The subject of this article is clearly stated at the start:.
"Architects & Engineers for 9/11Truth is under attack.
The source of these attacks is a collection of people who have been undermining the 9/11 Truth Movement for years. At the center of this cabal’s activities are deception and disinformation used to suppress the evidence that a plane crash was faked at the Pentagon. This is the very evidence that proves government complicity in 9/11.
Hmm… I wonder why they would want to neutralize that evidence…"
The fact is that this group of people don't think there was a faked plane crash at the Pentagon and have gone to very detailed lengths to demonstrate that fact. If these people believe there was not a faked plane crash at the Pentagon then the accusations against them of deception and disinformation and suppressing evidence are false accusations
No more video fakery, nukes, or no planes on this article! I'm going to start deleting comments and banning people. Some of you are determined to derail the comments on every article I do,
I know you are not a slanderer, nor an attacker, having spent over a year with you, faithfully, on Sunday conference calls re ReThink 9-11 CANADA - you ONLY WANT THE TRUTH - as do I
Sad to hear about all this nonsense.
Sandra, & Gene - much disappointment in. But they put it out there. The real deal, so to speak.
I will read your last bit, conclusion. Thanks for your in depth research and tenacity. Cheers
FROM THE EDITOR: Any comments about planes/no planes will be deleted. This is not the subject of the article. It's more than suspicious that every time I write something that mentions the Pentagon or AE911Truth, the discussion is hijacked by people pushing no planes. Stop or you'll be blocked!
What strikes home with me personally about this article Craig is the point you make about the one sided nature of Gene and Sandra's criticisms. It is true, I have never heard a word of condemnation from either of them directed at Chandler or Hoffman or any of the cabal really even though they have been particularly nasty toward CIT and those of us who know the pentagon evidence well. Double standard is putting it mildly.
The cold, hard truth of the matter is that both AE911Truth and its wannabe replacement IC911 are controlled opposition entities.
Now, to be clear, I don't mean to say that everybody involved in these things is insincere. I don't believe that to be the case. Quite possibly, the majority of grass roots activists are sincere. But regardless, these things are quite ineffective and it is surely by design.
As with any controlled opposition construct, the real purpose is to channel all the energy that should rightly go into uncovering the crime and exposing the perpetrators in directions that pose no threat to the criminals. What we see with AE911Truth is a totally singular obsession with controlled demolition and so on, yet zero investigation of other aspects of the crime. In particular, the whole question of video fakery seems to be off the table. So we are supposed to believe that these visuals of a plane just slicing into a steel-framed building are authentic videos.
So, rather than question the reality of the plane crashes (I mean in particular in Manhattan) they will espouse utterly convoluted theories. For example, they will acknowledge that passenger airliners cannot fly that fast at such a low altitude. Nor can they (obviously) slice through steel! But rather than going in the obvious direction of realizing that the plane crashes are almost certainly a hoax, they come up with really outlandish narratives. They will tell you that there were two sets of planes, the regular passenger planes that take off from the airports, and then there is a switcheroo where those planes are replaced with other planes that are flown into the buildings by remote control -- apparently those planes are capable of these feats of aviation that a stock Boeing airliner is not capable of.
In short, they just tie themselves up in knots. Not only is it difficult to imagine people sitting in some room thinking up such a Rube Goldberg machine kind of plot, but it is also hard to imagine winning over many people to believe in such a story! All the more so, when there is no actual proof of this outlandish theory!
But all of that is not a bug, it's a feature. The goal is impunity for the criminals and the main means of that is to run out the clock, so taking the investigation into these preposterous directions is how it is done.
Well, as regards this article, Craig, based on my own understanding of the 9/11 half-truth movement, it is very hard for me to get very excited about AE911Truth vs. IV911. Frankly, it seems akin to wanting me to get excited about WWE vs. WCW.
The subject of this article is clearly stated at the start:.
"Architects & Engineers for 9/11Truth is under attack.
The source of these attacks is a collection of people who have been undermining the 9/11 Truth Movement for years. At the center of this cabal’s activities are deception and disinformation used to suppress the evidence that a plane crash was faked at the Pentagon. This is the very evidence that proves government complicity in 9/11.
Hmm… I wonder why they would want to neutralize that evidence…"
The fact is that this group of people don't think there was a faked plane crash at the Pentagon and have gone to very detailed lengths to demonstrate that fact. If these people believe there was not a faked plane crash at the Pentagon then the accusations against them of deception and disinformation and suppressing evidence are false accusations
No more video fakery, nukes, or no planes on this article! I'm going to start deleting comments and banning people. Some of you are determined to derail the comments on every article I do,
Well done. Stay strong. Good job exposing the filth within the movement.
Great article, Craig
I know you are not a slanderer, nor an attacker, having spent over a year with you, faithfully, on Sunday conference calls re ReThink 9-11 CANADA - you ONLY WANT THE TRUTH - as do I
Sad to hear about all this nonsense.
Sandra, & Gene - much disappointment in. But they put it out there. The real deal, so to speak.
I will read your last bit, conclusion. Thanks for your in depth research and tenacity. Cheers
FROM THE EDITOR: Any comments about planes/no planes will be deleted. This is not the subject of the article. It's more than suspicious that every time I write something that mentions the Pentagon or AE911Truth, the discussion is hijacked by people pushing no planes. Stop or you'll be blocked!
Warring AGAINST free speech, open discourse and the truth of what really happened on 9/11
A War Room... Or a padded playroom, safe space?
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/cowards-for-911-truth
Ephesians 5:11 - Have nothing to do with the unfruitful deeds of darkness but expose them.
Galatians 4:16 - So have I become your enemy by telling you the truth?
What strikes home with me personally about this article Craig is the point you make about the one sided nature of Gene and Sandra's criticisms. It is true, I have never heard a word of condemnation from either of them directed at Chandler or Hoffman or any of the cabal really even though they have been particularly nasty toward CIT and those of us who know the pentagon evidence well. Double standard is putting it mildly.
The cold, hard truth of the matter is that both AE911Truth and its wannabe replacement IC911 are controlled opposition entities.
Now, to be clear, I don't mean to say that everybody involved in these things is insincere. I don't believe that to be the case. Quite possibly, the majority of grass roots activists are sincere. But regardless, these things are quite ineffective and it is surely by design.
As with any controlled opposition construct, the real purpose is to channel all the energy that should rightly go into uncovering the crime and exposing the perpetrators in directions that pose no threat to the criminals. What we see with AE911Truth is a totally singular obsession with controlled demolition and so on, yet zero investigation of other aspects of the crime. In particular, the whole question of video fakery seems to be off the table. So we are supposed to believe that these visuals of a plane just slicing into a steel-framed building are authentic videos.
So, rather than question the reality of the plane crashes (I mean in particular in Manhattan) they will espouse utterly convoluted theories. For example, they will acknowledge that passenger airliners cannot fly that fast at such a low altitude. Nor can they (obviously) slice through steel! But rather than going in the obvious direction of realizing that the plane crashes are almost certainly a hoax, they come up with really outlandish narratives. They will tell you that there were two sets of planes, the regular passenger planes that take off from the airports, and then there is a switcheroo where those planes are replaced with other planes that are flown into the buildings by remote control -- apparently those planes are capable of these feats of aviation that a stock Boeing airliner is not capable of.
In short, they just tie themselves up in knots. Not only is it difficult to imagine people sitting in some room thinking up such a Rube Goldberg machine kind of plot, but it is also hard to imagine winning over many people to believe in such a story! All the more so, when there is no actual proof of this outlandish theory!
But all of that is not a bug, it's a feature. The goal is impunity for the criminals and the main means of that is to run out the clock, so taking the investigation into these preposterous directions is how it is done.
Well, as regards this article, Craig, based on my own understanding of the 9/11 half-truth movement, it is very hard for me to get very excited about AE911Truth vs. IV911. Frankly, it seems akin to wanting me to get excited about WWE vs. WCW.