Members who do not agree with what is going on

This is the first time I'm responding to the e-mails and feel I must, having been involved in NY911Truth group, though not able to be able to be present now, I am still with you guys in spirit and truth concerning 911. We need to find out WHO planned and orchrestrated the crime of 911 and see there brought to justice. When I spoke at Cooper Union on the 5 year anniversity, I mentioned how most of the network anchors belong to the Council on Foriegn Relations(CFR) and we all know the media blackout we've recieved concerning 911Truth.(Not only the heads of the major media, but the heads of the military,heads of the administration,etc.) In light of the new BBC clip (Alex Jones's Prisonplanet.com) the anchor reports building7 HAD collapsed a half hour before the event.Whoever wrote the script was complicit in the crime of 911.By the way the CFR's sister org. the RIIA is located in London. Les, your not suggesting we not investigate WHO commited the crime of 911 are you? I hope the group continues to persue the connection between the CFR and the crime of 911.

______________________________________________

Dear everyone, I have been trying to sidestep some of the controversy, but I can no longer remain silent. The content of these emails is so sad (even embarrassing) I have to speak out. Natasha seems to have appointed herself spokesperson for NY911truth. Les has appointed himself ideological arbiter, cop, judge and jury. In the Case of Tom Foti, as in the Bush Administration military tribunals, there has been no public trial. I'm not even clear about what the charges against Tom are: on one hand he is accused of being an FBI agent; on the other hand, he is accused of focusing on the global elite and proposing that the group do civil obedience. For which charge has he been found guilty and expelled? No evidence has been brought forth publicly to support the charge that Tom is an FBI agent. When I have asked for evidence, I have been told, "Trust us." I feel like I'm watching re-runs of old Bush press conferences. The second "charge" implies that debate about strategy and tactics is not allowed, and that the leadership has the power to set boundaries on what is permissible to discuss. Does this remind anyone of anything? Let's not forget that it is still within the realm of possibility that all of this hoopla derives not from government infiltration or other malicious causes, but rather from a combination of paranoia (justifiable), lack of democratic procedures (a mistake) and standard group politics (unavoidable). If Les and whoever else want to make accusations against Tom and Luke, they should make clear and specific charges against them and make them publicly. If Les and whoever else want to function contrary to democratic principles, just say so; at this point, the pretensions and manipulations are transparent. Both Les and Natasha derive justification, at least partially, from the silent support of Frank Morales who has contributed nothing to this conversation publicly. I think Frank's silence is not acceptable. He has been a leader of the group from the beginning. If he agrees with Les and Natasha, he should say so publicly. I don't like back-room discussions and explanations. If the leaders have something to say,, they should say it to the group. I have been waiting more than a month now to hear some public clarification of the charges against Tom and Luke. I have been waiting to see if other members found this process very unacceptable. But now word has got out. Our emails have become the butt of jokes. After all the wonderful hard work everyone has done to build New York 911 Truth Movement, these developments are tragic indeed. Sincerely hoping we can raise the level of the discussion