Tag Archives: David Chandler

Pentagon fraud: Coste, Chandler deceive about England claims: Part 2

While Coste and Chandler claim it was the small piece at the far left of the frame that England was saying hit his cab, CIT video proves it was not.

They push 757 impact by falsely stating England never claimed long end of pole hit his cab: but he did – on camera!

April 28, 2019

This is the second of a two-part report on the Lloyde England story. I would strongly recommend reading Part 1 (which offers a detailed analysis of why England’s story simply does not stand up to scrutiny) before reading this article. In Part 2, I look at the attempts by a small group within the Truth Movement to con us into believing that the England story is entirely true and that it supports a large plane impact with the Pentagon.

Apparently [CIT] forgot to ask the key question(s): “Lloyd, [sic] how long was the pole?  Give us an estimate.  How long was the pole?  Can you estimate that in feet?  – Wayne Coste on the listserv of the 9/11 and Other Deep State Crimes Teleconference, Jan. 6, 2017

How long do you think the pole was, approximately? – CIT’s Craig Ranke to England in Lloyde England and His Taxicab: The Eye of the Storm, 2008

I’d say the pole was 30 to 40 foot long. – Lloyde England, responding to Ranke

It was about 40 foot long. – Lloyde England to Jeff Hill, 2010

By Craig McKee

In their continuing mission to convince the 9/11 Truth Movement that the U.S. government is telling the truth about a 757 hitting the Pentagon, Wayne Coste and David Chandler are grossly and deliberately misrepresenting key parts of two interviews that taxi driver Lloyde England gave to Citizen Continue reading

Why I choose to stand up to the most persistent threat to 9/11 truth

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

Why do we tolerate a ‘truther’ cabal that constantly props up almost all of the 9/11 Pentagon official story?


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

9/11 truthers must focus on destroying the official story, not splintering over dozens of theories

We must also resist those in our movement who want us to accept more and more of the official account

May 1, 2017

By Craig McKee

It’s a question you would think we would have answered long ago: How can we collectively pull the truth out of 9/11 if we are pulling in different directions?
As determined and sincere truth seekers, we continue to do what we can to open the eyes of people everywhere to the fact that they have been lied to about 9/11. But to be successful, we must also explain what those lies are. In other words, we have to show how the official story of this world-changing event cannot be true.
This raises another crucial question: does the 9/11 Truth Movement have a strong and coherent message—one that is understandable and potentially Continue reading

Jenkins misleads by linking Pentagon plane impact theory to AE911Truth

Jenkins cut Pentagon section out of September 11: The New Pearl Harbor without permission.

October 19, 2015

By Craig McKee

In my last post, I deconstructed David Chandler’s very disturbing Pentagon presentation at last month’s 9/11 Truth Film Festival in Oakland, CA. But as troubling as his reinforcement of most of the official story was, it wasn’t the only talk at the festival given by a member of his “Team” of researchers.
Festival organizer Ken Jenkins—who along with Chandler wants the rest of the Truth Movement to believe a large plane actually hit the Pentagon as the official story claims—tried in his brief Continue reading

Fear of ‘ridicule’ leads to damaging partition of 9/11 Truth movement

According to Chandler and Romanoff, Gage and Ryan should have passed up this audience.


 
By Craig McKee
The 9/11 Truth movement is fighting a war – but it’s only wounding itself.
Self-appointed “credibility cops” have made it their mission to act as antibodies in the Truth movement’s immune system, seeking out and destroying harmful ideas, individuals, and alliances they think threaten the survival of the host. The idea is to rid the movement of any area of research that might contaminate it and invite public ridicule.
But is the cure worse than the disease?
The exaggerated need to control all aspects of the message is working against us. We have become so Continue reading

‘Propaganda team’ uses contrived Pentagon fight to derail 9/11 Truth movement

Ryan, Chandler, Legge and the rest would have us believe this is a picture of a plane crash.


May 21, 2012

By Craig McKee

It has been a very good year for the small but relentless group that wants evidence of a faked plane crash at the Pentagon on 9/11 taken off the table.
The group has scored a series of victories in recent months that have hurt the Truth movement and created a “lowest-common-denominator” approach to evidence and to building the case against the official story.
The clique in question includes Kevin Ryan, David Chandler, Jonathan Cole, Frank Legge, Jim Hoffman, Victoria Ashley, Chris Sarns, Justin Keogh, Michael Wolsey, Gregg Roberts, Erik Larson, and several others who have become “respectable” members of the movement (we know they are because they regularly endorse each other and cite each other’s “research”).
For a decade, we’ve seen an orchestrated and determined effort by this small clique to steer the 9/11 Truth Continue reading

Truth and consensus: jury still out on Griffin's new 9/11 expert panel

By Craig McKee

Maybe we should start calling it the 9/11 Consensus Movement.
Recent developments in the struggle to widely expose the truth about the fake “terrorist attacks” of Sept. 11, 2001 have focused on apparent efforts to overcome divisions between different factions in the movement. Ironically, these attempts at consensus have themselves been highly controversial.
The latest, and possibly most consequential, move towards consensus is the creation of a collection of experts in a panel called “Consensus 911: The 9/11 Best Evidence Panel.”
The group, announced in September, was put together by prolific 9/11 researcher and author David Ray Continue reading