Hill's theory was that in running for office he had to be given equal media airtime, during which he talked about the government's involvement in 9/11.. interesting idea i thought.

The Green party never does any good, but thats a damn good idea for getting the truth out...

Interesting:

http://odeo.com/audio/180242/view

VERY slow download, VERY MUCH worth the wait to hear Craig Hill say how the Pentagon non-757 evidence "cuts through the lie in LIHOP" ("the kinder, gentler version of 9/11 half-truth"), which he then called "disinformation". He also said that "LIHOP does the work of Bush." And "LIHOPers dissuade us, from within, from using this undeniable visual evidence."

He is SOOOOOOOOOOOOO right.

He said to ignore the LIHOPers.

I think he was talking about David Kubiak (911truth.org +). Plus Kyle Hence and John Judge (911citizenwatch.org +).

Then Bowman suddenly appears and says "we can't be exclusive, and have purity checks", yet that is exactly, precisely what our false-friend gatekeepers-of-the-911-evidence at 911truth.org and 911citizenswatch.org have been doing for a looooong time already!!!!!!!! (Too bad Bowman didn't tell his gatekeeping half-truth pals that a loooooong time ago. Those gatekeeping traitors to 911 truth omit all mention of many 911 sites, and the Naudet video evidence, and the government's own Pentagon Video Frame evidence, just to name a few egregious examples of their disreputable evidence suppression and ugly censorship tactics -- tactics that all just, "coincidentally", work in favor of BushCo). Bowman, unlike Hill who gave specific logic-based examples, merely spread vague fear (of being "discredited") and mistrust (of "plants from the other side" and "extreme theories"), based upon nothing whatsoever. (That's basically just a form of the same unacceptable fear-instilling 'self'-limiting, 'self'-censoring "advice" we've been getting from Mike Ruppert and Mark Robinowitz and Sander Hicks and Michael Rivero and all their LIHOP pals.) Then he suggests "we stop this stuff". What a full-fledged hypocrite Bowman turned out to be, eh?

Thanks a lot, dz! It's just a shame that you felt compelled to offset Hill's clear, evidence-based, visionary statements with Bowman's disinfo-loving ("it doesn't make any difference" limited-hangout) BS.

(IMHO, "glance at it, and move on", is awfully darn close to the gatekeepers' main patter of, "there's nothing to see here, citizen; move along".)

Glance at it and move on means if you don't like the message, don't worry about it, carry on about your business.

Isn't that the goal of the disinfo agent? To distract us, the prevent us from spreading the truth?

If you don't like someone else's methods, who cares, just go about your own business. Don't take your eye off the ball for anyone.