[Peace-discuss] Fwd: War is illegal - International Declaration

[Morton K. Brussel]

Thanks John! Helpful, if almost unfathomable (both Carl's and yours).
Mort

On Apr 27, 2008, at 6:17 AM, John W. wrote:

> At 12:48 AM 4/27/2008, C. G. Estabrook wrote:
>
>> I agree with Randall.  The statement clearly aligns signers with  
>> the "911 Truth" movement, and I don't think AWARE should limit  
>> itself to that.  --CGE
>
>
> I take it to mean, O Great Wordsmith, that if AWARE should not  
> LIMIT itself to petitions circulated by those affiliated with the  
> "911 Truth" movement, then you think it SHOULD sign those anti-war  
> petitions and ALSO petitions circulated by
> other anti-war groups.
>
> If I knew how to draw a Venn diagram on the computer, I'd  
> illustrate the point.
>
> John Wason
>
>
>
>> Brussel Morton K. wrote:
>>
>>> There have been books written about 9/11, both(?) ways, so you  
>>> will not have a definitive answer to your question. I happen to  
>>> believe that a more open and better inquiry about 9/11 would be  
>>> useful, and since I think the rest of the statement is to the  
>>> point, I'll propose that AWARE  sign off on it. Are you not being  
>>> overly fastidious on this?
>>> --mkb
>>>
>>> On Apr 26, 2008, at 10:28 PM, Randall Cotton wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm not sure how I missed it when I first read this statement,  
>>>> but part of
>>>> it says "well documented evidence shows that the official  
>>>> explanation of
>>>> 9/11 cannot be correct." This is in the context of calling for an
>>>> international investigation of the 9/11 events. I support an  
>>>> international
>>>> investigation but while I don't discount the possibility that  
>>>> this claim
>>>> is true, I haven't seriously considered the matter and can  
>>>> neither aver or
>>>> deny the truth of that claim. So I'm not sure I will propose  
>>>> AWARE become
>>>> signatory to this at tomorrow's meeting after all (maybe at a later
>>>> meeting instead). I may revoke my own personal signature to the  
>>>> statement
>>>> as well until I clarify this issue (being a well-executed  
>>>> project, one can
>>>> revoke one's signature simply through e-mail, according to  
>>>> information on
>>>> the website).
>>>>
>>>> Can anyone provide or lead me to unassailable facts showing the  
>>>> truth or
>>>> falsehood of this claim?
>>>>
>>>> R
>>>>
>>>> PS We can speculate infinitely on this matter of course, but I  
>>>> don't think
>>>> that's useful - I'm definitely not suggesting anyone engage in  
>>>> that on
>>>> this list and hope folks will resist any such temptation. Just  
>>>> facts or
>>>> pointers to such, please.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss