rules, film festival

I do agree with Mark on a need to set up rules, if we have stumbled into a question of asking a member to leave.

• I suggest we go either with unanimous acclamation, or 2/3 vote of a voting inner group, PROVIDED conditions are found and met when:
1. member repeatedly and impolitely disrupts meetings
2. member repeatedly and seriously breaks agreed rules of the group

I do not think we are facing this situation, not by a far.

• Ken
  Personally, I would offer preemptive formal apology to Ken, if not for his life experiences he arrived to, ahead of all of us.
  Somehow, I feel we know this issue was overblown, and now it is over with, or to be solved between these 2 gentlemen.

• Film Festival
  As i mentioned, I think group ought to mount bigger, discernible presence, once a lecture size public gathers, on any forum we organize.
  I have seen only Chris giving a little bit of speech last time on Prof Jones lecture.
  
  We need solid, 15-20 minutes welcome, who we are, intro speeches from group members .. It for us too.
  We need to show website/s. No question about that. Speakers I have proposed in last email.

Issue/s we face are much bigger and more important than are internal discourse of last weeks.

Petr

http://controlledDemolition.blogspot.com

my part only bcc to bl dweb

Hello, on http://RockCreekFreePress.com article, good, success! :] As I suggested, I would start /always/ with nanothermite. ...For example,..... "This year brought a big news and change to 9/11 Movement - the irrefutable scientific evidence of the presence of the explosive nanothermite in the dust of WTC. That drove us, The Davis For 9/11 groups, to question again, and with renewed vigor, the results of the Government commission and government official version". ... and ease into your insider theme about Commission, details ...... somelike that. //////// whatever you write is fine with me. Mission Statement Here is one liner from me. Lets see if we see other proposals, too. "Our mission is to gather a critical mass of public common knowledge, understanding and acceptance of the truth regarding the tragic events of 9/11, by educating and informing ourselves and others, in order to achieve new independent facts-based investigation, and finally, to witness resulting official recognition of the Truth of 9/11, so that history accounts can be officially corrected, and the war empire forces can be revealed, removed from power, brought to account, thus being defeated, for the sake of world peace and world prosperity". Some design links, for those who want to hand code. http://www.webdesignbooth.com/15-really-useful-web-based-html-editors/ , http://friendfeed.com/webdesign1 On membership question. I probably must be missing something. I think the issue is practically cleared away now, as much as possible. -That "somebody "really doesn't like" somebody else" is not a cause to make somebody stop attending the group... in my view -I would, of course, always respect the majority verdict, but as it is now, I will not join any calls for reducing the membership. -"Reckless and malicious?" .. I must be really missing this part. -Yes, as I said, I clearly see what Mark did and is doing for the cause of 9/11. Others are just as much contributing to the common efforts, in their ways. So no, I do not see a reason why Mark should be advised not to come to the meetings against his own decision. Petr On the Film Festival, I am proposing, early enough, 1. day, Howard and Rodney speak. 2. day, Chris, Jim and Alex Themes, up to you .. 9/11, intro, the group, your take, your experiences, activites, engage the public. ... Bring a list of websites, display them, mention them, briefly discuss them. bcc/ minus the contenion part/ to http://911DavisWeb.blogspot.com - our work blog ... its private, will send you invites