|
In Reply to: THE LATEST!!! (reposted from movingon) posted by susie on January 14, 2005 at 19:32:06:
In order of appearance the Family's lines of defences are:
(1.) In their first notice Peter claimed their innocence & hinted that bitter exmembers should search their hearts for contributing to Ricky's anger. This accusationhas now been expanded to a major defense. The above letter quotes strong emotional statements from MovingOn participants to try to build their case & openly blame exers for instigating Ricky.
(2.) They deny that Angela Smith (Sue) was a member of the Family at the time. Apparently she conveniently quit just a month earlier, which sounds suspicious, but whatever. The Family was a bit confused about what to say at first with Clara Borowick contradicting Peter, but now seem determined to distance themselves from Sue. This line of defense has built-in difficulties, which I will not expound on so as not to give the Family any ideas. It's easy to connect the dots to prove the connections.
(3.) Clara Borowick's letter to the media said that respected sociologists & academics have given the Family a clean bill of health. Peter also said that this is something the media has not received so far. Hint: they will make a major push to get out published academic 'clean bills of health' & get academics who are in bed with them to speak up for them. Mark who these academics are, get their e-mail addresses & flood them with the truth.
My guess is when Ricky's video comes out much of their primpary lines of defense will be abandoned.
