criticize "Truth Seekers"?
by Eric Hufschmid
Dividing or Cleaning?
Hundreds of people in the so-called "9/11 movement" are accusing one another of lying. For example:
Are these accusations dividing and
weakening the 9-11 truth movement? Or are they making the 9-11 movement
more effective? How do we determine whose accusations are helping us, and
whose are hurting us?
Insults are bad;
It is true that when members of a group fight among themselves, they become less effective. However, is also true that a group must clean itself of incompetent leaders and criminals.
Therefore, we need to distinguish between the disruptive fighting that can weaken a group, and the beneficial fighting that cleanses an organization of its incompetence and criminal activity.
If the fighting involves nothing more than insults, it is usually disruptive. Insults are sometimes useful, however, because they can act like a slap in the face to force a person to look at an issue differently.
If the fighting involves serious analyses of behavior, by comparison,
it is usually helpful because it can identify the incompetent or corrupt
leaders. Not surprisingly, crummy leaders will try to suppress analyses
Insults and Analyses
Examples of insults
Why we investigating 9/11?
The purpose of investigating a crime is to understand what happened and figure out who is responsible. There is rarely "proof" that somebody is involved in a crime. Usually there is only evidence that a person is connected to a crime.
We don't have proof that anybody was involved with 9/11, but we have a lot of evidence that Zionists were the primary group responsible. And there is a lot of evidence that most of the 9/11 investigators are part of the Zionist crime network.
When I make accusations that the 9/11 investigators are Zionist criminals,
I'm not insulting those people, and I'm not dividing the "9/11 truth movement".
Rather, I am doing what a crime investigator is supposed to do; namely,
investigate the crime, and expose the criminals.
Is there a "9-11 movement"?
I don't worry about disrupting the 9/11 movement because I don't see any 9-11 movement. Instead, I see two categories of 9-11 activists:
1) Individual citizens who work on their ownThere are thousands of citizens who operate independently of one another. These people spread information about 9-11 and other crimes to their friends and relatives.
2) OrganizationsExample are 911truth.org, MoveOn.org, and Veterans for Peace. The members of these groups work together under the guidance of leaders.
When can we criticize a person?
When is it acceptable to complain about a person's life and personality?
I would say that when somebody is trying to be a leader, his personality and life become important. Schwarz wanted to be president of United States in 2008. He wanted to pass judgment on how we live, how our economy will operate, and which nation deserves a bombing. I say we are justified to investigage Schwarz in order to determine what type of a mind and personality he has. If Schwarz doesn't like the intense scrutiny, then he should stop trying to get control of our lives.
If our ancestors had set higher standards for their leaders, and if
they had looked more closer at their political candidates, our nation would
be in better shape today.
When I complain about the leadership in the 9-11 movement, the peace movement, the labor unions, the school system, the corporations, and our government, I hear endless excuses.
Both the Republicans and the Democrats have dozens of excuses for their crummy leaders; the members of the MoveOn organization have excuses for their incompetent leadership; and the members of the Veterans For Peace have excuses for their crummy leadership.
We are not dividing the nation when we stand up to our leaders. Rather, we are cleaning our house of incompetence and corruption. We are exposing the crummy leaders and criminals.
For for information on deception:
If you know the names Lisa Pease, Jenna Orkin, you might like this:
Why they are so desperate to shift blame to Arabs:
About Crypto Zionists: