Sent yesterday evening, via the Metabunk contact form. He sent another note requesting that I post it here.
I think Mr. Gioia is wrong, or misled, on several points, and his intentions, while understandable on a most personal level, ought to be rejected as part of a public service action. Point by point:
I think this is overstating the current status of the petition, as far as it is known: The U.S. Attorneys merely issued a note of receipt of the mail package, along with the remark that they would follow the law as it applies to such a submission - which of f course would go without saying.
The word "accept" implies a connotation that the U.S. Attorneys view the filing by the Lawyers' Committee
You have been misinformed about what the law says. No Grand Jury (GJ) needs to be convened, as the District already has (at least one) standing Grand Jury, and there is no requirement to actually investigate. All that the law demands is that a GJ be
informed by the US Attorneys of a submission and the identity of the submitter, along with a comment by the US Attorney, who may, if they so choose, make recommendations.
Granted.
It seems quite likely to me, […], that the GJ has already decided not to pursue this submissin as it is, in fact, baseless, but as a general rule, such a decision is not cmmunicated back to the submitter. Thus, it may turn out that we will never hear back from the GJ or the US Attorneys. The more recent "Mandamus" filing by the Lawyers' Committee, which has the intent of having a court force the US Attorneys to give feedback, may likewise go nowhere, as there exists no legal obligation on the part of the US Attorneys or GJ to give such feedback.
Essentially, it appears to me that the Lawyers' Committee, while knowing full well that the petition is already dead, will drag procedings out for as long as they can, with the intention to incur fees to themselves from donations collected from naive followers.
I understand the sentiment on a most personal level. It's perhaps akin to having a chronic or incurable illness, or a loved one with such a desease, and little hope that mainstream medicine will provide healing - many will then turn to quackery. If you turn to quackery on your own financial and emotional resources, that's your prerogative. I have been there: My girl friend suffered from an incurable brain cancer, and together we consulted and tried alternative approaches. It certainly was a comforting experience to at least be "doing something".
But you are calling as a public body upon a public institution to spend tax payer money on what is, at the end of the day, quackery. That, in my opinion, is irresponsible.
I am convinced that the Firemen, Policemen, and first responders have been heard, and the physical evidence has been vetted, by the various investigations. What we do not need is for these testimonies to get cherry picked, taken out of context, misrepresented, or for physical evidence to get ignored by the likes of AE911Truth.
I think the victims deserve much better than to have their memory dragged into highly dubious and dishonest campaigns by a tiny fringe of people with, let's say, an idiosynchratic version of reality. Just to give you one example: A large proportion of the so-called "9/11 Truthers", including leaders and followers of AE911Truth - possibly even majorities of these groups - claim that American Airlines Flight 77 did not crash into the Pentagon. This would imply that the passengers and crews of this flight did not perish inside the Pentagon, that their remains were not pulled from the Pentagon debris nor identified by DNA testing, and that consequently their loved ones did not, in fact, bury the victims. Can you imagine the emotional stress that such crazy, cynical lies could evoke in those relatives?
The ideas of such "Truthers" do not deserve any public money being spent on their inevitable debunking.
I see, Mr. Gioia, that you did an interview with AE911Truth's Andy Steele - who is one of those who claim that the vctims of flight AA77 are not actually victims of AA77's crash into the Pentagon. Did you know that?
This site and its people will ALWAYS allow you to respond back as often as you want to.
This is absolutely NOT true for many, most "9/11 Truthers", who generally practice heavy-handed censorship. For example, I am blocked from commenting on AE911Truth's Facebook page, and I am far from alone. I never insulted anyone there, all I did was state facts and criticise claims that I believed to be demonstrably wrong.
