The 2008 Declaration: Standards and Strategies for 9/11 Truth

After months of cooperative effort, we are proud to announce "The 2008 Declaration: Standards and Strategies for 9/11 Truth." Many truth movement veterans came together after the 9/11/07 anniversary with concerns over the increasing influence of disinformation, disruption, partisanship, and irresponsible representation within the movement. This document is our response.

As we state clearly in the Declaration, we simply aim it to be a guide for others, not a divisive list of commandments. It's the best we could come up with, we hope it does some good.

The authors and supporters listed are not the only ones who participated in the creation of this Declaration. Some names may be added or removed as per individual request. We invite everyone who so wishes, to host or link to the Declaration.

Comments and questions are welcome on the TruthMove Forum.

These kind of strategies seem to aid in concentrating

on the "right" effort. But eliminating faktors even before we start is a trap.
-Why not discuss directed energy claims? (obviously disinfo since the destruction of the towers can be beautifully explained with "classic" controlled demolition)
-No plane theories? Just silly. Everybody has seen and heard the planes and got them on videotape in multiple angles.(exept for the Penta-con plane, WHERE IS THE VIDEO PLEASE?)
- UFO and alien stuff? What has that to do with 911? Get out of here.
-Anti environmentalism? Claiminig MAN MADE global warming is a hoax is NOT the same as being anti-environmentalistic. There are SCIENTISTS who claim this! MAN MADE pollution on the other hand is VERY real and undisputed. (Tsjernobyl, industry, 9/11 dust!)
-The apollo moonlanding(s)? I had a look at it but I'm not gonna tell you what I think, look for yourself please! Consider there were 6(!!!) moonlandings between 1969 and 1972. Moonlandings go like this: Take off from earth with a saturn5 rocket, travel the distance of 30 times the diameter of the earth(!!!), get into lunar orbit(!!!), split-off the lunar module from the command module and land the lunar module on the moon(!!!) while the command module stays in lunar orbit, survive on the moon with its intense heat and cold; air conditioned with a few car batteries(!!!), take off from the moon, make speed to get into lunar orbit and reconnect to the orbiting command module(!!!). Fly the whole assembly back to earth and still live... and this SIX TIMES in 3 years without FAILURES..hmmm..

What else am I not supposed to talk about according to truth move?
Holocaust denial/revisionism and Jewish conspiracy theories.
So called holocaust deniers deny, to my best knowledge, that they deny the holocaust.
So it seems they are being attacked and slandered by those who don't wish them to INVESTIGATE the holocaust. Why not let ANYBODY investigate the holocaust? It happened, didn't it? (o.. ohhh..could that be the reason for not wanting anybody investigate the holocaust? COMPUTER SAYS: YES)

Show "..." by FredHendrik

Take it somewhere else, Fred.

Good Resource

I am just checking out the website and my first thoughts are this is what the movement needs. direction, focus and clarity.

A thoughtful effort that deserves consideration from all truthers.

Bill Polonsky
"The evidence is there no matter how much you don't want it to be."

TruthMove seems like a deliberate mixture of info & disinfo.

I'll stick with 911blogger & WeAreChange, thank you.

To each his own, I guess

A "deliberate mixture of info & disinfo?" Where's the disinfo? Environmental issues--things like global warming, mass extinction, peak oil? So the environment is fine? So we can keep on perpetuating an economic system based on infinite exploitation and growth?

This Declaration is about 9/11 Truth, but you can't talk about 9/11 Truth without going into other issues as well, and one's particular ideology or world view will always come into play. Pairing 9/11 Truth with the concept that the environmental movement is a global elite scam and that all the dire environmental issues we hear about are simply "hoaxes," is highly irresponsible and ignorant. There is no compelling evidence that this blanket attitude has any merit. It simply appears to be promoted by certain high profile leaders and it fits in perfectly with many people's inherent fear, selfishness, and need to control cognitive dissonance.

For more information, see:

• For every person in the world to reach present U.S. levels of consumption we would need 4 more planet Earths. (Wilson, p. 23)

• If current trends continue, one half of all species of life on Earth will be extinct in 100 years. (E.O. Wilson, The Future of Life, p. 102)

International Truth Movement

"Pairing 9/11 Truth with the

"Pairing 9/11 Truth with the concept that the environmental movement is a global elite scam and that all the dire environmental issues we hear about are simply "hoaxes," is highly irresponsible and ignorant."

Disinfo or just bad research? You decide...

Are people actually "pairing" 9/11 with other issues or is it just that they're not myopically focused on only 9/11? We have to "pair" 9/11 with other issues (not specifically global warming) in order for people to understand the broader concept. To people who think that everything in America is A-OK, saying that elements of our government were complicit in 9/11 sounds like nonsense. Also, 9/11 happened over six years ago - there's a lot that's been going on since!

PS- Isn't TruthMove "pairing" 9/11 with pro-UN IPCC ideas that are highly disputed by scientists who wrote papers for the IPCC report?

I agree

"TruthMove seems like a deliberate mixture of info & disinfo".

DEW and "no planes for the towers" should be on the black list.

But I would like to keep an open mind on what hit the Pentagon and the "pods".

Wish more people agreed with you

Principle before association doesn't sit well with everyone. As I have said many times, I care about the facts more than my own organization. I care about the facts more than the movement for that matter. If my organization or the movement at large got caught up in BS, it would be time to start a new one.

That may not sound all too friendly and yet it is essential as this movement is about individual learning and understanding that leads to collective action. People who care more for the action than the understanding are easily lead astray, or drawn into distracting arguments. I get quite weary of people acting like we are on different teams in this movement. There is a logical process, and you either follow it or not.

That being said, the scientific method certainly involves debate. In physics we have the standard model folks who disagree with the string theorists. They might argue vigorously, however, if one theory was proven correct, the other side would adapt. That's principle before association as well.

People tend to judge our project as though it were just a 9/11 truth organization when in fact we are proposing that there is a unifying concept in informed consent that runs parallel to the specific concerns of many related movements. We all want people to have more information vital to their future. And the upcoming conference in Santa Cruz seems to have a very similar approach to ours. 9/11 is just one very revealing piece of a large puzzle and a critical tool in helping people to recognize the state of our world today. But many other concerns deserve our attention, and trying to achieve some measure of unity with other movements, we can have a greater impact.

Thanks for the encouraging words. I'll have a look at your site. Keep truckin.

International Truth Movement

A Positive Portion Should Be Included

After reading the doc in question one thing stands out to me... How about listing 9/11 truth arguments (or approaches) that are successful? For our deprogramming purposes it isn't only important that something be true, it's also important that the uninitiated can be receptive to it. If the focus is effectiveness, then let's offer some guidelines to the best practices, not just avoiding the least effective ones.

In determining what works it is critical to put aside our personal preferences and listen to the audience.

I do appreciate what TruthMove does, but i agree that mixing in other topics narrows audience appeal. 9/11 truth is an eye opener for most people. Once their eyes are opened they WILL continue their own investigation of other pressing issues, with new insight. That is why I've put in so much effort into 9/11 truth as opposed to other activist topics. Speak to your audience as if they can think for themselves & you will be rewarded.

I like the declaration though. Perhaps it will inspire other organizations to think of their own declarations (imitation=flattery, of course). If others run with it or not, at least it will inspire worthwhile conversation within the movement.... thanks for putting it out there. I'll comment over on TM's forum too, if time permits.

Thanks for the comments

Yes, maybe we should add some positive-minded links to the document. But we did our best to keep this declaration concise, and we felt it was important to spell out the specific things that have been damaging the movement, as well as the approaches which are more effective.

Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice also started working on similar statements, here's one of them:

International Truth Movement


Is this the same TruthMove?

At least it says "disinformation." But why did they go there, film it, and put it on google?

From the list of unconvincing claims

"A missile or something other than a 757 hit the Pentagon"

How can we know for sure that it was certainly a 757 that hit the Pentagon, and not some modified plane?

Vesa, that question's off

Vesa, that question's off limits... ;)

I think what the statement means...

Is that you shouldn't state, as fact, what you think hit the Pentagon. That doesn't mean you shouldn't question or promote the fact that a commercial airliner managed to penetrate Washington D.C. airspace 34 minutes AFTER the SECOND tower was hit, when everyone in the WORLD knew America was "under attack". That doesn't mean you shouldn't question or promote the fact that there are videos in existence that are not being released to the public even though they are considered evidence, and the families asked for them to be released during the time of the 9/11 Commission. That doesn't mean you shouldn't question or promote the fact that Norman Mineta testified before the 9/11 Commission that at the time Flight 77 was heading towards the Pentagon, Dick Cheney was in the PEOC giving orders to a young man that couldn't have been "shoot down" orders because Bush apparently didn't give the order to shoot down planes until 10:18.

Who Is? Archives

That's not what the statement says. Please read carefully.

We say that there is no "convincing basis in verifiable facts" that a "a missile or something other than a 757 hit the Pentagon." That is very different from indicating that "we know for sure that it was certainly a 757 that hit the Pentagon."

International Truth Movement

"We say that there no

"We say that there no "convincing basis in verifiable facts" that "...something other than a 757 hit the Pentagon." "

How much research have you really done? If you're going to appoint yourselves as the "International Truth Movement," the least you could do is get your "verifiable facts" straight.


Well, I just don't like the way in which the harmful missile meme is paralled with the idea that a modified plane or a drone may have hit the Pentagon.

A plane conducting the described maneurvers would have been an agile plane and/or in extremely talented hands, but most likely remote-controlled.

Is there a "basis in verifiable facts" that it was a 757? I don't know.

There is no convincing basis in verifiable facts

that a 757 hit the Pentagon. The government has a duty to explain what happened. The burden is on the government, not the people, because they have all the information. Here is a good analysis of the right to truth under human rights law, using standards of the European Court of Human Rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights..

Don't agree John

I'd say you are completely wrong about the Pentagon. But really your (minority) opinion on that point just illustrates the silliness of this effort to impose a particular version or theory on the movement in the name of high sounding slogans like "standards'. As for the charge of disruptor you folks like to throw around so casually - I think the shoe is on the other foot. The video fakery and exotic weoponry people were met from day one with a hail of abuse and ridicule. Not appropriate, especially since video manipulation of some sort is now established IMO. I am still uncomfortably agnostic on some of these issues - and that's probably not good - but i think your efforts to close off discussion on important aspects of this thing is misguided.

self-censoring does the government's job for them?

It's worth noting you shouldn't claim something without supporting evidence.

Jon, above, makes a good illustration, please don't claim a remote controlled A3 crashed into the Pentagon with little more than a hypothesis! It's clearly more persuasive, to state, it's doubtful an AA 757 executed the maneuvers credited the plane that struck the Pentagon on 9/11 as tracked by Air Traffic controllers.

Further, it's improbable due to the size of the hole in the Pentagon, it was a Boeing 757 with a much larger wingspan. It doesn't hurt to put some effort into careful statements or arguments.

With that said, I remain unconvinced self-censoring accomplishes anything other than doing the government's work for them? It designates as off-limits unconventional areas of inquiry. There's more than a little evidence to suggest much is askew with any inquiry into 9/11! Is the large amount of molten metal in the basements due to thermate or some other explosive device? It doesn't hurt to ask.

Also, it bothers me there were so many vehicles with odd damage all along FDR drive and in the parking lot lo the northwest of Building 1? .Some claim the phenomenon of instant rust and the area coverered are explained by or consistent with the use of unconventional weapons such as mini-nukes?
I don't believe, anyone in the movement is able to make the judgment that it's an incredible claim?

...don't believe them!

i agree

an open minded discussion is the only think that has any chance of cutting thru the tangle of lies that obscure sept ll mass murder event


Im growing weary of any one any site person or spokespperson telling me a good to think bad to think choice:the pentagon stinks every aspect of the event and its aftermath is highlysuspicous