9-11 Research Does Not Advocate the Breaking of Any Laws
On February 16, 2006, we became aware of a flyer, reproduced below, advertising the "MARCH FOR TRUTH 2006, GROUND ZERO, NYC - 2/20 - 10:00 AM." It features the URL for this website along with st911.org (the subject of this essay). 9-11 Research is not affiliated with or involved in this event.
In an interview on WING TV, A spokesperson for the "MARCH FOR TRUTH 2006, GROUND ZERO" and the show's host urged participants in the event to be confrontational.
While we strongly support the right of all Americans to use nonviolent efforts to expose crimes of 9/11/01 and their cover-up, 9-11 Research chooses to use the Internet to educate people about the unexamined evidence and unanswered questions surrounding the attack. Each day, more than 10,000 people visit this website.
Historically, protest has been an essential method of social justice movements, such as the Civil Rights Movement, the Women's Suffrage Movement, and anti-war movements. In many cases, political means have been insufficient to achieve profound changes. For example, African-Americans didn't get the right to vote by voting.
One form of nonviolent protest is civil disobedience, in which protesters violate the law, typically in an orderly and symbolic manner, to draw attention to a cause. Successful civil disobedience efforts typically involve a great deal of preparation, training, and support. Several established social justice organizations have extensive experience with the use of civil disobedience, and provide information and resources about it on their websites. Following are some examples:
- A page on the School of the Americas Watch website about preparations for a vigil and direct action at Fort Benning
- A page on the War Resisters League website with a demonstration report and call to action
- A page of the ACT UP website describing civil disobedience training
In the WING TV interview, the spokesperson for "MARCH FOR TRUTH 2006, GROUND ZERO" indicated an approach to civil disobedience which is ad hoc at best:
A confrontational protest event at Ground Zero on September 11, 2005 was exploited by the press to ridicule the issue highlighted by the protesters -- evidence of demolition of the Towers.
Nicholas Levis speaks at the event,
"END THE 9/11 MEDIA BLACKOUT!! March and Rally for the Truth".
Photo by Stefania Zamparelli (source)
In contrast, a well-organized and well-attended protest that marched on the New York Times and other media offices was constructive and educational.
In rare cases, measured confrontational debates in public spaces can persuade individuals to question dogmatic assumptions. However, confrontation typically injects emotion into arguments and impairs new understandings. This is particularly true when the subject of the debate is 9/11 -- a complex subject rife with misinformation -- and the place is Ground Zero -- the site where thousands of people lost their lives. The personal emotional significance of Ground Zero suggests that an appropriate public action would be well-organized, somber, respectful, and non-confrontational.
Experience has shown that virtually all meaningful protests in recent years in the U.S. have been penetrated by agents provocateurs intent on disrupting the events and discrediting the cause. Police violence can occur even without the involvement of provocateurs. In many cases, such as the 2003 picket at the Oakland Port and the 2003 anti-WTO protests in Miami, police violently attacked completely nonviolent individuals.
back to Disclaimers