A 9/11 mystery: why a minority of truthers want to claim that this is the scene of plane crash.
‘Propaganda team’ uses deceptive spin and private pressure to attack evidence that no 757 hit the Pentagon
If you do good, people will accuse you of selfish ulterior motives. Do good anyway. The biggest people with the biggest ideas can be shot down by the smallest people with the smallest minds. Think big anyway. Give the world the best you have and you’ll be kicked in the teeth. Give the world the best you have anyway. – Selected lines from Anyway by Kent M. Keith
February 13, 2019
By Craig McKee
Usually the discussion is about how 9/11 was done. Or why it was done. Or who did it.
But we in the 9/11 Truth Movement don’t talk as much about why we choose to fight for truth in the way we do. Which elements do we focus on? Which do we stay away from? Do we take a dry academic approach or that of a passionate activist or journalist? Do we advocate for theories that we can’t prove or do we focus on proving the official story false? And how far do we dare go in condemning actions by “respectable” researchers who we think are undermining what we’re trying to accomplish?
The answers to these questions depend on who we are, what we have learned, and how open we are to seeing through subtle and not-so-subtle attempts to deceive us. This is why I am writing this article – to offer some insight into the reasons for the choices I have made – and the ones I continue to make.Continue reading →
England says it was the “long end” of the pole, the part attached to the ground, that penetrated his cab. Coste says it wasn’t this pole at all but the top of another pole.
So much is false in the Pentagon story – why would some ‘truthers’ spend years describing what they think is true?
September 4, 2018
By Craig McKee
What would you think if a group of truth activists, known for other areas of 9/11 research, turned their attention to writing papers, making videos, giving talks, and doing interviews telling us all the ways they thought NIST’s analysis of the World Trade Center destruction was correct?
What if they almost never questioned NIST’s findings but instead did everything they could to undermine any challenges to NIST from members of the Truth Movement? What if they told us they did this to keep the movement from losing credibility, to keep us from looking like crazy conspiracy theorists with wild ideas about Continue reading →
While the wing of the Navy Annex where Hemphill watched the plane has been torn down, this image shows approximately where he was when he saw what he describes as the plane flying over the Annex and the Citgo gas station.
December 29, 2017
He claims CIT’s ‘entire process’ is invalidated because of one interview – and he gets that spectacularly wrong
“Okay, well that makes, you know, I mean I don’t know it just makes whatever you say, like any, I don’t know how to say it, I guess that makes it, I don’t even know what to say, like from what you’re saying it could easily have hit the light poles and smashed into the Pentagon from where you saw it.” –CIT opponent Jeff Hill, who receives gushing praise from Chandler, helping Albert Hemphill “clarify” what he saw on 9/11
By Craig McKee
Much of the supposed “division” about what happened at the Pentagon on 9/11 involves research carried out by Citizen Investigation Team – or, more to the point, attacks on that research.
Some say this is because the research itself is “controversial.” But, by and large, for more than a decade now, it is the attacks on CIT that generate the controversy. The attackers then decry this result as being responsible for splitting the 9/11 Truth Movement.
David Chandler’s latest unwarranted assault on CIT illustrates this scenario and process. The article, called “Why the CIT Analysis of the Pentagon Event on 9/11 Should Be Rejected Continue reading →
While this graphic, including a composite image of the damaged Pentagon wall, isn’t precise, it does convey just how unbelievable it is that a 757 with a 124-foot wingspan could have entered the building without leaving some large pieces of wreckage outside.
December 11, 2017
Join more than 800 from 50 countries and six continents (so far) who are stating that no 757 impact happened
(The list appears immediately below this article)
Those adding their names to the list below do so because they support a simple statement: No 757 hit the Pentagon on 9/11. Nothing more, nothing less. It doesn’t matter which theory or theories they support, just that they can stand behind this fundamental position. They are not being asked to endorse anything in my article, which is simply an introduction to the list. The article reflects my personal views and no one else’s.–CM
By Craig McKee
It has been more than 16 years since 9/11, and no issue has done more to slow progress and inhibit unity in the fight to spread the truth than the Pentagon. Some think this is a reason to run from it. A few have written papers assuring us that the government’s impact scenario is essentially correct. While others have remained true to the conviction that there is one statement that best describes both the evidence and the position of the vast majority of truth activists:
“No 757 hit the Pentagon on 9/11.”
We generally agree, and yet we have appeared divided for all Continue reading →