Recently, I forwarded a link for 9/11: Press for Truth to a number of people on my mailing list. One of these people forwarded the link to HIS mailing list, which I'm on. So I thought this was great because he's someone I haven't ever communicated with regarding 9/11 truth. Then, last night, he sent out to his same mailing list the link to the Michael Shermer hit-piece in Scientific American along with that video link where Shermer is interviewed on C-SPAN. Not knowing whether my friend jumped over to the other side, or whether he just wanted to be "fair and balanced," I decided to respond with a letter. Here it is:

Dear ______,

That article by Michael Shermer really wasn't a response to 9/11: Press for Truth (as your message subject indicates) -- it was a hit piece about 9/11 conspiracies -- and, there's no mention of the film in that article.

Press for Truth is NOT a film about "conspiracy theories," but instead delves into the unanswered questions of the family members of the victims, the facts about the 9/11 Commission that many people don't know, and the established but marginalized media reports about the involvement of the Pakistani ISI (intelligence service). The film features interviews with Paul Thompson, the author of the comprehensive timeline of 9/11 http://cooperativeresearch.org -- a man who few people (except the uninformed) would call a "conspiracy theorist." The point of Press for Truth is to establish a clear case as to why we need a new investigation into what happened on 9/11.

There are plenty of people on both sides of the 9/11 debate, but polls clearly show that the government's own unproven conspiracy theory is losing ground and more and more people are waking up to the lies and are asking questions. Lately, there have been a number of hit pieces (like this one by Shermer) coinciding with the 5-year anniversary. But there are also more and more prominent people on board the 9/11 truth movement who are speaking out as well. These people are not "conspiracy theorists" in the derogatory sense of that phrase -- a term used to stigmatize people and cut off debate. Also, it should be noted that these people are from all sides of the ideological spectrum. They're individuals who believe we haven't been told the whole truth by a government that lies about just about everything under the sun. They believe it's patriotic to question the government. I'm one of them.

Paul Craig Roberts, a conservative, is now part of the truth movement. Here's his latest essay, but he has quite a few others on 9/11 published over the last month or two, available at informationclearinghouse.info :

Where is the Evidence?

by Paul Craig Roberts

http://informationclearinghouse.info/article14963.htm

 

If you are new to the 9/11 truth movement and are confused or want to know more, I'll be happy to lead you in the right direction. Just ask. There's a lot of disinformation out there to weed through. The main point to understand is that this is NOT a movement of fringe lunatics as many would have you believe.

A great place to start for an overview of 9/11 is truthmove.org. Here's their 9/11 page -- use the menu on the lefthand side of the page for six sub-pages on 9/11. The authors have done an excellent job, in my opinion, in prioritizing the issues and stating them in a cogent and rational way. The site also includes many other important issues. I hope you'll take the time to learn more.

http://truthmove.org/insight/911.html

Best wishes!

CK