Pentagon

Pentagon debates expose emptiness of large-plane-impact scenario

compmix2

We can see in this composite photo that there is no room for a plane to have entered without large pieces of wreckage remaining outside.

The work that Craig Ranke (of Citizen Investigation Team) has done on the witnesses for the north path is some of the most solid, irrefutable evidence that one could ever assemble on 9/11, period – Massimo Mazzucco, creator of September 11: The New Pearl Harbor

It was my understanding there would be no math ― Chevy Chase as Gerald Ford in 1976 presidential debate, Saturday Night Live

March 16, 2016

By Craig McKee

It’s like watching someone try to dance between raindrops while they accuse you of being all wet.

Those who are determined to push the impossible claim that a large plane really did hit the Pentagon on 9/11 – despite the absence of a plane at the “crash” site – go to incredible lengths to try and make their case. They speculate, hypothesize, assume, and concoct imaginative and “plausible” scenarios that they claim “fit the data” or are “consistent with an impact”. They focus on minor details as if they are conclusive, they mention the “witnesses” as if the word (more…)

To Ken Doc: You’re an anti-truther when you tell lies about truthers

(*This open letter is to Ken Doc, a self-described Canadian truther who is head administrator of the largest 9/11 Facebook forum, “9/11 Truth Movement.” It’s a digital place where civility, sincerity, and intelligence are frequent casualties. Doc devotes a page on his web site to calling me a “disinfo troll.” His supports for this nasty allegation—all of them—are provable lies. These same lies are being told by two others, Mike Collins and Seb Ménard, with whom Doc is well acquainted (for a thorough deconstruction of Collins’ disinformation playbook, see the article below this letter). More about them below. Once you read this letter, it should be crystal clear who is spreading disinformation. I’ve written about Doc’s forum before—about how it’s run like an immature high school clique.  In this cabal, the administrators pat each other on the back while applying absurd double standards to what is permissible behavior. These admins, except for one or two, are like the self-centered “popular kids” who shun and insult people they don’t like while hypocritically telling everyone else that insults are not allowed. The immediate casualty is the Truth Movement. The ultimate victim is truth itself.–Craig McKee)

In this Ken Doc graphic, he is front and center with supporting characters Richard Gage and David Chandler. I think that's Mike Collins behind him in the black helmet.

A legend in his own galaxy: In this graphic from Ken Doc’s Facebook page, he is the hero with Richard Gage and David Chandler as supporting characters. I think that’s Mike Collins behind him in the black helmet.

January 1, 2016

TO: Ken Doc

Well, here we are again. I had hoped that after writing an article in January 2015 about how damaging your Facebook forum is to the 9/11 Truth Movement and how irresponsible you are in running it, I would never have to address you or the forum again. I thought that your banning me and several others who agree with me about what happened and did not happen at the Pentagon on 9/11 would be enough for you.  Evidently not.

I have no choice but to respond to a dishonest attack you’ve launched against me on your web site based on invented charges. You did this by creating an entire page devoted to libeling me with allegations you know are untrue. You included me with four others in the “disinfo trolls” part of your site. The others who have received the same treatment include Jim Fetzer, John Lear, Ace Baker, and no-plane supporter Norma Rae. To justify your claim that I am a troll, you introduce several easily provable lies.

I became aware of the page’s creation in the last couple of months, which leads me to think it may have been prompted by two articles I posted on Truth and Shadows in October criticizing public presentations on the Pentagon by David Chandler and Ken Jenkins. Both researchers are part of a team that pushes most of the Pentagon official story and accepts almost all of the government’s evidence as being genuine and persuasive.

Your position on the Pentagon seems to have changed since I wrote the article about your forum. Before it was published, you held the position that you didn’t know if a plane hit but that you thought it was pointless to discuss the subject because it always leads to fighting. We’ll just never know exactly what happened, you used to write, although you were open to the possibility of a plane impact.

But then your substantial ego got bruised, and after that you suddenly became 100% convinced that a plane hit. Suddenly it was obvious! It appears you changed your position out of spite. If you learned new information immediately after the article that led you to change your tune, please let us in on what it was.

Let’s get to the lies.

You say I support the theory that the World Trade Center towers were destroyed by “space beams.” This is a blatant falsehood on your part. You know I don’t believe this and that nowhere can a quote be found to (more…)

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 (more…)

Win converts using these ‘plane-hit-the-Pentagon’ talking points: just keep repeating, ‘It’s so divisive!’

If someone says they think this is an actual aerial photograph, don’t correct them. This way you retain plausible deniability.

If someone says they think this is an actual aerial photograph, don’t correct them. This way you retain plausible deniability.

June 10, 2015

By Craig McKee

You feel your eyes getting heavy … your breathing is becoming slow and regular … you are becoming sleepy, so sleepy … you will accept what I am about to tell you without question … you will repeat this to others over and over and over until everyone assumes it must be true.

Now that you’re feeling relaxed, we are ready to begin looking at the best ways to steer the 9/11 Truth Movement away from the strongest evidence that the event was an inside job – what happened at the Pentagon. The first thing is to adopt this basic list of talking points. The fact that the points are untrue should not deter you.

Slip these into 9/11 conversations whenever possible:

  • “The Pentagon is so divisive.”
  • “Discussing it always causes infighting.”
  • “It is tearing the 9/11 Truth Movement apart!”
  • “Science tells us that a plane hit the Pentagon.”
  • “Yes, this part of the official story is true.”
  • “We’ll never know because the government has all the evidence.”

The key is to get the overwhelming evidence that no plane hit the Pentagon off the table while seeming like you really (more…)

Can largest 9/11 Facebook forum rise above ridicule, insults, and contrived controversies?

January 25, 2015

By Craig McKee

Under the right conditions, a 9/11 forum can be a great place to share information, test hypotheses, and learn from other truthers. But under the wrong conditions, it can provoke divisions, spread disinformation, and suppress essential evidence.

The 9/11 Facebook group “9/11 Truth Movement” – the largest of its kind with nearly 40,000 members – can be both. facebook-eye_2459156bIt has some great people posting there on a regular basis, and it has some sincere and hard-working truthers helping to moderate the discussion. But at times it can also operate like a cliquish “club” that applies astounding double standards to enforcing its own rules.

My expression of concern about this, outlined below, is not for the purpose of rehashing past arguments or responding to past slights, nor is it my wish to reduce (more…)

Doctored Pentagon video proves 9/11 cover-up and inside job

 

pentagon-video-frames

From the frames released in 2002: notice the wrong date and the helpful descriptions so you know what you’re seeing.

June 13, 2014

By Craig McKee

A single frame gives it away.

All but one frame of two sets of surveillance videos purporting to show the impact of Flight 77 into the western face of the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001 appear to show the same thing. But it’s that one frame that tells the tale. It shows that evidence was falsified and that a deliberate plan was carried out to fool the public into thinking that a plane hit the building when it did not.

This, combined with other key evidence (including the nature of the damage to the building, the lack of debris outside the building, and the on-camera accounts of credible witnesses who put the plane on a different flight path that the one (more…)

The Barbara Honegger Show: DC 9/11 conference spun as new consensus

Panel 2

Pentagon panel: From left, Deets, Honegger, Sullivan, and Barrett.

By Craig McKee

Barbara Honegger calls last month’s “9/11: Advancing the Truth” conference “historic” and a “major triumph for the movement.”

More than that, she thinks it’s a huge step towards that elusive “consensus” about the Pentagon that so many of us have thought was neither possible nor particularly desirable.

But who can blame Honegger for her enthusiasm? It was clearly her show. Not only was she part of the organizing committee for the conference, but she spoke both on Saturday and on Sunday. The latter talk went on for nearly two hours – longer than the other two Pentagon speakers combined (I’ll return (more…)

Pentagon session at DC 9/11 conference buys into false premise of disunity

View from Sheraton Pentagon City

The view from the Sheraton Pentagon City, where the conference will be held Sept. 14-15.

By Craig McKee

It was supposed to be the centerpiece of the “9/11: Advancing the Truth” conference taking place near Washington D.C. in September.

A three-way debate about what happened at the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001 would offer members of 9/11 Truth movement the opportunity to watch as conflicting positions were presented and contrasted by leading advocates of those positions.

It hasn’t worked out that way.

As someone who believes that the evidence showing that no large plane hit the building is conclusive, I thought a debate on the subject might be helpful to make that clear to more people, especially those who have been misled into thinking that the question is unresolved.

I knew there would be a trade-off, of course, which is that it could appear to elevate the importance of the (more…)

The Kevin Ryan paradox: the way to show the 9/11 official story is false is by accepting as much of it as possible

LuckLarry-2007_05_silvserstein

World Trade Center leaseholder Larry Silverstein gets a pass from Ryan.

By Adam Syed (Special to Truth and Shadows)

Kevin Ryan says the best way to challenge the official story of 9/11 is to “accept as much of the official account as possible.”

In his new book Another Nineteen: Investigating Legitimate 9/11 Suspects (the title alludes to the official nineteen alleged al Qaeda hijackers), Ryan says he favors this strategy for the sake of “simplicity” and to avoid “adding unnecessary complications.” The problem is that he often achieves just the opposite – adding complications and muddying the waters.

My first tinge of alarm came upon reading the book’s introduction: “For simplicity, this alternative conspiracy should accept as much of the official account as possible, including that the alleged hijackers were on the planes.” (p. 14)

This is not the book’s only such passage.  On the first page of Chapter 10, which deals with the Pentagon portion of 9/11, he says:  “Considering means, motive and opportunity might allow us to propose a possible insider conspiracy while maintaining much of the official account as well.” (p. 152) (more…)

Debate scrapped, but DC 9/11 conference will still examine what happened at the Pentagon

030926-F-2828D-080

By Craig McKee

It won’t be a debate, but the issue of what happened at the Pentagon on 9/11 will still get a hearing at the “9/11: Advancing the Truth” conference, scheduled for Sept. 14-15 at the Sheraton Pentagon City in Arlington, VA.

Instead of the formal three-way debate that was planned, we’ll now see three one-hour presentations followed by either a 30- or 60-minute panel discussion that will feature questions from the audience, according to chief conference organizer Matt Sullivan of DC 9/11 Truth. He says that those invited to speak on the Pentagon raised concerns about the debate format, and this led to the decision to modify it.

Each presentation will cover one of three distinct positions: that no large plane hit the Pentagon; that a large (more…)