July 14, 2004
[911truth.org which seeks to be THE website portal of reliable 911 Truth for the movement has a campaign going on now
that they call the "Summer of Truth"]
Subject: PROMOTING SUMMER OF "TRUTH" AND/OR LIMITED HANGOUTS
For some "truth" in advertising, it should really be called
"the Summer of Truth and/or of Limited Hangouts". Just like the project's mission:
"The Summer of Truth Campaign intends to build a powerful grassroots movement for full 9/11 truth disclosure and
legal-political redress based on existing proof of this government's misrepresentations, exploitation and investigative obstruction
of the events of September 11, 2001"
Ah, government "misrepresentations" . . . You mean they
misrepresented that they committed mass murder?
"Given the enormous body of evidence refuting the "official 9/11 story," we can now lay out a prima facie
case for foreknowledge, complicity and/or obstruction of justice".
So, we've got a case for foreknowledge and/or complicity and/or obstruction of justice. So, it may just be a case of
obstruction of justice. . . So, we're getting a Summer of Truth and/or of Limited Hangouts.
Nick Levis [911truth.org's East Coast Regional Director] asked us to check the 911truth.org website and see that nothing
on it smacks of mere negligence. I wrote yeah, see your own group's mission statement. (complicity OR gross negligence):
"Mission Statement - Our mission is to publicly expose the truth surrounding the events of September 11, 2001 in
a way that:
1. leads to full accountability for complicity or gross negligence on the part of individuals inside and outside the
And these compromised missions continue . . . AND WITH SUCH MISSIONS, IT'S NO WONDER YOU GET "ACHIEVEMENTS"
like this, laughingly described at 911truth.org's 'About Us' website:
as "holding hard-hitting critical press conferences (carried live by CSPAN) featuring victim families' deep concerns."
(See my article above, Watching the Citizen Watchers & Families for detaails about their "hard-hitting" press
Update July 19, 2004 (and a little from July 1, 2004):
Kyle, and I appreciate this, is the only person connected to 911truth.org to directly respond to the substance of my critique
of the mission statement of
911truth.org after I pointed out that it certainly wasn't in keeping with the description previously offered the 911 Truth
Alliance list as the organization's goal, one of "pursu(ing) a strategy of maximum publicity for
complicity theory". Kyle's response indicated that he IS willing to settle for negligence because a) he believes
its enough to bring impeachment charges (a laughable conclusion in my view) and b) apparently impeachment is his goal. "just
making the case for negligence is enough to bring
impeachment charges and for some folks that's as far as they will go no matter how much evidence of complicity you can
present them." Kyle is apparently here conceding that the battle re: complicity is lost before it has even begun! (Again,
"and for some folks that's as far as they will go
no matter how much evidence of complicity you can present them.")
Stunning, isn't it? An executive board member and co-founder of an organization claiming its intention
is to make the complicity case, telling all of us, why bother to do so? We can't win.
And you know, the question is not how far "some folks" are willing to go, the question of the hour is how far
the folks at 911truth.org are willing to go, if they want our support. A portal can be a great thing or it can be a very
dangerous thing because it really sets the limits, by claiming to present the whole picture (come here
if you want the 911 truth, folks).
911truth.org's line should at the VERY LEAST be: either complicity, or something worse (manufactured terror, however
you want to word it); either LIHOP or
MIHOP etc. (The public already believes in negligence following the hearings, we should all already know. We don't need
an organization or portal to push the known. What we need is one who shows them that it's NOT NEGLIGENCE.)
I also submit that even the complicity line is not strong enough because a) it's actually not complicity;
it's not 'we were partners in crime with someone else', it's really we were the ringleaders and everyone
else our lackeys. Just looking at the twin towers proves that; and b) with the complicity line you get a
whole lot of crap (like, the Saudi's did it, and we just let it happen; or for that matter, Paul Thompson's line:
"Paul says either the US government was directly involved with Pakistan and other countries in the 9-11 plot and
allowed it to happen or helped it to happen, or the US government was taken for fools and afterwards covered up their foolishness"
And an organization, by the way, is not really an "it", and it's not static. It's made up of the people who
do things, so looking at the people in the organization and their lines is a pretty damn good predictor of the things that
people will do in that organization tomorrow, and next week, and next month, etc.. So it is not sufficient to see what an
organization is doing today when you hand out a flyer promoting them. You want to hand out trusted sources, so that you'll
know the organization isn't selling something next week to your recipients that you're not buying.
Selling negligence is NOT exposing a coverup, it's merely the dissemination of the gov't's limited hangout. And anyone
or any group that disseminates the gov't's limited hangout -even as one of several possibilities - is NOT serving the movement
(because that is obviously the
most palatable choice, not to mention one the American people for the most part already believe and have accepted with
grace). Instead, selling negligence is doing the exact opposite. And such IS a betrayal of our trust.
You can contact me at AngieSept11@yahoo.com
911 Truth Movement Musings (Watching the Watchers)
http://Angieon911.com or http://www.Angieon911.com