Dear Patricia,

With all due respect... and I truly mean that, because we all respect you. You have fought a fight none of us can begin to imagine, and you've exhibited nothing but courage, heart, and strength. You are the reason that many of us have been fighting for 9/11 Truth for so long. It starts with the victims, and their families.

But I can't let this recent letter pass, for this very reason: Truth matters. All truth.

The only thing that determines whether "these voices" (those in the 9/11 War Room clip that was being referred to) are acting in good faith is their own sincere conviction. Nobody can, or should, be the judge of what is in another's heart. We may not all agree on the details, but those are not a measuring stick of good faith.

If the talking points haven't changed, it's because the evidence still stands for those of us who have concluded that controlled demolition brought down the towers. If anything, this reinforces the original hypothesis as it has stood the test of time and been validated by eventual studies such as the UAF's.

How does one define "progress" though? 

Have we obtained justice? Have any real perpetrators been held accountable? Have the history books been re-written? 

No. None of those things.

But those aren't the only parameters.

Whereas only a small percentage of the population doubted the official story in the early years, well over half now have questions. 9/11 is no longer being relegated to being conspiratorial, it has become mainstream, and that's significant.

We have gone from being ridiculed to now having some of the strongest voices in independent media asking questions, and loudly so. From Tucker to Morris, Candace to Kim Iverson, Dore to Brett Weinstein - the impact of their words cannot be underestimated. They have normalized asking questions, and have become instrumental in reaching people who look to them for their no-nonsense reporting.

We've also gotten Ron Johnson's attention. Where this leads is yet unknown, but even just a year ago it would have been inconceivable to get any Congressperson's attention, let alone a sitting Senator. Richard was instrumental in making that happen.

There have been many other success stories along the way, but they are not the focus of what I want to communicate.

I want to dispel any kind of insinuation that certain individuals are doing this for some kind of financial gain. Most of us in the movement are not "unsuspecting supporters", we donate because it's the one thing that we can do, and we're unbelievably grateful to people like Richard who actually walk the walk and make things happen. Most of us have neither the tools, nor the know-how, nor, frankly, the necessary unrelenting drive of the handful that never stop.

To hear Richard get accused of living some kind of lavish lifestyle is infuriating. I've seen him struggle to make the next mortgage payment. Unable to make a $100 money transfer. Grateful for having been invited to a restaurant when things were tight. He and Gail have had roommates for years now just to ease the burden of their monthly costs.

This is not someone who is taking advantage. On the contrary - he could have had a nice, cushy life as an architect, and retired in comfort and with financial security. All he had to do was say yes to the employment offers he received,especially after AE dismissed him.

And we would have all been worse off.

I doubt that Judy Wood has donated all the proceeds from her book so as to not profit off 9/11, but her Qui Tam case is where I truly struggle. Had she been able to proceed and won the case, she would have been awarded 15-30% of the final settlement. She, personally. To add insult to injury, the remaining 70-85% would have gone to NIST, or the government more generally. The very department we all agree knowingly submitted a false report. The very government that pulled off 9/11 and killed 3,000 of its own people. (The point of a Qui Tam case, by the way, is to prove intentional fraud or abuse on the part of a contractor, which she didn't have and why the case was thrown out. The Lawyers' Committee lawsuit was in fact about the physical evidence but was refused by the Supreme Court because it claimed the plaintiffs didn't have standing.)

Dr Morgan Reynolds' Qui Tam case? Ditto.

What about the lawyers in the Kreindler case? The Motley Rice one? Are they profiting?

Even Norman asks his readers at the end of his Substack articles to donate to him via his paypal account. Is he profiting? 

As for the evidence, while it's true that we don't allow a lot of room for discussions on mechanisms we have trouble getting behind, we don't focus our energy on throwing people we disagree with under the bus, engaging in vulgarity, mockery, or other demeaning tactics. We also don't prop up a vulnerable victim's family member as the poster child and milk her support for our own gain.

And for what it's worth - the criticism towards those who support controlled demolition for not wanting to get behind alternate types of energy is equally applicable to those who support the latter. We're all guilty of that.

Still, all things being equal, and considering that none of us can prove our theories beyond a reasonable doubt because we're still missing information, one cannot lose sight of the fact that even controlled demolition and the physics that support it are a hard sell to those who are stuck in their cognitive dissonance. If you truly care about progress, consider the harm that is being done by invoking directed energy weapons. We have enough trouble being taken seriously as it is. Even if I supported DEWs, I would make sure to keep that on the downlow, if only as a purely tactical strategy to avoid complete self-sabotage.

So those are my thoughts, Patti. It's been painful watching you come so hard at people who have dedicated their lives to making this one right. Gene has spent an easy $100,000 over time on 9/11. He's been in New York for the anniversary every year since 2017, except when we had our conference in DC last year. He has stood alone on the street corner with a bullhorn, shouting out the most critical information for hours on end. He has written hundreds of letters, made and given out posters and stickers and pamphlets and DVDs. We have a FOIA going for the Pentagon. We do 9/11 every. single. day. Outside of our full-time jobs. And maybe, had not so much money gone into 9/11, we could have bought a decent house. Instead, we're living in a fixer upper that needs so much work we don't know where to start, especially with 9/11 taking up so much of our time. But it's a choice we make, and we can make our peace with it. We'll figure things out, somehow. 

We're surrounded by people with beautiful hearts who want nothing more than justice, and I feel protective of them and the way they're being portrayed. People who, unlike you, were not personally affected by 9/11, but who simply felt compelled to do what they could to right a wrong. Out of principle.

So that's all I wanted to say. You may, and likely will, continue to experience and express these negative feelings towards a different set of advocates in the Truth Movement, but it won't be because I didn't try to reach across the aisle.

With sincerest respect,

Sandra