CD

Bridging the Psychological Gap

This is an entry from my personal blog: murderformoney.wordpress.com. (Do not be alarmed, it is not entirely dedicated to 9/11, however, that was my impetus). After reading Phil Mole's article in http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/06-09-11/ , I felt compelled to fill in the gaps of Mole's piece.

Skeptics and Conspiracies

There is no consensus among skeptics, except by accident. And typically for different reasons. Skeptics are my people. I understand them. A real skeptic is not afraid to question authority, nor does a skeptic oppose an idea because it originates from an authority. Skeptics are professional doubters–not inclined to a supposition until reasons can substantiate it. It is the analysis of these reasons that sets critical thinkers apart from the advertising-prone masses.

Which is why it pains me to see skeptics defending the official narrative of the WTC collapses without turning a critical eye on the details at its core. There are plenty of reasons to be skeptical of “truther” theories concerning the various aspects, and let me be clear: several non-official theories are far more outlandish than the official story. For instance:

Forget NP, forget CD.. It's time to start summarizing the most concrete 9/11 evidence for mainstream consumption

Recent political developments due to the midterm elections are cause for concern to the 9/11 Truth Movement, and it is a good time to rethink strategies for the manner of communicating the most relevant information. This article details the importance of effectively summarizing information for potential newcomers to the movement, as well as explaining why it is not a good idea to focus on controlled demolition and no plane theories.

Time to Summarize the Most Concrete Evidence

Following is a list of topics which could be considered to have concrete evidence of government involvement in the 9/11 attacks, relying mainly on declassified documents, mainstream media reports, as well as audio and video testimony by key individuals...

- prior examples of government sponsored terrorism
- prior stated intentions related to the attacks
- prior knowledge of the attacks
- blocked investigations before the attacks
- behavior during the attacks
- blocked investigations after the attacks
- disinformation put out about the 9/11 Truth Movement

Most, if not all of the necessary information exists in order to form an airtight case for government involvement in the 9/11 attacks, however the information is generally not being properly summarized and presented for consumption by mainstream newcomers. It is not enough to communicate only to those who are already familiar with the issue.

For example, try this.. type "summarize 9/11" into Google. Obviously some information is showing up, but where are the hundreds of different summary pages which need to exist? This is a problem!