ResearchGuy's blog

“Debating” What Hit the Pentagon by Exaggeration, Namecalling, and Threats

Gregg Roberts

Published January 8, 2011

“The most perfidious way of harming a cause consists of defending it deliberately with faulty arguments.”

        Friedrich Nietzsche, The Gay Science, section 191

        German philosopher (1844 - 1900)

This article is a response to “Is Leading 9/11 Truth Site Working For The Other Side?”, credited to “staff writers” at the Rock Creek Free Press, November 2010 edition, available at:

http://www.rockcreekfreepress.com/CreekV4No11-Web.pdf

The “leading 9/11 Truth site” being referred to is 911Blogger.com. The authors of the article critiqued here chose to remain anonymous, and the article’s title doesn’t lend itself to an easily pronounceable acronym. Therefore I will refer to the article’s authors, along with their vocal message board sympathizers and Barrie Zwicker, as The Complainers. We will abbreviate Citizen Investigation Team as “CIT” and their video National Security Alert as “NSA” (noting the irony).

Where Are the 9/11 Whistleblowers?

A common objection to the idea that 9/11 was an inside job is that hundreds, if not thousands, of people would have to have been involved. "Someone would have talked ... and we would have all heard know about it if they did." Although this objection sounds sophisticated, it is completely uninformed on several counts. And yet, most people who have stated this objection find it so compelling that they cut off the discussion at that point. So I decided to look at the objection more closely and write a paper about it.

To support my ongoing research, I am asking $9.50 for the essay. It comes with both a money-back guarantee and a free upgrade to the second edition when it's ready.

Please visit http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/roberts/index.html for a more extensive description of the essay and how to order it.

Gregg Roberts
Associate Editor
http://911research.wtc7.net
http://wtc7.net
http://911review.com