The Politics of 9/11: The activists who claim to speak for the families are not politically neutral.

The Wall Street Journal Opinion Journal ^ | March 10, 2003 | Editorial

[quidnunc]

Has anyone else out there begun to wonder just who these 9/11 "families" are that have been interviewed without end the past week about their "outrage" over President Bush's TV ads with a quick clip of September 11? Are they all neutral innocents, as depicted, or are they part of an organized anti-Bush opposition?

It seems to us that the media that gives these folks so much free face time and column inches might push the story a bit further to help viewers and readers put this dispute in context. Alas, what a little pushing of our own unearths is that far from disinterested parties, the activists who claim to speak for all 9/11 families are in fact subsidiaries of established anti-Bush forces — political entities committed to defeating the President this fall. We guess transparency only applies to the business world.

Consider the benignly named September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows. The group has been loudly protesting Mr. Bush's ads, organizing a rally for "victims' families and firefighters" to condemn the President's "offensive exploitation" of September 11. Peaceful Tomorrows says its goal is to "turn our grief into action for peace." In the Washington Post's coverage this group is "nonpartisan." If so, nonpartisan has lost its meaning.

One of Peaceful Tomorrows' founders is David Potorti. Mr. Potorti used to write for a left-leaning weekly in North Carolina, railing against faith-based initiatives, companies without unions and the "gaping inequities" in America. Within three months of losing a brother on September 11, he was protesting the war on terror in a peace march sponsored by Voices in the Wilderness, whose founder, Kathy Kelly, was recently sentenced to three months in prison for breaking onto an army installation. That's where Mr. Potorti fell in with folks such as Kelly Campbell, a 9/11 family member and "environmental campaign coordinator." Out of this emerged Peaceful Tomorrows.

The group was immediately welcomed into the Democratic network of money and support. Peaceful Tomorrows is a "project" of the leftist Tides Center. The Center provides back-office services to ideologically acceptable "charitable" organizations for a fee. The Center receives generous financial assistance from liberal foundations, including various Heinz family endowments. The chairman of at least one of those endowments is Teresa Heinz, wife of Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry.

-snip-

[zarf]

Ahhh, the story finally hits the editorial page of a broadsheet that gets more than 10 readers...

[doug from upland]

This is great. I spoke to a major Wall Street Journal reporter about this yesterday. This did the story. This is growing and growing.

[doug from upland]

They did the story. The NY POST did the story. It is starting to hit. USA TODAY claimed they are investigating.

[Deb]

But it's only online. It wasn't in todays copy of the WSJ.

[LdSentinal]

It says March 10, 2004. It hits the paper today.

[Drango]

Good job Doug. Yo've pulled more than your own weight on this issue. Kudos!

[Burkeman1]

No- there couldn't possibly be some moderate to conservative Republicans among them since not one shred of WMD evidence has come through that justified their sons lives? Lets sleep now shall we?

[doug from upland]

Thanks, Drango. I will be gone much of tomorrow on business, but I am going to put up a post to go after the major networks and shame them into doing the story.

[Deb]

Yes, I know, but the WSJ "Opinion Journal" is their online only editorial feature. I hope it runs tomorrow in the hard copies. The rebuttal to these political agony aunts has been slow and weak in coming.

[Jewels1091]

Brit had it on his show tonight too....the majors still won't touch it nor will any reporter ask Kerry about it.

[quidnunc]

Deb wrote: Yes, I know, but the WSJ "Opinion Journal" is their online only editorial feature. I hope it runs tomorrow in the hard copies. The rebuttal to these political agony aunts has been slow and weak in coming.

This is the lead editorial and I believe it will run in the dead-tree edition tomorrow.

I'm not sure that the on-line edition has much, if any, exclusive content.

Often especially auspicious articles from the d-t edition are run on-line on the weekends.

[Burkeman1]

No.

[Waco]

Alright now, everyone knows that only those present when Pearl Harbor was attacked may talk about it. Forget visiting the memorial,,,Hawaii doesn't need the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$, anyway. Hic

[Burkeman1]

WSJ matters not. Follow the leader.

[Burkeman1]

And?

[CWOJackson]

"...the majors still won't touch it nor..."

I think "still" is a good choice of words. One of the interesting things about the media is how they are literally like sharks...once a frenzy starts they just can't help themselves. For example look what started out on Drudge (who's Drudge) concerning a President they worshiped.

If this start growing legs they will all rush in for their mouth full.

[Fun Bob]

So far only editorials. No news pieces. This needs to be in the news pages.

miserable failure miserable failure miserable failure miserable failure war criminal

[Burkeman1]

"President they Worship"- CWO you are not all useless.

[Spruce]

I am a 9-11 family member. I did not lose anyone I knew in the attacks. I don't even live in NY.
September 11 used to be my first-born daughter's birthday. In fact 2001 was her 16th birthday. She now serves proudly in the United States Air Force, kicking-ass at the DLI. I dare anyone to tell me I am not a "9-11 Family".

We are being steadily worn-down by our enemies and my family refuses to yield.