel by PM. Further details will be posted here as soon as they are agreed.

On a related topic, the future of this website and forum is open for discussion. In the past (including at the national conference) I and others have attempted to form a constitution and 'management committee' to manage this site and make it accountable to its users. Inertia has meant this has yet to happen and whilst improvements could undoubtedly be made it is doing the job it was created for: namely providing a space for British campaigners to meet, discuss, cooperate, etc. The current 'owner' wishes to hand it over. I have offered to take this on. If anyone wants further background or wants to be involved in developing the site further please PM me.

All thoughts on the formation of the campaign and our future direction very welcome