Years ago in June 2007 when I realized that the focus of the 9/11 Truth Movement was turning more towards the alleged "Controlled Demolition" of the towers and WTC7, I wrote an article entitled, "This Is Not The Controlled Demolition Movement."
Some examples of this are available here (with exceptions for sure on which theories they focus on):
- "Debunking The 9/11 Myths: Special Report" - [Popular Mechanics, 2/2005]
- "Fahrenheit 2777" - [Scientific American, 6/2005]
- "9/11 Bush Bashers" - [World Net Daily, 8/16/2006]
- "Why the 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Won't Go Away" - [Time, 9/3/2006]
- "9/11 fantasists pose a mortal danger to popular oppositional campaigns" - [Guardian, 2/20/2007]
In their hit pieces, they won't touch things like former Senator Bob Graham's call for a new investigation (or former 9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey joining him). They won't touch things like the September Eleventh Advocates statement, and 9/11 Whistleblower Sibel Edmonds' follow-up pertaining to Behrooz Sarshar. They won't touch this story about "insiders" having doubts about the CIA's role concerning 9/11 (and the follow-up). I have done my best to promote things like this.
Because the media has attacked, misrepresented and slandered advocates for 9/11 Justice for years, and continue to do so, and continue to use that same formula that attacks the most popular theories of the 9/11 Truth Movement while ignoring some of the most incriminating information, I am 100% certain that advocates for 9/11 Justice are, at some level, right. This should speak volumes to people. That the "methinks thou dost protest too much" mentality of our lapdog media, tells us that people like me (responsible advocates for 9/11 Justice), on some level, are right.