ReThink911 at the Ottawa Transit Commission

Published on Nov 24, 2013
http://www.rethink911.org

Building 7: The Story the Times Missed - ReThink911

Related:

What to Make of the NY Times Ignoring the ReThink911.org Campaign?

A Cheap and Effective Way to Spread the Word about the ReThink911.org Campaign

These ReThink911 stickers are effective, inexpensive ways to get 9/11 into the minds of everyone you know – and don’t.

Price	$0.99
5 or more	$0.80 each
10 or more	$0.70 each
20 or more	$0.55 each

Find this and many other great items in the ReThink911.org store. I myself just chipped in with a friend on 500 of the ReThink911 Street Brochures, after having previously purchasing 100 myself. 

My friend can be seen handing them out in a video on my previous post, "Help to Spread the Word About ReThink911.org With This Street Brochure," while in front of the NY Times building in NYC. Which as many readers know currently has a 29-foot by 13-foot ReThink911.org billboard directly adjacent to it, that calls out the Times for their lack of coverage of the campaign (which thus far has resulted in exactly the same amount of non-coverage, see related link below).  

I on the other hand opted to just to hang my fliers up about my area like so. There is no shortage of creative ways to use these tools to inform people once you get to brainstorming, so please consider doing your small but important part in raising more awareness to this important and historic effort. The Times isn't doing their job so we have to continue on being the media and change we want to see.

Related: 

What to Make of the NY Times Ignoring the ReThink911.org Campaign?

ReThink911 Media Blitz - Updated With New Actions at Bottom

If you haven't taken any of the below actions please take all of them. Even though the mass of emails to certain media outlets already went out, it can't hurt to email them a little late.

From ReThink911.org:

Up until this Saturday, five major New York City newspapers including The New York Times, the Daily News, the New York Post, the Village Voice and Newsday, will receive a flood of emails from ReThink911 supporters worldwide.

Join this media blitz campaign to tell the NYC media that there has been a giant ReThink911 billboard in Times Square since September 3rd. The 54-feet-tall billboard asks New Yorkers if they know a third tower fell on 9/11. A recent poll shows that, after 12 years, only 1 in 2 Americans know about the collapse of WTC Building 7. Mainstream media cannot and should not ignore this ─ but they have so far. With the participation of thousands of ReThink911 supporters like you, this can change.

TODAY NEWS OUTLET: The New York Times

On this Tuesday October 9, please take 5 minutes to contact the New York Times at these addresses:

metro@nytimes.com
news-tips@nytimes.com

BCC: us at this address so that we can keep a tally of our progress: NYCmedia@ae911truth.org

Later this week we’ll send instructions for the other news outlets:

Thursday: Daily News and New York Post
Saturday: Village Voice and Newsday

Tips for Writing Your Email

 

It is best if every letter is different. So, rather than providing a standard letter, here are the main points worth touching on:

• There’s a billboard in Times Square (1 to 2 sentences suggested)
• Introduction to Building 7 (2 to 3 sentences suggested)
• Why they should report on the Times Square billboard (2 to 3 sentences suggested)
• A link to the website: www.ReThink911.org

Thank you for getting involved!

Update:

Days 1 and 2 of the ReThink911 Media Blitz saw the New York Times receive over 500 emails from ReThink911 supporters worldwide.

Let’s aim for over 1,000 on Days 3 and 4 – because if anyone in the mainstream media is going to report on a massive billboard in Times Square asking New Yorkers if they know a 3rd tower fell on 9/11, it’s New York’s two biggest tabloid newspapers: the Daily News and New York Post.

Please take 5 minutes to send a separate email to each newspaper:

Daily News

voicers@nydailynews.com
msheridan@nydailynews.com
jgonzalez@nydailynews.com

NY Post

tips@nypost.com
online@nypost.com

BCC: us at this address so that we can keep a tally of our progress: NYCmedia@ae911truth.org

Update:

The Daily News and New York Post each received a flood of emails from 500 ReThink911 supporters on Days 3 and 4 of the Media Blitz Week. Thank you to all those who participated!

Next on the agenda on this final day of the Media Blitz are the Village Voice and Newsday. Two of the Village Voice’s partner alternative weekly newspapers – the Dallas Observer and SF Weekly – already covered the ReThink911 campaign, so there’s a good chance the Village Voice will, too – if we send a loud enough message.

Please take 5 minutes to send emails to each newspaper:

Newsday

newstips@newsday.com
li@newsday.com
editor@newsday.com

The Village Voice

Copy and paste your letter into the “letter” field and fill in the required info on this page:

http://www.villagevoice.com/feedback/EmailAnEmployee?to=4338353

BCC: us on your Newsday email at this address so that we can keep a daily tally: NYCmedia@ae911truth.org

Dallas Observer Article on ReThink911.org Campaign - Dishonest or Grossly Misinformed?

In the article, "Dallas Gets It Very Own 9/11 Truther Billboard on Stemmons Freeway," readers are misinformed that, "The truthers talk about thermite and microspheres -- further evidence, they say, of an explosion. An analysis of the infamous 'red/gray chips' by the American Academy of Forensic Science found that they were an epoxy resin, not thermite."

 As "Simon001" points out at 911blogger.com:

The AAFS did not write that stuff, this is from the unpublished report by Dr. Millette who may be a member of the AAFS. More than a year of waiting without it being published says a lot about the quality of this report, and I have good reason to believe that it did not survive the review process. The paper by Basile is next in line. Even NIST admitted that the paint from the towers is stable to temps way above the 425°ignition temp for the chips of ATM. This story by the Dallas Observer is pretty bad by most standards, and hardly worth talking about.

The truth of the matter is, as blog contributor Ziggi Zugam and I point out in our new article published at 911grassroots.org, a "New WTC Dust Study Looks Set to Confirm Nano-thermite."

Peter ORourke states at 911blogger, "I believe that Mark Basile, in anticipation of this report has done side-by-side ignition testing with paint and the red/grey chips and that this appears in 9/11 Experts Speak Out." The side-by-side testing video does not appear in the Experts Speak Out film, but is embedded in our new article (second link up). ORourke is right that the tests were conducted by Mark Basile. They are part of the work being done in the new study.

Uncritical vs. Unbiased Reporting: An Email to Joel Mathis

Below is an email I sent to Joel Mathis of phillymag.com on 9/12/2013, regarding his criticism of Paul Kurtz's coverage of the ReThink911 campaign.

______________________________________________________________________

Dear Mr. Mathis,

My name is Adam Taylor. I am a 9/11 activist and a contributing writer and researcher for several 9/11 truth websites, including Debunking the Debunkers, AE911Truth, and ScientificMethod911. Having read your recent Philly Post article, I'm very disappointed to see that you have offered an unfair and misinformed criticism of Paul Kurtz's coverage of AE911Truth's ReThink911 campaign. It's obvious that, contrary to what you claim of Mr. Kurtz, it is in fact you that has provided an uncritical assessment of the issues surrounding the events of September 11th. Allow me to enlighten you to a few of your errors that is quite unbecoming of someone who claims to be a journalist. 

For starters, your entire criticism of Mr. Kurtz's article as failing to provide "counterarguments" to AE911Truth's position is entirely unfounded. True enough, the article does only discuss the group's position on the collapse of the WTC buildings. But why is that such a bad thing? Is Mr. Kurtz required to present every viewpoint on the collapse of these buildings? While Mr. Kurtz provides no criticisms of AE911Truth's work, nothing in the article necessarily endorses their position either. It could be that Mr. Kurtz agrees 100% with them. But nowhere does he say that in his article. He does not state his own opinion, but merely reports on the event in an unbiased manner, which is exactly what a professional journalist should do. Perhaps you believe that the mere mention of the group is uncritical endorsement, and that Mr. Kurtz should not have done so. If this were the standard practice of all journalists, they would likely have very little to comment on. 

But ironically, your article provides us with a perfect example of what uncritical journalism actually looks like. You provide two examples of supposed "debunking" of the truth movement's claims. Your first example is Popular Mechanics, and it seems that along with Rachel Maddow you've placed a disturbing blind faith in their analysis of the movement's arguments. Popular Mechanics has long been responded to by many people within the 9/11 truth movement, including Jim Hoffman, David Ray Griffin, and AE911Truth founder Richard Gage. I myself have written an extensive multi-part response to Popular Mechanics' latest version of their book Debunking 9/11 Myths. By your own standards, shouldn't you have mentioned these "counterarguments" in order for your article to be considered an "honest report"? And just how honest is this source of yours to begin with?

It's unlikely that Popular Mechanics has much to say about the group Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, given that they've largely ignored them. In their previously mentioned Debunking 9/11 Myths book, there is not one mention of AE911Truth or its founder Richard Gage. Now it's one thing to give no mention of this group, but it's another thing to deny its existence completely. And that is essentially what Popular Mechanics has done. In their book they actually claim that "not one of the leading conspiracy theorists has a background in engineering, construction, or related fields." Keep in mind that this book was published in 2011, and by this time AE911Truth was comprised of around 1600 professional architects and engineers. Does Popular Mechanics sound like it's presenting an honest assessment of the truth movement? I provide a summary of other omissions and distortions in their book here. 

Your second example, Rational Wiki, fairs no better. While no critique of their entire 9/11 conspiracy page exists to my knowledge, much of what they discuss has already been addressed by the movement as well. Simply type in any subject they bring up into the search engine at Debunking the Debunkers and you'll find answers to their arguments. But the specific section of their page you link to shows just how uncritical the writers of that site are. They fail to note that NIST's WTC7 report has been exposed as extremely erroneous, and contains a multitude of deceptions and misrepresentations. Did you bother to critically analyze either of these sources? And if not, then what justifies your criticism of Mr. Kurtz  supposedly doing the same thing?

As I said at the beginning, it's very disappointing to see the position you've taken on this issue. You criticize Paul Kurtz for giving the movement an "unchallenged platform" (which, by the way, it's really not; that's what the comments section is for), whilst all that he has done is provide an unbiased coverage of the group's efforts to get a new investigation into the collapse of the three WTC buildings. Rather than show that Mr. Kurtz was wrong for giving them uncritical coverage, your article gives off the impression that he was wrong for giving them any coverage at all. You conclude your article by saying that:

It’s one thing to raise questions: That’s the job of journalists. When there are people who offer different, credible answers on those questions, it’s also the job of journalists to present those.

The media has for many years presented the government's scientific assertions about the collapse of the WTC. Now it's AE911Truth's turn. The group presents exactly the kind of "different, credible answers [to] questions" that you talk about. And it's no one else's fault except yours if you fail to see that. I recommend that you issue a formal apology to Mr. Kurtz for your unfounded criticism of his reporting and journalism methods. I hope you will take my comments into consideration, and do exactly what AE911Truth's campaign is encouraging people to do: re-think 9/11.

Sincerely,

-Adam Taylor

9/11 Family Member Vance Green speaks at Rethink911 Times Square

Related:

9/11 Family Members and 2,000+ Architects and Engineers Ask That You ReThink 9/11

ReThink911.org: Implausibility of the Official Theory

Related:

Debunking 9/11 Debunking: On WTC’s Design to Withstand 707 Impact

ReThink911 is Officially Airborne Forward the Video – Sign the Petition

Chemical Engineer Mark Basile and Other Professionals Speak Out for ReThink 911

NEW VIDEOS FROM RETHINK911.ORG Sept. 1, 2013

ReThink911 is Officially Airborne Forward the Video – Sign the Petition

ReThink911 is Officially Airborne
Forward the Video – Sign the Petition

Watch The Video Here: http://ReThink911.org

Dear ReThink911 Supporters,

The day we’ve all been waiting for has arrived. Today the ReThink911 campaign officially launches. Over the next month, tens of millions of people in 12 cities around the world will see the ads that thousands of you made possible with your hard work and generous donations.

But this campaign is way more than just these ads. It’s the educational materials we distribute, and it’s the tens of thousands of people—and one day millions of people—who raise their voices in support of a new investigation into the events of 9/11.

We kick off our people-powered educational campaign by asking you to take two vitally important actions:

1) Watch the newly released official ReThink911 video narrated by Daniel Sunjata—then forward it to all of your friends and family and everyone else on your contact list, and share it on Facebook and Twitter using the buttons below the video player. Let’s make this video go viral!

2) Sign the newly unveiled ReThink911 International Petition. When this petition reaches one million signers, it will be delivered to the Head of State of every nation that had citizens who died in the attacks of September 11, 2001.

Are you wondering when your city’s ads will be up? Here you go!

San Francisco – Bay Area Rapid Transit posters: already in circulation
Washington D.C. – Taxi tops: already in circulation
Boston – Taxi tops: already in circulation
Chicago – Taxi tops: already in circulation
Dallas – Stemmons Freeway billboard near Feizy Center: September 2 installation
Toronto – Dundas Square billboard: September 2 installation
London – Downtown billboard and street boards: September 2 installation
Sydney – Downtown street posters: September 2 installation
New York – Times Square billboard (47th St. & 7th Ave.): September 3 installation
Vancouver – Downtown transit shelters: September 4 installation
San Diego – Mobile billboard: September 5 to September 11
Ottawa – Bus posters: September 9 installation

Stay tuned in the coming days for photos and videos.

Thank you for making this historic campaign a reality!

Related:

Chemical Engineer Mark Basile and Other Professionals Speak Out for ReThink 911