DRAFT VERSION #1 (Jonathan
Mark)
EXPLOSIVE EVIDENCE: A CALL FOR TRUTH OVER TREASON
I haven't received an advocacy argument
for this version from Jonathan, but I think the that the following
exchange may serve as a helpful introduction:
Question: As
the proposition (Explosive Evidence: A Call for Truth Over Treason)
stands, it references the evidence mentioned in the Feb. 24 minutes,
but essentially this is the same as the draft you have posted on 911
Blogger,
right? In other words, to vote yes on the proposal is to accept
your
draft version, right?
Answer from Jonathan Mark:
Yes
and No.. supporting the question I proposed would be to support general
campaigns
using such Misprision laws based on such specific evidence.. but it
would not
be limited to any individual's interpretation of the laws, or the
individual
expression of their free speech. That is independent of our vote.
However, as a
group, we are reasserting the accuracy of the evidence we examined, and
support
it as a basis to question and challenge the US government for acts that
could
be seen as treasonous or at the least, a felony crime, which is still
happening
by a cover-up and using a false rationale to justify invading and
occupying
other nations. This general campaign is an attempt to include the
anti-war activists with a
direct action that goes to the root of the administrations'
justification for
the wars.. based on science and evidence. That is the substance that we
would
be supporting.. not individual actions using the basis of fact from
independent
research and observation.
Explosive Evidence: A Call for Truth Over Treason