New York City 9/11 Truth

Fund Raiser for Ellen Mariani September 9th 2007

2007-08-27T00:22:00.001-05:00

Sponsored by New York City 9/11 Truth:

In the Tradition of the Lower East Side Howl Festival at the Authentic Rebel Cafe 2007,, none other than Bob Holman's Bowery Poetry Club, a Fund Raiser for Amazing Feminist, strong Woman and Stander-uper to Government "Shut-up" Persuaders, Ellen Mariani.....

Mariani will likely present a talk on her experiences at the Fund Raiser, and be present in NYC that weekend for other of the many events planned for the 6th anniversary of the September 11th attacks.

When: Sunday Afternoon 2PM to 4PM, Sept. 9, 2007

Where: Bowery Poetry Club 308 Bowery, between Houston and Bleecker

What: VJ showing of the most influential, convincing, artistic and perfect of the new cross-over electronic medium genre, the "9/11 Video Mash-up."

Suggested Donation $10. Inquire at info@nyc911truth.org for advanced tickets.

"9/11 Video Mash-ups" as featured on YouTube, LiveVideo, and also on other, less popular portals like Metacafe and LiveLeak were pioneered by notorious and legendary 9/11 activist, researcher and Downtown (East Village) Artist, Nico Haupt.

Since first introducing the concept in the Fall of 2006 the genre has expanded to include the work of over 20 prominent activist-researcher-artists from around the World, working most of them, pseudonymously.

VJ Peggy Carter will introduce the main streams within the genre, accompanied by spoken word narration and some lyric, as well as introduce the newest form, pioneered by "John Connors" aka Mark Dice of the Resistence Manifesto. Dice's concept was furthered by the young activsts at WeAreChange, .

Among the most prominent of these activists are Luke Rudkowski and Matt Lapacek of Brooklyn, who have received millions of hits for their "hecklivism" clips.

In these clips
Z. Brzezinski,
Rudolph Guiliani,
David Rockefeller,
John McCain,
John Edwards, Hillary Clinton
and most recently Nancy Pelosi Speaker of the House are confronted, video recorded, and the record of the confrontation published on-line. These new genre cuts the social acceptance of art for the rich and the acceptable trend setters establishing its own raison d'etre. The form blends physical morality, bravery, commitment, community awareness, information propagation, stunt work, feat, with an attempt to compete with the Mass Communication Methods, that are known and proven to rule the life of the Body Politic.

Context will be provided in Liner Notes/ Catalog.

Ironically, the New York Post's ultra-right wing columnist, not known for her accuracy, nor for her even-temperedness, Andrea Peyser, wrote a libelous column stating that Nico Haupt, the originator of this concept art, was harassing 9/11 Widow Ellen Mariani, "9/11 Skeptics' Lunatic Fringe Target Victim's Widow", whose welfare provides the focus for our evening of art. This "reporting" was a blatant fabrication, completely untrue, on the part of NYPost New's darling and Right-wing pit girl, Peyser. Ellen Mariani is aware of our efforts and grateful for them.

City Moves To Ban Film and Photography

2007-08-01T14:06:00.000-05:00

What Have We Become? An Iron Curtain Country? No Photography on the Street?

Come Protest The Destruction of our Ability to Challenge our Officials and Obtain our Own Evidence, through the use of Photography on the Street

What ever could be the reason for this ban?!

Challenging The Film/Photography Ban In New York City

This Thursday coming(August 2nd), we will be arriving at about 4:30 pm at City Hall, to challenge the Mayor Bloomberg-enduced ban on filming and photography in New York City. We'll be meeting with various individuals across the city at this convergence spot to protest the ban, including filming the event.

The banning opens up the possibility that any non-insured still photographer/filmer, and most specifically team thereof, will be targeted. The ban calls for a requirement of a 1 million dollar liability insurance policy in addition to a permit, for various photography and filming actions that occur for more then 10 minutes. The city claims it is only enforcing and "adjusting" old permit laws, to justify these actions. The police department has stated it will begin enforcing the laws, as of August 2nd, which is why we chose this day. We must meet this head on.

The implications of this, within the 9/11 truth movement alone, are pretty much on the surface. From 9/11 student scholars beyond, many have been taking video to document officials responses to questions about 9/11. Video and photographs have been used to document actions, cause the multiplication of actions, as well as pass along and spread creative concepts which other truth movement individuals and groups have put into use. Furthermore, video and photography can help prevent and/or document a potential future false flag operation if one were to be occur. There are so many significant reasons why this must be challenged.

All are HIGHLY encouraged to join, feel free to take what ever proper measures to rely the message that a law strictly against the first amendment, including freedom of expression and freedom of media, will not be tolerated or recognized by the people of New York City.

Most specifically, our meet-up location will be at City Hall Park, which is at the south end of City Hall. Both the N and R trains(City Hall), and J M 4 5 6 trains(Chambers Street) stop in the immediate area. See you there, and please invite all others who may be interested.

Archived Articles on the topic:

City Moves To Ban Film and Photography

And in a revealing moment deeply trenched with the irony of it all, the self-assured confidence they have, and true demonstration of their nature and intent:

City Announces Mass Filming Of its Citizens In Lower Manhattan

According to the following news coverage(nbc) on the topic, the last day for public commentary being accepted is august 3rd. Which means we can and should enter this event into the public record. Minutes, photograph, and video from the day..in addition to our redress of government right at the epicenter of the matter, i recommend making immediate application of these following the event.

Nightly News covers Picture New York Rally

As one woman said:

"I already have a permit, it's called the first amendment."

Also there is a related petition located at pictureny, which would be good to sign. Seems to have well over 10,000 signatures already, which means word is at least moving. Lets expand on that, see you there

Constitution for New York City 9/11 Truth

2007-08-01T13:37:00.000-05:00

We Signed our Constitution last month on the 9th of July.
Our Forum is New York City 9/11 Truth

New York City 9/11 Truth is a non-profit association of individuals based in the City of New York that educates the public concerning the evidence and documented facts of the attacks of September 11, 2001 as a way of inciting peaceful societal change.

Because it can be established using publicly available information that elements within the United States Federal, State and Local Governments, the Military-Industrial-Intelligence complex, and banking and insurance interests perpetrated the crimes of September 11th, 2001 and profited from same; because the Mass Media has relentlessly promoted a cover story that was crucial to the success of the crime, which has been used to justify a pre planned agenda of war, racism, and subversion of human rights and has terrified the public with illusory foreign enemies, we, the undersigned, to pursue justice and international peace, to provide support to individual truth activists and maintain a publicly visible 9/11 Truth presence in the City of New York, do hereby establish this Constitution of New York City 9/11 Truth.

Article I. Name.
The name of the group will be New York City 9/11 Truth. Hereinafter referred to as the organization.

Article II. Purpose and Goals
Section One : Purpose
The purpose of the organization will be direct public dissemination of the verifiable evidence and facts directly relevant to the attacks of September 11th, 2001 to the largest audience possible and using the most effective means available.

Section Two : Goals
1. Education of the entire population of the New York City
Metropolitan Tri-State Area concerning the true perpetrators
of the events of September 11, 2001.
2. To show any justification of international wars based on the
attacks of September 11, 2001 to be without merit and
thereby promote peace.
3. To strip away the pretense of legality which shields the true
perpetrators of 9/11 in order to resuscitate the American
Constitution, Bill of Rights and advance the American
Constitutional Republic.
4. To encourage the public to examine evidence for themselves.
5. To empower activists to act individually.
6. To maintain a publicly visible 9/11 Truth presence in
the City of New York.

Article III. Membership
Section 1 : Eligibility
Any person that publicly promotes truthful information regarding the attacks of September 11th, 2001 in a respectful manner during an event Sponsored by the organization is eligible for Membership.

Section 2 : Obtaining Membership
Any eligible person may become a Member by submitting their name and email address to a Member in writing and in the presence of a witnessing Member. Membership in the organization will be indicated by receiving a Log In Name and Password for the organization's web site.

Section 3 : Inactive Membership
The Membership of anyone that does not attend a Public Outreach Action Sponsored by this organization at least once a month may be revoked.

Article IV. Meetings
Regular meetings of the organization will be held once a month. Meetings will be announced at least one week in advance on the groups web site and through email. These meetings will be open to public attendance.

Article V. Officers and Duties
Section One : Treasurers
The officers of this organization will consist of three Treasurers. A Treasurer will receive all moneys of the organization and shall deposit all money so received in a bank account bearing the name of the organization. Money so deposited shall be withdrawn only by check signed by a Treasurer and a witnessing Member. These officers will be responsible for maintaining accurate financial records.

Section Two : Membership Equality
No other officers will be appointed and no special privileges will be granted to the Treasurers. All Members will have equal privileges. Non-executive positions may be appointed with Bylaws in order to assign duties without conferring privileges.

Article VI. Public Transparency.
Section One : Public Participation in Educational Actions
Public Outreach Actions of the organization will be announced in advance on the designated web site and through a public email list so as to encourage nonmember participation. Such actions are open to participation by anyone that furthers the goals of the organization in a productive manner.

Section Two : Publicly Viewable Internet Presence
The organization will maintain a world wide web site. This web site will primarily consist of a publicly readable Forum. All Members will be able to post content on the organizations designated web site.

Section Three : Records, Rules & Decisions
Complete financial records will be posted on the organizations web site in the most timely manner possible. The organizations rules and decisions will be posted on the designated web site and will only be effective once they have been so posted.

Section Four : Online Decision Making
Amendment and Bylaw decisions may be reached online with a commenting and voting period of no less than ten days. Posting of such proposals will be announced to Members through email. Proposals for Public Outreach Actions may be considered Sponsored by the organization when two Members, beside the proposing Member, indicate they will attend and do so.
There are four possible responses to proposed decisions:
1. Agree - Self-explanatory.
2. Stand Aside - The Member does not have an opinion, or does
not feel well-informed enough to express an opinion. Not
responding will be considered a stand aside.
3. Disagree - The Member is not in agreement with the proposal,
but does not feel strongly enough to block a decision.
The disagreeing Member has the right to explain why they
disagree and have their disagreement registered.
4. Block - The Member feels strongly enough to block the
decision. To block the Member must provide an alternative
proposal and give a coherent explanation of the reason for
the block.

Article VII. Amendments & Ratification.
Section One : Amendments
Amendments to the Constitution must be passed by consensus.

Section Two : Ratification
The ratification by consensus and by signature of three or more Members of the organization shall be sufficient for the establishment of this Constitution.

Article VIII. Bylaws.
While membership is ten or below Bylaws may be passed by a 75% majority. While membership is 25 or below Bylaws may be passed by an 80% majority. While membership is 50 or below Bylaws may be passed by a 85% majority. If membership is above 50 Bylaws must be passed by a 90% majority.

Signed and ratified July 9th, 2007.

9/11 Premiere of Video Music Mash-up VJ event NYC Thursday

2007-06-27T23:45:00.000-05:00

9/11 Premiere of Video Music Mash-up VJ event NYC Thursday

Inviting you to 9/11 Premiere of Video Music Mash-up VJ event NYC Thursday

Art Event
Thursday
7:30
Meet at the fountain at City Hall.
Will have a sign for our Party.

Nico Haupt will premiere as V-J in near-by loft space starting at 8PM, projecting a selection of some of the the 500 9/11 Video Music and Political "Mash-ups" created over the last 6 months.

'Nother Face-off: Guiliani Confronted by Victims

2007-05-29T17:20:00.001-05:00

'Nother Face-off: Guiliani Confronted by Victims

Sabrina, Ryan and Luke Get Him! Check out his facial expression before his actor genes kick in.

Check out the proof he's lying. It's in here:

Faced Off : Rudkowski vs Brzezinski

2007-04-25T10:53:00.000-05:00

Click To Play

With only hours notice, CHANGE discovered that NWO Globalist Zbigniew Brzezinski was giving a speech at the YMCA in Manhattan. Luke was able to get in and ask some questions about his recent statements regarding false-flag terror attacks being staged by the Bush Administration, and his funding of the Taliban during the Afghan war with the Soviets. He was then directly confronted on the CFR’s involvement in planning the attacks of 911.

Jim Fetzer at the Blue Loft: Final Event in NYC

2007-04-19T15:25:00.000-05:00

Friday April 20th, 7:00 pm (talk begins at 9:00pm)
"Why Truth is the Best Strategy"

Jim Fetzer will be visiting the Blue Loft at Twelve Warren St. for an audience with New York 911 Truth members and friends.

Dr. Fetzer will demonstrate the scientific method of screening out what does not make sense from what does, with examples taken from the history of the Pentagon Attack, the event at Shanksville, the Trade Center destruction and the history of his reasonings around those events.

Due to the 'last minute' nature it is possible this will be a small gathering. So consider this to be an opportunity perhaps for an intimate conversation with a much-talked-about voice for 9/11 truth.

To our knowledge this will be Dr. Fetzer's only public appearance on Manhattan during his one week visit and will be the last and only chance to hear him speak here, only blocks from the site of the former World Trade Center.

All are welcome at this event. Donation of $5 is requested but none are turned away.

New York City 911 Truth is honored to host Dr. Fetzer.

Doors will open at 7:00 for an informal 9/11 related discussion group and for a presentation of recent news items with refreshments. Dr. Fetzer will arrive for his talk at 9. Straggle in before then, but please don't be late for the talk.

Report on Attempt to attend Les Jamison event at St. Mark's NYC, April 1, 2007

2007-04-05T21:25:00.000-05:00

This is not good.

I Luke Rudkowski feel a bit guilty for playing into the hands of individuals who seek endless in-fighting and e-mail debates instead of fighting for 9-11 truth. I hope people do understand that Les Jamisons actions have left me with few options other than simply making my case publicly.

On Sunday, April 1, 2007, I attended an event at St. Marks Church with my friend Ralph Shoenman, who was a speaker at the event. Before I tried to walk in, there were three security guards waiting for me outside to deny my entrance. They even became physical by putting their hands on me. I cannot fathom why this was happening. For the past two years I have done events at St. Marks Church and during those two years I have never done anything wrong or inappropriate or given them any reason to deny me access to this public church. When I questioned why I was being denied entrance, they simply ignored me and called the NYPD to obviously have me physically removed from the premises. It should be noted that the NYPD came, became annoyed and left.

After this altercation, I saw Les Jamison standing outside, so I tried to approach him and talk to him, in which this was the first time in two months. He ran back into St. Marks Church and locked the door. Later on, I saw Frank Morales and I asked him what was the reason for me getting disrespected in front of a public church. He merely just shunned me away and walked in the church and locked the doors. These actions show how far people will go out of their way to not have a rational conversation to deal with this situation.

Its really gotten to me that for the last 6 weeks Ive been taking money out my own pockets for flyers and DVDs after Les confiscated the group bank account and all the assets. He's literally tried stopping the actions at ground zero.

And while I can accept taking money out my pockets to support this cause, but I will not stand for being slandered and mistreated. There's really much more to the side of the story than most know. If anyone has something against me because of something Les said, please talk to me first before you go on and believe it.

Ive gone out of my way to communicate with Les Jamison to resolve this. Ive called him. Ive tried e-mailing him, but no response for weeks. He no longer has the support from NY911Truth activists and does not represent the group in any way shape or form. His actions speak for themselves and only hurt the movement.

Response to Les' Letter -
Les,

Your letter is interesting, since it is extremely vague and doesnt name anyone by name. I was actually quite confused reading it.

1. Les, you were never elected or nominated for leader of this group. Tom and I do far more work in terms of organization and promotion than you do. And youve even said so yourself.

2. I hope people understand that you hand picked your own steering committee without any input from the group. No one had knowledge of this, and while you were calling secret meetings I was calling for open forum meetings with rotating moderators. NY911Truth steering committee meetings were and will always be open and democratic meetings.

3. The letter I wrote had hard copy signatures that all came from public NY911Truth meetings and NY911truth street actions, while Les called individuals all over the nation and asked for signatures without even letting some people understand the situation or read the letter they were "signing" over the phone. This is not the Les Jamison fan club, where all donations go to a bank account which Les has 100% control of, where one individual controls all aspects of the organization and holds it at his mercy when he disagrees with someone.

Your actions speak for themselves and represent a desperate reach for power and money.

As Ive said before, I have nothing to hide and only want to see this movement achieve great successes. But that will not happen with someone acting as overlord or puppet master.

I am asking Les ONE MORE TIME to meet with myself and Sander Hicks so we move past this. This is easily solvable, if you would simply show an interest in open dialogue and communication.

Peace and Respect,

Luke

www.myspace.com/peoplesv

Check out my new film that shows what NY911Truth is about.

P.S I BCC everyone this email to end all these endless email fights.

Action at ABC Studios, Upper West Side

2007-03-20T19:06:00.000-05:00

Demonstration of Support for Rosie O'Donnell

March 21st Wednesday: 9:30am
Outside ABC The View Studios
320 West 66th Street , just past West End Ave., NYC

Wed., Mar . 21: The View celebrates Rosie O'Donnell's birthday.

http://abc.go.com/daytime/theview/directions.html

NY911Truth and CHANGE will be outside ABC's Corporate Studios for "the View" this Wednesday to support Rosie O'Donnell courageous and brave actions standing up for 9-11 truth.

Rosie O'Donnell has been Ignored by most of the 9-11 truth movement and Ignored by the mass media.

We, as citizens of New York, say "enough is enough" and were going to show Rosie support for standing up for the truth. We're going to be outside ABC studios with our "9-11 was an inside job" banner and "Thank You Rosie Sign." All supporters are welcome to attend.

After Rosie O'Donnell went public doubting the official story of 9/11, the Mainstream Media has openly ignored Rosie O'Donnell. Just like they ignore the family members of 9/11 victims and first responders who question the official story of 9/11.

The Mainstream Media concentrates their efforts on mindless fluff like the dispute between Rosie O'Donnell and Donald Trump. Why won't they cover Rosie O'Donnell talking about 9/11 truth?

It is clearly evident the established media knows about this story and has chosen the Blackout option, rather than the discrediting method, which would be attempting to debunk us. The truth behind 9-11 can longer be "debunked."

Go to We Are Change for more info and updates
Contact Luke Rudkowski for more info Email: revolutionchl@yahoo.com
Site: MySpace

Declaration of 9/11 Truth

2007-03-16T11:30:00.000-05:00

This message was sent out on March 8th, 2007. It is public now since Jamison didn't respond substantially, in a timely manner; Did not respond at all to the substance of the agreement taken in an open, announced meeting.

____________________________________________________
( Alright this is the letter which I will send out to Les. If you do not agree with the statements below in any shape or form or wish to omit certain things please email me ASAP, please do not be tedious so we can send this ASAP. Please do not make this public and allow Les to respond to the email privately. We need to find a way to work with each other without dividing the group any further.)

On March 7^th, 2007 at Au Bon Gout (a Deli), 276 Fifth Avenue Corner of 30th Street, a public meeting was held to address the issue of the Bank Account and conflict resolution. Through a vote of 17-0, it was voted that Luke Rudkowski and Tom Foti should be added to the group bank account. Les has not provided flyers nor DVDs the last two street actions at Ground Zero, therefore there needs to be more people on the bank account. Since Luke Rudkowski and Tom Foti are the most active members and need money for flyers and DVDs, they need access to the bank account. Tom Foti and Luke Rudkowski were already voted on the bank account in previous meetings, Les undemocratically did not respect that vote.

It should be noted that Les Jamison was well aware of the meeting and did not attend because the meeting was public. He choose not to attend this meeting and make his voice heard nor did he answer any of Lukes calls or other members phone calls regarding his vote or opinion.

The group agreed that all decisions should be made in a democratic process. Les currently has 100% control of the bank account, website and email list and the group agreed that this should not be. Instead the group decided that 25% of ownership of the bank account should be assigned to Les Jamison, Harvey Newmen, Luke Rudkowski and Tom Foti. The money currently in the bank account was raised by the hard work of all NY911TRUTH members and should not be controlled by any single individual who does not provided any documentation where the money is utilized.

Dividing the group is counter productive and against all that NY911TRUTH stands for. No One person shall make a decision to kick someone out due to personal conflicts, as it stands Luke Rudkowski and Tom Foti are still active members of NY911Truth. If any member wishes to dismiss any member we shall do it in a democratic process. We all need to sit down and come to a democratic resolution on these issues in a public open meetings.

Best Regards,

Active members of NY911TRUTH

Names...

P.S Les you have to 3/14/07 to respond to this matter, or else this will go public. We all need to work together in order to validate this movement. Your actions of ignoring NY911Truth members are childish and immature. Come on, Les if you really care about 9/11 Truth you would working with us and not against us.
____________________________

The following is the only response from Les Jamison. He declared, unilaterally, the public meetings null and void:

Hello all,

This is my last communication on these matters.

Do you remember when we were all basking in the glow after the hugely successful 9/11 Truth Breakthrough Weekend? Do you remember the great experience, the respect and admiration we received from the larger movement, and hope we had going forward?

In the weeks afterward, an activist named Eric Safka from NJ who met us over the 5th anniversary began attending our meetings to see how he could contribute to the cause. Also, he was the one who let us know about drills going on at Bayview Oil Refinery where he works. He saw a lot of strange activities which many thought was a cause for alarm and should be looked into. Tom Foti was one of us who was in close contact with Eric as we monitored the situation.

Well, Eric and I spoke periodically since then. I just happened to return a phone call to him Sunday night. He asked me what has been going on with the NYC group, since he had seen some of the controversial emails, and I gave him an overview. As part of the story I included how Tom had conveyed to one of our members a desire to "take over the group". Well, you all should be very interested to know that now a second person has come forth stating the very same thing. Eric told me that Tom had told him that he wanted to find some way to take control of our group! Eric said he's willing to state this publicly at a meeting. I hope all of you ask "why was this Tom's intent?"

Why am I sharing this? Everyone should now consider that this happened in the weeks after our big anniversary events when we were proud of ourselves and working in tight cohesion. This is right after I worked closely with Tom, planning all the events, and helping him with his article in our publication, etc. Then what happened? While so many others locally and nationally were thrilled about the success of our events, here is more evidence that Tom was looking to take over the group. He was obviously working to defame me and create distrust because of my religious history using flimsy and unsubstantiated information as you should have seen in earlier emails from me. This all went on despite the fact that I had been completely focused working as a full time 9/11 truth activist since 2004, which is well known.

So take this however you will. We just hope you're objective and look at the facts here and consider the overall pattern of what has gone on from the fall till now and understand why recent decisions have had to be made. The choice has been made clear.

Lastly, as far as these meetings called by Luke & Tom, they are NOT NY 911 Truth meetings. NY 911 Truth cannot tolerate anyone who's actions are destructive and undermining. Anyone in alignment with this principle is welcome to participate with us. We have plenty of good work going on. Those who aren't, fine but try some other group. Just know that the attempt to destroy NY 911 Truth has been defeated.

Onward,

Re-investigation?!

2007-03-10T17:20:00.000-05:00

From Walter Reddy

Ryan is right!

Why is NY911TRUTH allowing a LIAR to still hold a position of leadership. He should be voted out. The reason I left the group is because of Les.

Prior to the 5 year anniversary, Luke, suggested to the group we have one of our members speak at Cooper Union and he suggested it should be me, the group agreed with no objections, including Les. The day of the event at Cooper Union, Les, LIED - in front of Frank, Luke and myself saying the group never agreed and proceeded to do everything he could to keep me from speaking.

Thanks to Frank I was the last speaker (with 5 minutes to speak.)

I spoke about the connection that the Council on Foreign Relations(CFR) had to 9/11. Nicholas Rockefeller (CFR), admitted to a friend (at the time) 11 months PRIOR to 9/11, " There will be an EVENT, and as a result of this EVENT we will invade Afghanistan, and be looking for people in caves! ha,ha,ha!", Dick Cheney (CFR), and more.

There seems to be enough evidence to get a Grand Jury to send up an indictment. 9/11 was a CFR job (Key CFR members).Prior to the 5 year 911 anniversary we going to form a PEOPLES GRAND JURY and pursue those involved in planning and/or carrying out 911 and bringing them to justice.

Natasha, you want to go out and collect 70,000 signatures - great! But if you think you get the TRUTH and JUSTICE from another 9/11 Commission (type) investigation.(6 of the 11 members were CRF members), you're naive. It would be like having the fox investigate who ate the chickens. Walter Reddy

Tom Responds to his Banning by a Secret Council

2007-03-09T00:52:00.000-05:00

Okay, Anthony. So, if I'm getting you right, you're saying that there was a "steering committee" chosen in private, without the awareness of the larger group, and without discussion by the larger group. Then, as I understand you, whoever it was that chose this secret steering committee chose to have a private meeting and vote on things that affect the larger group, again without disclosing to the group who this steering committee is, or what issues were being voted on.

You're telling me that this is a legitimate method of deciding on group issues, even though many of our hardest working and dedicated activists weren't even aware that the "steering committee" you speak of even exists; even though so far no one but yourself and Al have even admitted being in this "steering committee". You're also saying that this private, hand-picked group -- picked by who is yet undisclosed -- has the authority to make decisions about the larger group's direction, and to have exclusive control over the funds that all the activists worked hard to raise. You're saying that this "steering committee" doesn't have to conduct democratic process with the whole group, because, well,... it doesn't. And you're telling me that the rest of the people involved and active in our 911 Truth group here in New York somehow should just bend to your wishes.

Sounds like the person behind your plan must be George W. Bush.

We're not bending to an un-elected authority. We happen to be in the business of fighting an un-elected authority. You want policy to be decided upon? Great. Come to a real meeting that includes all the interested parties, bring your ideas to the table, we'll discuss them, debate them, and vote on them. Not in some smoky back room where only witting parties are invited, but in a fashion that's true to the "majority rules" methods that have made our republic the great nation that we are trying to save.

Do not take NY 911 Truth activists for fools, and don't take us for children, Anthony. And please don't think we lack courage or resolve.

Respectfully,

Tom

Secret Meeting Bans Les' Confronter

2007-03-09T00:37:00.000-05:00

Hey crew,

Anthony Rago and Al Rohde sent me this email about a meeting they were at last night. Funny, it wasn't the meeting I was at. The meeting I was at was publicly announced. Wonder why theirs wasn't.

So, please anyone who was involved with the vote Anthony speaks of below, identify yourselves. It's the democratic thing to do in a vote, kind of like in congress.

Thanks.

Tom

>From: "Anthony rago" <>
>To: Tom Foti
>CC:Les Jamison
>Subject: RE: Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 13:28:12 -0500
>
>Tom, we were at the Committee meeting last night - you are out of the group
>completely. It was an unanimous vote. Please remove from your email list
>our names. When will you get it. You are not part of NY911Truth anymore.
>You are part of another group. But not NY911Truth. It's done.
>Anthony Rago and Al Rohde
>
>

Funds Denied Ground Zero Activists?

2007-03-08T14:59:00.000-05:00

"The fact is that after little Tommy's bizarre behavior a couple of weeks ago it really isn't any shocker that steps were taken to insure against the possibility that the group's funds were not suddenly taken away."

So we trust Les, a confirmed liar, but we don't trust Tom for calling out Les about his lies regarding his background?

That makes a lot of sense.

Quoting Rodney Lewis >:

> Hi folks,
>
> Natasha is quite right, and this fellow Ryan doesn't
> really know what's going on and is probably being used
> as a mouthpiece for "someone else".
>
> The fact is that after little Tommy's bizarre behavior
> a couple of weeks ago it really isn't any shocker that
> steps were taken to insure against the possibility
> that the group's funds were not suddenly taken away.
>
> Are we all aware that Foti expected to "borrow" from
> the account to pay for his trip to Arizona?. After his
> previous stunts, there was a high probability that the
> money would never be recovered. I paid my expenses to
> go there, why not him? Could it be that when he went
> to the well and found it dry it pissed him off so much
> that he became bent on revenge?
>
> So now we have a new "group" with a "sound-alike" name
> and a "look-alike" website. It would be hilarious if i
> didin't know the circumstances leading up to this. But
> i've been told that there is a reference to Nico Haupt
> there a "respected researcher"... And that is truly
> funny, hee, hee.
>
> I'm not worried that those that this concerns can see
> through the sophistry.
>
> -rodney

Accounting of Monies?

2007-03-08T09:20:00.000-05:00

Subject: 9/11 Truth Bank Responsibility

Date:

March 07, 2007 05:04:00 PM EST

To:

Subject: RE: the bank account [& more]
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 17:03:48 -0500

Elaine,

Les is "100% owner" of our group bank account (as quoted by the bank rep.); I am no longer on the account, because Les Jamieson, without a discussion or vote, took me off.

He can evidently do this because he is "100% owner" of the account.

Luke was voted by the group to be a signer on the account, just as Harvey was.

Despite the vote, Les refuses to put Luke on; Les can do this, because he is "100% owner" of our account. I might add that Les was never voted to have total control of the account.

The group is not represented fairly by this arrangement. Let's close this account, and open another with a true banking committee making decisions that represent the group's wishes.

Thanks.
Tom

Nothing to See Here. Move Along.

2007-03-07T12:30:00.000-05:00

I'm sorry, Ryan. I just don't buy the idea that Les lied. He forgot. If you asked me how many times I sang (I am a classically trained singer, not professional) since 9/11, when I was busy in a meeting focusing on something else, I wouldn't remember and would have to look it up in my old daytimers. And I love to sing.

Also, many of the web sites you list below are duplicates and some are before 9/11. Your list gives the appearance of a very long list of documentation. It is not.

Also, there is another person on the bank account with Les. Too many people do not trust Tom Foti. He continues to misconstrue and misrepresent. It is not Les's private bank account. Nothing is spent without the consent of the group and everything is open. If you want to know what was spent, all you have to do is ask. And nobody keeps the content of their checkbook in his or her head, unless you have some kind of photographic memory. You have to look it up.

So please stop the crap about "there is no transparency".

Elaine

Democratic Prodcedure and Questions Leads to Coddling

2007-03-07T12:11:00.000-05:00

Dear Bill:

Thank you. Well-said.

I only want to point out to the group: The methods of co-intel are to divide the group, create factions, and smear the leaders. Tom did this and his actions were unconscionable. When he and I discussed the situation he said he would stop. Instead he tried to rip the group up further the very next day. Thus he had been coddled for a long time and had to go. By consensus vote with assistance from some behind this group and some experts. No, this is not an amoebic,
consensus democracy with no direction. This discussion happened and then it was all over.

Then suddenly two weeks later Tom sends out an innocent little letter as though he and everyone else had not discussed his exit ad nauseam and asks about the money. Noow his innocent little letter is that he wasn't at the meeting he was voted out at. This is entitled to do exactly what it has to some of you. He writes innocently so you think he is innocent. We come down strong on him because he works counter to the group's purpose. Then we look mean and then just the right notes with the words ;freedom of speech' and 'democracy' and censorship' start floating around, causing a lot of knee-jerk reactions.

Thus has Tom won the sympathies of some of you. Now he can make it look like it is we who are dividing and I suppose he might convince you we were smearing him.

Now Tom and Niko and Luke have shown us their true colors. Can it be said of them that they are not trying to fracture the group, to fracture and NYC 911Truth groups that might come into being? Have they sent you their new website? They have put together a sham website with the sole purpose of decrying NY911Truth. They have a blog devoted to disssing us. They paste something about all decisions being Democratic and transparent. And that's about it. But
what it doesn't do is bring an interested person to the reak website. That's divide and conquer. That's group treason.

That's intel method.

Thank you again, Bill, for your helpful words : )

peace,

Natasha

Reports of 911 Truth NYC Demise Greatly Exaggerated?

2007-03-07T07:57:00.000-05:00

"The movement does not need counter intelligence or disruptive "agent provocateurs" to hurt the movement... it's dying from within... if not dead already."

Lets not forget that Les Jamison has already sent out emails throughout the 911 truth community accusing Luke Rudkowski, Tom Foti, and Nico Haupt of being agents simply for calling him out on lies he told the group about his past.

Quoting The Skepti*Overlord :

> Hi Johnathon and all...
>
> On Mar 2, 2007, at 11:08 PM, JV wrote:
> > A few weeks ago Bill from Above*opSecret.com attended an organizational meeting and offered technical and hosting help for establishing a NY911Truth Forum. I would also like to offer my expertise in making this happen. If the group approves, I would be willing to work with Above*opSecret to establish the forum, form a committee or whatever is appropriate. Volunteers would also be needed for forum moderators once the system is populated.
>
> (some observations from a concerned "semi-outsider" of your group, if I may be so bold)
>
> Most are unaware that I communicated to Tom and Les that I have receded somewhat, as well as our offer of help (for now).

> However, I'm still keenly interested in the issues, the "movement's" goal, and continue to be focusing attention in our own way.
>
> I've seen the Nico-explosion video and the online tsunami of embarrassment it's causing for the movement. The moment he dropped the F-bomb in a place of worship in mixed company is the moment he should have been asked to leave, never to return. Behavior like that only proves that attention is more important than addressing real issues.
>
> The "truth movement" is in serious trouble. At this stage of your evolution, you can't afford not to devote significant time and energy to why and how it's in serious trouble.
>
> Consider these tibits of information...
>
> Our 9/11 Conspiracy Survey:
>
> Over 51,000 people who visit a large conspiracy discussion board took the survey (about 70% were non-members)... and more than three- quarters firmly believe there are "one or more conspiracies related to the events of 9/11/2001."
>
> But, our visitor surveys shows a disturbing counter-point:
> An older one --
>
> -- Out of the nearly 50,000 conspiracy-minded respondents, only 8% picked "9/11 Conspiracies" as a primary area of interest. And when asked for their second-favorite area of interest, 9/11 conspiracies came in sixth.

And a newer one -- -- With responses now edging over 6,000, only 4% report being attracted to "9/11 Conspiracies"... second from last.
>
> If you can't generate interest in those predisposed to have an affinity for your issues, then something is terribly wrong, and likely your message and/or presentation is at fault.
>
>
> On Mar 5, 2007, at 12:36 PM, R Rod wrote:

> > Les, I don't know if you are CIA, COINTELPRO, or what, but it is very clear that right now you are doing more to hurt the movement than anyone else.
>
> The movement does not need counter intelligence or disruptive "agent provocateurs" to hurt the movement... it's dying from within... if not dead already.
>
>
> The bickering over procedural and governance issues in your group is not unusual and very normal... but it is certainly amplified by the passion inherent in your reson detre.
>
> But don't let it detract from recognizing there is a much larger and more important issue -- the failure of your message. I can't see how any 9/11 Truth group could possibly, in good conscience, expend precious energy on any other subject at this point.
>
> But that's just me.
>
>
> Thanks for allowing me this brief moment in your in-box.
>
> Your friend,
> Bill
>
>
>

Rule of Group: Must Not Criticize Leaders?

2007-03-07T07:39:00.000-05:00

Bill Van Horn said:
> "verbal attacks against the leaders of the group, no matter how eloquently couched in "logical" terms should be recognized for what they are, attempts to destroy the group by taking out it's leaders. [The word "sophistry" comes to mind here. It means "a cleaver but misleading argument." Intentionally misleading is implied.]
>
R Rod said:
Lets not forget that Les Jamison has already sent out emails throughout the 911 truth community accusing Luke Rudkowski, Tom Foti, and Nico Haupt of being agents simply for calling him out on lies he told the group about his past.

What is the Process?

2007-03-06T18:28:00.000-05:00

RE: Position Statement for NY911T

To all,

Anthony said below that I'm no longer in the group because I got voted out in a "conference call." If any of you were part of this conference call, would you please fill me in? This is the first I've heard of it.

I realize there are those who have issues with me, but this is a peculiar sort of way to conduct a democratic process. Was anything else decided on this conference call that everyone should know about? Please inform.

Thanks.

Tom

From: "Anthony rago"

Subject: RE: Position Statement for NY911T
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2007 18:47:48 -0500
>Tom, although I wasn't at that meeting - there were others
>subsequent to it. One was a conference call in which I did
>participate. Les didn't remove you - the Committee did. I am
>saddened by all this. But I did send you (along with Al Rohde)
>numerous emails basically begging you to stop the attacks on Les and
>you didn't even respond. Instead you continued those attacks. Along
>with your insistance on the direction which was dangerous to the
>group and your statements about "taking over the group but I don't
>know how yet," and your obvious support of Nico brought this end
>about. Although this saddens me greatly, I support the decision by
>the group. Regards, Anthony
>
>
>>From: Yom Foti
>>To: aud
>>Subject: RE: Position Statement for NY911T
>>Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2007 12:09:51 -0500
>>
>>
>>
>>Guys,
>>
>>I respect your position. But I'm baffled by something you're
>>saying. There was never any group vote to remove me from
>>anything. The last meeting we had was at the deli on the corner of
>>5th Avenue and 30th. Al was there, but Anthony I don't believe you
>>attended that one. There was only a discussion about excluding
>>Nico and Geo from the mailing list. After that meeting, I emailed
>>out a dissenting opinion. And it was only after that that Les sent
>>out an email saying he personally was kicking me out of the group.
>>We haven't had another steering committee meeting since then.
>>
>>I would welcome a group discussion on these subjects. But we
>>haven't had a group vote so I cannot submit to the expressed will
>>of one or even a few people. I would respect the will of the
>>group. We haven't had this opportunity. This Wednesday, we'll
>>have another meeting at 7:30 at the same place. There we'll have a
>>chance to resolve everything.
>>
>>See you then.
>>
>>Peace,
>>
>>Tom
>>

Refuse Democracy to Save Ourselves: Fear Works, Apparently

2007-03-06T15:28:00.000-05:00

Hello Tom,

Here is the simplicity of the situation.

NY911Truth has a specific narrow focus.

Only activities which fall within these specific narrow confines shall be pursued by the group under the groups name and banner.

Efforts to circumvent this truth should not be tolerated by the individual group members as it clearly weakens the groups purpose, survival chances, and effectiveness.

Each group member should pointedly turn a deaf ear to the "reasonings" of persons who are trying to undermine the clearly stated purpose of the group.

Les was in error when he supported activities which fell outside the parameters of the group's purpose. I don't believe that Les will make that error again.Les should publish the groups clear purpose as he sees it if he hasn't already and that will be the groups purpose. To be quite clear on this subject let me say that the groups regularly scheduled meetings and communication channels of any sort should not be used as a forum to air the "reasonings" of persons who are in treason with the groups stated purpose. Additionally, verbal attacks against the leaders of the group, no matter how eloquently couched in "logical" terms should be recognized for what they are, attempts to destroy the group by taking out it's leaders. [The word "sophistry" comes to mind here. It means "a cleaver but misleading argument." Intentionally misleading is implied.]

Only a tough organized group is going to be able to bring this groups purpose to realization. Many who read my words will be shocked that someone could be so harsh.Many will want to waste my time with their cleaver rejoinders. Wake up, it's a harsh planet, our brothers and sisters are being gunned down everywhere you look. Gunfire and shock troops will be appearing on a street near you according to government plan. We are here to protect the children who can't defend themselves. The immediate future of The United States depends on us.

Tom you have other fish to fry...Go fry them. Don't you dare set myself and my friends up to be swept up under The Patriot Act and The Military Commissions Act. Any civil disobedience could be used and will be used in times of turmoil to sweep up the entire group and lock us away without legal counsel for as long as they want. That's not me saying this but law professors who have dissected the two acts previously stated. Tom you and your group must clearly differentiate yourselves from us, at Ground Zero and elsewhere. You are not a member of this group as evidenced by your public announcement of other intentions.

Tom and anyone else out there who wants to pull the group off its path, please decide to go your own way and not damage the group any more in your parting. My fellow group members please decide to stay on the path and clearly stand up for the groups purpose and drive away those who batter our leaders and attempt to pull the group away from it's stated purpose.

I'm not trying to be popular with this post. I don't want to "maybe bend my position a little bit" to be democratic. I want to succeed and only to succeed. Get tough as individuals on people trying to pull this group a part or we will fail. There is much at stake.

Bill Van Horn

Ryan Comments

2007-03-05T15:06:00.000-05:00

Change is not a 'different group with a different agenda', it is a youth group, intended for people under 30. Luke formed a group of young people to get involved and form camaraderie amongst us, and it has been a much bigger success than anything anyone else has done. Unlike 6 months ago before Luke formed Change, now a majority of the people who do street actions both at Ground Zero and other places are under 30.

Tom, Luke, and myself along with a few others have been very dedicated in doing street actions throughout the week since the summer, actions that Les or many others who seem to think they suddenly have authority have NOT ONCE been a part of. We have been harassed by the cops a few times, but nothing that we have not experienced at Ground Zero. The only difference between anything we did during the week that was any different than what NY truth activists have done every Saturday for the past four years is that we go throughout the city to places other than Ground Zero.

When someone came to a Wednesday meeting a few months ago passing out a paper saying that ny911truth should have democratic elections and that leaders should be transparent about their backgrounds you, Les, said that "authority in the group is based on who puts in the most work" and you also said that "anyone who wants to do a presentation can do a presentation, and anyone who wants to do a street action can do a street action." You went on to say that we can't "let people who don't put the work in try to take over the group."

By your very definition Les, 'who puts in the work' has authority. Tom, Luke and and others have put in much more work than you in spreading 911 truth in recent months.

You then said "people know me as a facilitator and not a power-hungry, turf-grabbing, ego-driven leader. As I've stated before, I've facilitated and contributed to everything you've wanted to do"

As long as you are a facilitator and contributor, your background and religious beliefs are irrelevant. However, due to your position (whoever placed you) in ny911truth, THE most important citizens group in the world right now, you have become well known.

Since you are a well known leader of this group it was INEVITABLE that someone was going to look into your background, however irrelevant it may be.

I heard about your involvement with Urantia back in the beginning of the summer, as well as the claims about CIA connections. I was told to look it up on Google, did so, and came to the conclusion that is was harmless, especially so long as Les is a 'facilitator and contributor'.

Nico Haupt was a well respected NY 911 truth activist before Les ever popped up and was declared leader. He is a well respected researcher, especially on the topic of war games, and his research is cited in several of the top 911 truth books that exist. (Crossing the Rubicon, Towers of Deception, and Synthetic Terror, perhaps others that I've yet to read)

So lets not act like Nico is some kook who just magically popped up and began stopping the truth, far from it. Nico did act inappropriately at a recent St. Mark's event, and I voted to not email him about future events there, because he was not welcome there. I would like to say that I now take that vote back. The emails from Nico that we got showed the group that you did indeed have some connection with Urantia, which again, I believe to be harmless.

Since everyone in the group got these emails proving your involvement in Urantia, and since practically anytime anyone stepped outside St. Mark's church on a Sunday evening would hear conversations regarding your involvement with this group, and since you are 'leader' of the email/st marks events, it was INEVITABLE that eventually someone would ask you about your involvement in it.

When the topic did come up, you answered the question and according to your previous email "I told you last spring after answering your questions about Urantia to free to ask again if any new questions pop up." In light of the barrage of Urantia emails from Nico, Tom brought up some more questions about the topic at a recent Wednesday night meeting, as you had previously welcomed.You clearly said to the entire group 1. you never had any position of authority in Urantia and were "only a reader" and 2. you have not been involved with Urantia since '99, when you went to South Africa to to be of just a few Urantia representatives at the 'Parliament of World Religions'. But of course we all knew this because of the emails we got from Nico.

I later spoke with Tom after that meeting, and we began talking about the questions that he had asked, and the answers that you, Les, gave. Very nonchalantly, I said to Tom "you do know he lying right" because, like I said, I researched this issue and found these links that prove that you lied to the group at the Wednesday meeting:

Report from Les at S. Africa 'Parliament of World Religions'

Vice President of Greater NY Urantia group (bottom)--

04 --If you want to be involved with Urantia in the Greater NY
region, CONTACT LES ***type name into search*** (real link
doesnt work for some strange reason)

04 http://www.urantia-nyc.org/membershipinfo.html
05 http://www.lightandlife.com/new/urantia/links.htm
03 leading intensive fellowship

Article by Les

07 website listed as 'ONE OF OUR MEMBERS'

01 On Urantia Outreach Committee

99 Parliament of World Religions

Article written by Les on Urantia website

02 Proposed speaker at Urantia event

03 Writing on Urantia message board ***type name into search***
(real link doesnt work for some strange reason)

00-- helped develop Urantia website

leading urantia session
(spanish)--

Clearly Les was more than 'just a reader' and was definitely involved after 1999. This directly contradicts what he told the group to all of our faces, even his staunchest supporters.

I thought it was no big deal, as long as you facilitate and contribute, but Tom wanted to see these links that I told him I had found through a simple Google search revealing your lies. As mentioned, I thought nothing of it, but Tom did not feel the same way and I do not blame him. You are 'in charge' of the group to a great extent and control the group's bank account, despite not being the one who brought in a vast majority of the funds. Being in charge of something so important should mean that you are not lying about who you say you are, what your background is, and ultimately what your true agenda is. I might be a bit apathetic, but lets not blame Tom for caring and expecting some honesty.

Now you say you want to expel Tom, the only other person who had access to the group's account, the only person aside from you who tried to keep tabs on the groups finances, and who also produced a great deal of DVD's that we distributed at street actions where you and most others who think we should expel Tom were never to be found. The group voted for Luke to have access to the account as well, but it was never given to him. We've already tried writing politicians to no avail. If you want to send out petitions, fine, I've signed them myself, but it is more important and takes a lot more work to go out in the streets and educate people. Tom, Luke, myself and others have been appealing to the only people that will actually hear us out, the average New Yorker. Now our source of DVD's and fliers has been cut off and we are being told to get on a writing campaign. Thats been done, if thats what you want to do then I won't criticize you, but by stopping our outreach actions to educate the public, you are very significantly neutralizing the movement and directly aiding and abetting the people who were responsible for 9/11.

Being in your position it was INEVITABLE that someone would Google you and find this information.

So why lie?

And why try to use your authority to kick out the group's most serious members, Tom, Luke, and Nico for calling you out on your lies?

It was only a matter of time until this came out Les, you are smart, you had to have known this.

Les, I don't know if you are CIA, COINTELPRO, or what, but it is very clear that right now you are doing more to hurt the movement than anyone else.

- Ryan Rodrigues

Quoting Tom Foti <t***@hotmail.com>:

> (text is attached in case format is illegible)
>
> Hi Les,
> I see you have a lot of gripes. Why don't you air them at our
> meeting on Wednesday? I'm confident the group will listen
> respectfully. Again, if you would like to have a vote on
> something, I believe that is what a group meeting is for.
> I plan to attend, and will discuss with the group the benefits of
> having a group bank account that is not "100% owned" by a single
> member. I believe the group's interests would be served better
> with a joint account that has group involvement and oversight.
> Until then,
> Tom
>
>
>
>
> From: Les Jamieson
> CC:
>
> Subject: Re: the bank account
> Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2007 12:05:30 -0500
>
> Tom,
>
> You seem to think everything is status quo and you couldn't be
> more wrong.
>
> You violated the group's 9-5 vote to remove Nico and Geo from
> your distribution list.
>
> Your plan to take over the group has been exposed.
>
> Your deceptive behavior with a document by Angie which includes a
> section on the Urantia Book has been exposed.
>
> Your attending meetings with Angie and Nico and strangely being
> secretive them has been exposed.
>
> Your working in collusion with Nico, despite his stated intention
> of disrupting and confusing the movement, and despite his
> position as a "no-planer" has been exposed. You were asked to
> remove him from your distribution list over a
> month ago by me, then Frank's insisting you disassociate from
> Nico after his huge disruption at the church, have both been
> ignored by you.
>
> Many people have emailed you opposing your fixation on my
> personal spiritual beliefs, calling for an end to the emails from
> you and Nico to no avail.
>
> Plus, very soon I will be exposing the nature of the flimsy
> accusations of the Urantia Book being an OSS/CIA/NSA front which
> will show that zero fact checking was done to make these
> outrageous claims.
>
> So, I am including my statement of 2/9 below to reiterate the
> situation.
>
> For all others receiving this, please read this through because
> these details affect the whole group and your general
> understanding of the situation will be served. Then please see
> below for my last comments.
>
> -----------------------------
> Tom,
>
> First of all, it was truly bizarre that we even
> had to have a debate to remove Nico and Geo from your
> distribution list after their barrage of vile emails over the
> past several weeks. I asked you over three weeks ago to remove
> Nico because it was clear he was on a slanderous spamming spree.
> I told you he would only continue his agitation. You refused. Now
> he has agitated us all seemingless countless times causing many
> members to protest. Furthermore, Frank Morales specifically told
> you 2 weeks ago at St. Marks church that Nico was banned after
> his assault on our Sunday event and desecration of the church
> space. Yet you have continued to include Nico in your emails,
> such as your duplication of Luke's announcement about our
> strategy session on Wed. and memorial service this Sunday.
>
> Your argument at the meeting that we could just filter him out of
> our emails obviously doesn't address the fact that he would be
> continually informed
> of what we're doing as a group, when everyone else knows the
> liability and negative influence he is and want nothing to do
> with him and feel he has no need to know of our activities. How
> much more plain could it be?
>
> Then as a last ditch effort at the meeting to persuade the group
> to continue including Nico and Geo on our correspondence, your
> concern was that there would be repercussions because they would
> complain on the internet and make a big deal of this. First, why
> would you even care? Why would you expect us to care? Nico is
> widely known as an agitator and slanderer attacking everybody of
> any substance. But you were clearly more concerned with his
> response than the group's concerns and wishes. Furthermore,
> simply removing Nico and Geo (Craig Stetson) from your cc list
> wouldn't signal anything because they would just stop receiving
> the announcements. The only way they would
> know is if someone announced it. Right? Well Tom, this is exactly
> what you've just done. As Natasha has accurately stated, "So much
> for simply QUIETLY not sending him any more mails."
>
> I hope everyone is seeing through the smokescreen here. I told
> you last spring after answering your questions about Urantia to
> feel free to ask again if any new questions pop up. Instead you
> kept silent and schemed in the background all these months. You
> showed people a document by Angie Durso as fuel for your agenda
> to discredit me and cause suspicion. When Elaine told you to
> discuss this with me and Frank, you refused saying it would be
> dangerous. You even stated to Elaine you had to find some way to
> take over the group. This is bizarre because people know me as a
> facilitator and not a power-hungry, turf-grabbing, ego-driven
> leader. As I've stated before, I've facilitated and contributed
> to
> everything you've wanted to do since you first presented the
> Money Masters 2 weeks in a row last May! I've dropped off
> materials to your apartment many, many times.
>
> Tom, I used to think that your concern about me and my past as a
> reader of the Urantia Book and participant in that community was
> sincere. It has become clear over the last several weeks that
> this is false. People have been telling you for weeks that my
> religion is my business and no concern to them. But you ambushed
> me twice on this in our public meetings. On Wed. the group told
> you to keep this out of our meetings. Yet at the end you brought
> it up again. You're simply on a mission and this is your wedge.
> Also, Frank Morales, who is in reality our gracious benefactor as
> provider of cherished meeting space for the last 18 months, told
> you weeks ago to drop this or else. Your response was that you
> question your leaders,
> including our group leaders. What is obvious to everyone is that
> you certainly haven't scrutinized Nico's actions, or Geo's
> actions, or Angie. For some strange reason, they've all gotten a
> free pass. They're to be trusted, while I'm to be prosecuted
> despite my total dedication to the cause of 9/11 truth and
> ongoing support of you. Pretty clear. Also, you're belligerent
> tone to Frank was inexcusable. To me, that alone was grounds for
> getting barred. As for Angie, I wonder if anyone in our group
> knows that you were attending meetings with her group last summer
> in which Nico participated. Yes, while we were working hard
> planning for the 5th anniversary you had attended these meetings
> and for some strange reason you never let on. I know you brought
> up the Urantia issue there. But you never asked any one of us
> with NY 911 Truth our opinion or experience of that group. I
> guess you didn't care
> to know.
>
> Furthermore, your highly charged opposition to my desire to
> mobilize people on legislative actions and impeachment is
> telling. There's a huge movement for impeachment including within
> the 9/11 truth movement. Webster Tarpley spoke in favor of
> impeachment at the recent events in Washington, DC. But you
> really don't want our movement in alliance with millions of
> others. Instead, you said to me recently that you'd trust me if I
> went after the NWO and forget the "puppets". Your attempt at
> manipulation by invalidating any approach other than embarking on
> a decades long, multi-million dollar project to go after a
> nebulous, deeply entrenched global power structure is telling. I
> see from a recent response to Natasha that your ideal goal is to
> do civil disobedience and have the police stand down which would
> then signal to the world that the ruling class has no power.
> While some
> may simply call this delusional, I'm saying it's calculated. This
> follows your comments I remember from a few months ago that you
> were looking at civil disobedience actions as the answer. It
> seems you have Luke thinking along the same lines because he's
> spoken to me of it. I just have to say that this looks like a
> classic provocateur move which has been going on since the
> sixties. An operative blends in with a group, get's their trust,
> get's several of them to become more radical than the others,
> instigates an illegal action of some type, then the force of law
> comes in and crashes the scene and the group gets entangled
> legally with some even doing jail time.
>
> It's clear that you have been working in tandem with Nico. The
> film from that crazy Sunday a few weeks ago is evidence. He's the
> overt operator, while you're the covert operator. Viewing this
> totally objectively, the signs
> are all there, Tom. Frank Morales, who has seen this pattern for
> decades has been watching this for months. Whether this is your
> true goal or not, I'm advising everyone that we're going to treat
> it as such because we must. You will not be allowed to undermine
> the hard work of this organizing that began long before you came
> along. You will not be allowed to undermine our sacred cause. You
> will not be allowed to divert our energy any longer, leading us
> down a futile, even dangerous path. You're out of here, plain and
> simple. No more presentations. Yesterday Frank laid down that
> law. I'm sure he will be communicating with the rest of the
> group. Next week Harvey Newman will be doing his presentation
> instead.
>
> I expect you to return our duplicator, placards, DVD blanks, and
> anything else you have belonging to the group. Either drop it off
> at the church or with your doorman and I will
> pick them up Sunday afternoon.
>
> If anyone feels that I've acted in an autocratic fashion, you
> will soon learn that this is not the case. It's not my style.
> There is widespread support which I have through many private
> conversations. Most importantly, we would not have gotten this
> far in NYC without the generosity of Frank Morales and it's a
> given that we have an obligation to respect his position, which I
> and most others happen to trust explicitly. We also have the
> support of Ralph Schoenman who is in the loop. The bottom line is
> - we have a historic opportunity before us and nothing can be
> allowed to derail that. We must achieve justice for 9/11 and what
> we do in the coming months will determine our success or failure.
> Future generations are counting on us. Therefore, Tom, your
> participation in our work is no longer welcome and you can take
> any other saboteurs with
> you.
> -----------------------
>
> Next is a message from Elaine from 1/21 with further evidence of
> your scheming.
>
> Ok, Tom,
>
> Your email below does not alleviate my concerns. I tried to tell
> you this on the phone.
>
> I will try to clarify my concerns about how this whole thing is
> being handled. I am not convinced that Les lied. He was taken by
> surprise and it could be true that he could not have recollected
> his involvement clearly, simply because it may not be a priority
> to him at this time.
>
> I think the first time I heard about Urantia was the night we did
> outreach at the
> public Library on 42nd St. I may have heard about it before then,
> but not much before. You had in your hands a folder containing
> many pages, opened to a picture of a group of people, one of whom
> was Les. You urged me to Google Urantia, which I did. I
> truthfully did not find as much objectionable material as I
> expected. I am not religious.
>
> You also told me that night you were going to take over the group
> somehow, but were not quite sure how.
>
> At some point I asked you if you could forward the article to me
> that I saw in your hands that night, and you did with the
> admonition, "Don't tell Les." I found that disturbing when you
> said that.
>
> I found it more disturbing when I finally got to read it, and
> realized how much of it was about Les. I could not understand why
> you did not take it directly to him, telling him that there were
> a lot of things in here that were disturbing, please address
> this. I said this to you. I also said it is disturbing that you
> are talking to other people and not to Les. I asked if you had
> talked to Frank, you said you had and Frank was sensitive (I
> think) and not to talk to him either. You also did not want to
> reveal the source, "to protect her privacy". I contacted her
> myself and she gave me her website.
>
> The night you told 2 other people you would give them this
> document I asked you how long you had had this and you told me
> about ten months. I was dismayed. I told you it was not healthy
> to hold on to something like this. I have said to you many times
> sunlight is the best disinfectant. You seem to
> want to control on whom the sun shines and when.
>
> If I understood you correctly, you wanted to ask Les about this
> in front of the group "and get an honest answer". I said it
> wasn't right to do that without showing this to him in person
> first, but I held off giving it to him because you didn't want me
> to. You said it would be dangerous to do that. Dangerous to whom,
> I wonder?
>
> The night you raised this issue, you asked if he was in any way
> involved with Urantia, yes or no. I was disappointed with that
> approach, because it seemed like a set up, like a prosecutor
> asking a witness.
>
> I think it would have served things better to ask "Would you mind
> telling us in what way you have been involved with Urantia?" It
> might
> have joggled his memory that way. In any case, I have sent the
> document to Les and to Ralph Schoenman and Mya Shone. I have
> spoken to Les about it and when he has a chance to read it, I've
> asked if I could go over it with him. I wanted you to be there,
> too, but you told me I was trying to arbitrate something I
> couldn't.
>
> I hope you have the best interests of 911 truth at heart. Control
> and secrecy don't engender trust. Why did you hold on to this
> document all this time? Why did you tell me not to tell Les? Why
> did you tell me not to talk to Frank? Why did you not share this
> with Les right off the bat?
>
> Am I entitled to ask questions, too? And I'd like to know who the
> coward was who called me a lying cunt on Bigstring. What lie am I
> guilty of?
>
> Elaine
>
> ---------------------
> Furthermore, NY911Truth has languished over the last several
> months while other areas of the country are leading in the
> movement doing things which we've been distracted from doing or
> have been blocked here. We're about to get back on track with a
> direct focus on 9/11 activism. A separate email will make this
> clear. While I surely regret that all of you have had to witness
> this whole episode, please understand I surely never asked for
> this either. For those who will want to be part of some exciting
> work, visit www.911initiative.org and www.vt911.org for more
> background on this project. Onward...
>
> Les
>
>
>
> At 05:34 PM 3/1/2007, Tom Foti wrote:
>
> (In case the text formatting is illegible, I am also sending this
> as an attachment.)
>
> I would like to discuss the bank account belonging to our group.
> From my understanding, the account was supposed to be set up as a
> joint account in the names of the people voted by the group to
> the banking committee (at the time, Les Jamieson and myself).
> And when Les called me to meet him at the bank to sign the
> papers, I believed we were opening a joint account that could be
> managed by mutual oversight, as well as that of the group as a
> whole.
>
> But this is not what transpired. Les Jamieson had an earlier
> appointment at the bank, and set up our group account as being
> 100% owned by Les Jamieson. This arrangement allows Les to do
> as he pleases with the account. Although I was voted on by the
> group to be on the account, Les took me
> off of it, with no vote or discussion by the group. At a recent
> meeting, Luke Rudkowski was also voted to be a signer on the
> account, and with no justification aside from his own whim, Les
> Jamieson is refusing to add Luke to the account.
>
> Most of the money in our account was raised from the success of
> the 5th anniversary weekend, which we all worked very hard on.
> Much of the turnout is directly due to the efforts of Luke, who
> was solely responsible for bringing Alex Jones and the Loose
> Change crew to New York.
>
> I suggest that we close the current account, and use the funds to
> begin another one that could be more responsibly and equitably
> managed by group members. I believe that Luke Rudkowski and
> myself should be justifiably among the signers, as we organize
> the street actions and need access to purchase materials such as
> flyers and blank
> DVDs.
>
> Hopefully we can address this issue effectively and completely at
> the next meeting, which should be scheduled for midweek next
> week.
>
> Thanks to all,
>
> Tom
>

Do Not Question? Re-Investigation.

2007-03-05T01:02:00.000-05:00

There were two congressional investigations of the Kennedy Assassination, both of which were cover-ups. I have no faith in the system, I believe we have to do an end-run around the system and just reach as many individuals as possible. Having said that, I think there is room in the movement for those who are working for an investigation. Let's not limit ourselves. Let's do everything, and work in many fronts.

Dianne L***** New York, NY

From Ryan, Top Street Activist and Intellect

2007-03-05T01:00:00.001-05:00

Tom is the only person out every week doing street actions aside from ground zero passing out literature and DVD's, street actions where certain other people were NOT ONCE to be found, but he's not about 911 truth. lol Good One

Strength in Divesity

2007-03-05T00:58:00.000-05:00

Globalization, the police state, New World Order, are not separate from 911. They are the background from which 911 emerged. I think it is appropriate to expose the role of the global elite in 911. I do not think that this will alienate people. Some people process 911 as just the government hiding the truth. Some people, myself among them, pretty much took in the 911/New World Order/Global Elite, as a whole picture almost at once. Some people, myself not among them, woke up to the larger picture before 911. Everyone process the info differently, and there is room for all of us in the movement, and in the group. Diversity is our strength.

Dianne

Dianne L***** New York, NY