UQÀM staff denounce 9/11 Truthers speech
Comments are permitted here: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/montreal/story/2010/05/04/montreal-911-conference-uqam.html
UQÀM staff denounce 9/11 Truthers speech
Last Updated: Tuesday, May 4, 2010 | 11:56 AM ET Comments1Recommend10
CBC NewsAdministrators at the University of Quebec in Montreal (UQÀM) say they will develop a formal policy for outside groups renting campus space for events after a controversial lecture about 9/11 drew fire by academic staff.
But the French-language university defended its right to have contentious speakers lecture on campus as part of free speech, saying it was appropriate to debate ideas, as long as events don't incite riots.
The Monday night lecture, hosted by World for 9/11 Truth, drew about 700 people who came to hear from two U.S. academics who deny the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks were carried out by terrorists.
The researchers – David Ray Griffin and Richard Gage – believe the U.S. government played a major role in orchestrating the deadly attacks on New York City's Twin Towers and the Pentagon in Washington, D.C.
Griffin and Gage are lobbying for an independent inquiry into the attacks, which killed 3,000 people. Their theories – part of the self-titled Truthers movement that formed after Sept. 11 – have been repeatedly discounted by scientists and civil engineering experts.
Griffin is giving a second lecture on the same topic at UQÀM on Tuesday night.
U.S. experts at UQÀM upsetSome professors at the school argue conspiracy theories have no place at UQÀM.
Julien Tourreille, who holds the Raoul-Dandurand chair in strategic and diplomatic issues, told Montreal media outlets that Truthers are intellectually dishonest.
"I think it's a shame to see UQÀM's name associated to such a movement," Tourreille told Montreal newspaper La Presse last week. "It doesn't help the credibility of a research institution that tries to demonstrate that it employs serious people."
U.S. experts at other Quebec institutions, including Steven Saideman at McGill University and Louis Balthazar at Laval University, also spoke out in public against the conference.
Griffin and Gage gave a similar talk at the University of Toronto over the weekend.
Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/montreal/story/2010/05/04/montreal-911-conference-uqam.html#ixzz0mymue7mO
- mikezimmer's blog
- Login to post comments
Discounted how?
"Their theories – part of the self-titled Truthers movement that formed after Sept. 11 – have been repeatedly discounted by scientists and civil engineering experts."
Discounted how? Discounted by way of ignoring evidence? Believing wild and non-sensical explanations such as "the laws of physics don't apply in a collapsing building" or ridiculously complicated theories like "Crush-up/Crush-down", "wax-on/wax-off", or my personal favorite "springing, multi-ton, steel beams" arching out of the debris at 70mph trailing smoke all the way.
Discounted by any peer-reviewed papers? Even the NIST report cannot be peer reviewed. Not a single one even attended to even hear the evidence. That's discounting it. The height of ignorance.
peace all
dtg
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
"The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there it is."
-- Winston Churchill
That's what discounting is all about
When presented with proof, no one can't rightly refute it, and they'll expose themselves as dupes and shills if they try to dispute it, hence they are left to simply discount it. Also, there's this nonsense:
".... two U.S academics who deny the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks were carried out by terrorists."
When has Gage or Griffin ever denied the fact that the monsters behind 9/11 are terrorists?
Lies are all they have left and soon they will choke on them!
I pity these fools and liars, what shame they will feel in the future or most likely feel right now!
Regards John
t'would be nice but
I can't imagine it. They are utterly unconscious. I doubt they are capable of "shame"...
Academic Boneheads
Some of the biggest boneheads walk the halls of academia.
For the timid intellects at uqam, a dose of Michael Parenti is in order:
http://www.tucradio.org/081015_ConspiracyONE.mp3
http://www.tucradio.org/081022_ConspiracyTWO.mp3
Thank you
I'd never heard of Parenti before, and am glad you changed that for me.
Great Talk...from 93'
listen to Parenti
Cette réaction...
prouve seulement que le mouvement dérange énormément. Si seulement cette étincelle pouvait amener le Québec à se sensibiliser au faits entourant le 11 septembre. Que les enseignants de l'Uqam s'élèvent contre la libre expression d'opinions ne me surprend guère: il existe un noyau dur de droite dans cette boîte comme dans toutes les universités. Je souhaite seulement que d'autres voix s'élèveront dans le milieu des enseignants pour signifier l'importance du droit de s'exprimer sur des sujets divers.
À l'auteur de ce mémo: À qui peut-on s'adresser à l'Uqam afin de signifier notre désaccord?
Regarding this reaction
I think that we are having an impact, as you suggest. It may be that these pieces - no longer pure attack pieces - will lead others to open their eyes. I am not familiar with UQAM, but I believe that there are unthinking deniers in all universities, and UQAM is no different. So, I too hope that other voices will arise in academia in support of our cause. I suspect that many are in the closet on this, afraid to come out.
Merci
Why are the faculty acting like frightened sheep?
Because the thing they fear most is that what happened to Prof. Steven Jones at BYU will happen to them, and (gasp!) they might actually have to go out and work for a living.
Quel dommage.
frightened people
I had the honor of hearing David Ray Griffin speak last night in Hanover, NH. The question I asked at the end was why do people choose ignorance with all the evidence that exists, and simple enough for a child to understand. His reply, I think, too, is the reason for the faculty's denial of reality.. He said it was "fear."
His next book will be on "cognitive infiltration' perhaps he can keep challenging the current holocaust's deniers in a way to bring honor to humanity and our fallen nation.
He expressed too that about one third of the world has become awakened to the reality of a 9/11 cover-up deception; our goal now is to raise that above 50% ASAP. The story of David and Goliath is appropriate to bring up.. when I think of all that DRG has accomplished for the 9/11 truth movement.
This page still needs some work.. and so much more..
Campaigns for reclaiming lost USA Republic
Checking polls
The numbers I've seen suggest less than half the world is suckered by the cover-up, and not much more than half the US:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks_opinion_polls
As for why people ignore the evidence, I see it like a spouses who refuse to accept they are being cheated on even after being confronted with proof, which happens because they are too emotionally dependent on such dysfunctional relationships to face the ugly truth, and hence prefer to live a lie instead.
I wonder how Ohio State University would act.
I wonder if there would be an outcry there.
I say that because I went there, and during our Freshman Orientation, we were addressed by one of the major deans of the university in a big lecture hall who gave us a big welcome speech.
In this speech he impressed on our minds that the primary objective of higher education, above all else is "the seeking of truth." NOT achieving good grades so I can graduate with a 3.8 and get that awesome corporate job that will yield the 85K salary and nice 2 car garage house in the affluent suburbs. But the pursuit of truth at all costs. Even if the truth is sometimes unpopular, I remember him mentioning.
Hosting DRG and RG at OSU would certainly put that principle to the test wouldn't it?
Joint US appearance by Griffin-Gage
I think that's an excellent idea, Adam. We should definitely try to schedule a joint Griffin-Gage appearance at a major US university.
Replicate this same formula: Joint appearance, promoted by radio interviews and other means, on a college campus, with ensuing controversy to create publicity. In a forum that is expressly dedicated to truth, science and open discussion. (allegedly)
I'd be first to pitch in..
if we can get it sponsored there.. maybe some avenues through our alumni associations? Im not very active in mine I'm afraid..
just a thought..
d
This needs to stop.
"Their theories – part of the self-titled Truthers movement that formed after Sept. 11 – have been repeatedly discounted by scientists and civil engineering experts."
There are now ~1200 architects and engineers who we *know* support "their theories", including many demolition experts.
http://demolitionexpertsquestion911.blogspot.com/
How many scientists and engineering experts have publicly "discounted their theories"?
How should we best counter such distortions?
How Counter such Distortions?
I'll tell you how I do it.
I usually say something to the effect that all the scientists and engineers and experts of all kinds are on our side - that we've got legions - that no reputable, independent scientist or engineer would back up this absolutely ridiculous joke and fairy tale. None. Nadda. Zippo. And then I invite them to name just one. One. Only one. Give to me a name.
I say that we've got military, NASA, Intelligence, top award-winning Scientists and you got nobody who will back this joke.
Make them put forward a name. They cannot. There's only a couple who've gone on record to defend the weakest of the claims, and these people in the MSM would have no clue who they are or what they've said. And what those few handful wrote in support of the Official Story - without the needed evidence to support their theories - is total gibberish.
Why was Popular Mechanics, a bunch of nitwits writing for a Trade Magazine, chosen to defend this fairy tale? Well - duh!
Nobody with any credentials would put their name on something that purports to prove that this joke is true.
These MSM Stories need to be ridiculed.
A Truth Landslide in the Comments!
Go See. Contribute.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/montreal/story/2010/05/04/montreal-911-conferen...
Yes, that was heartening to
Yes, that was heartening to see.
Would if I could
I noticed this the other day on another CBC story.
It says 'This story is now closed to commenting.' with 108 comments. So I can't comment. It will stay closed (to me, at least) as the comment count rises, but I can still read them and vote. I've tried different machines and browsers but not connections.
It may be relevant that using http://www.anonymouse.org makes the comments section not appear at all.
Edit: Seems to be working again now, for no obvious reason.
Proving their loyalties
Though they tried to do a hit piece late last year, the special that the CBC aired at that time apparently didn't do well enough at suppressing truth from getting across to viewers regardless, and many even in the truth movement see that broadcast as mainly being positive (and not just in the usual 'no publicity is bad publicity' way) in helping open more minds to the questions that still surround 9/11 (I saw a clip of Griffin speaking favorably of it at Walkerton, Ontario, the other day).
That may be why, in this article, CBC seems to be going the extra mile to try to bury the truth movement in denunciations--the better to demonstrate their loyal, good service to the wealthy elites, and do something to atone for their sins in not having bashed us sufficiently in their TV special. This article may be, on first reading, infuriating for truth activists to read. But if you pay attention, you will detect a fury on the other side--furious that we continue to make progress. And that they (the mass media) are showing themselves not so able as they once were to shepherd public discourse as they see fit.
Do not stop commenting
One of the tactics I have noticed a number of times recently is the barrage of late arriving comments on 9/11 articles. These are typically by the same people and all are anti-truth. They use disingenuous arguments. By loading in their comments at the end of the commenting period, they leave a legacy of anti-truth comments where they will most readily be seen. Don't kid yourself, this has an effect on anyone coming in late to view the article. I suspect that a lot of these "late commentators" are on a payroll somewhere. Regardless, they may just be zealots. I don't think that we should let them have the last word, since it shows up first on many sites.
Yes. I'm noticing that tactic too.
One place I've noticed that is at Amazon.com.
http://www.amazon.com/Debunking-11-Myths-Conspiracy-Theories/product-rev...
The Popular Mechanics anti 9/11 truth book, which came out in August 2006, and experienced its zenith of interest during the next couple years, received MANY negative, one-star reviews from people who could see it for what it is: propaganda. The book has an average rating of 3 stars, and on the extreme ends, there are 63 five-star reviews and 54 one-star reviews. For the longest time, in fact, there was a very lengthy string of one-star reviews. Then, by that time, a couple years had passed, the zenith of interest was waning, and indeed many critical reviews were right at the top. Then, over the past year or so, I've noticed a bunch of positive five-star reviews get published, and of course, these reviews offer nothing but insults at "conspiracy theorists" and they insist that the book in question is the ultimate bible against truthers.
If you haven't done so yet, log in to Amazon and write a critical review of PM's book!
Thanks for the hint!
Just added my review of the PM book. :-)