Hydro , your entire post is spot on , and I wanted to expand on this one part of it a bit if I may ;

It appears to be very easily provable that the AMA has been telling us members to continue "doing as we've always done" even as the FAA has repeatedly said otherwise , it's in the AMA Emails we get and I've saved every one of them . The FAA has also made it's position very clear , stay under 400 feet in controlled airspace . Does this not open up the AMA to legal liability should the unthinkable happen (AMA member's model airplane VS Full Scale crash above 400 feet) ?

Scenario ; Unthinkable accident happens , and the model airplane pilot presents as his defense that his representative organization , you know , the one who is presently the only one who is recognized to represent our hobby to the FAA , has repeatedly stated to the membership to "do as we have always done" , leading that model airplane pilot to believe he was perfectly legal to be at the 800 foot height where the incident happened . How could the AMA not be seen as contributing to the cause of the disaster when it can be proven that it has engaged in a campaign of deliberate misinformation to it's members regarding the FAA's altitude requirement for a 400 foot hard limit in controlled airspace ?

When bad things happen , the Lawyers ALWAYS go after the "deep pockets" in lawsuits seeking monetary reimbursement . In my above scenario I believe the AMA very well could be held liable right alongside the model aircraft pilot , due to the fact that it can be proven the AMA has held fast to the "fly as you always have" mantra even as the FAA has made it perfectly clear that 400 feet in controlled airspace is now the law of the land . At what point does the AMA loose the benefit of the doubt between an unintentional misinterpretation of the FAA's rules VS a deliberate campaign of misinformation designed to placate the membership to keep the membership dollars flowing in ?