From fake 2000 electoral rolls to fake 9/11 victims

[Peter Presland]

Two of my concerns with raising the falsified deaths claim at this time are that A) doing so violates my Prime Directive for investigating deep political crimes: establish the "how" of the crime -- in this case, the manners in which the buildings were brought down or damaged and U.S. national airspace security breached -- beyond all reasonable doubt and to broad public acceptance BEFORE moving on to the "who" and "why" investigations, and B) in its current raw state it gives cover to the cover-up artists by presenting as an easy strawman candidate.

All of us -- including you and your noble comrades in the first or second generations of JFK researchers -- must learn from our personal and collective errors. Among the skill sets we have to master are those of the propagandist.

God knows they're used against us with devastating effect.

So ... Do I think that the issue is deserving of deeper investigation?

Yes.

But let's keep our heads -- and our own counsel.

Charlie

As the person probably responsible for launching discussion on this - following Paul's original post that is - I have to say I agree with Charles.

It is not a subject that I would consider broaching with colleagues and acquaintances in my own local community for example. The obstacles to getting the average Joe to seriously consider, let alone accept the possibility, that elements of their own/US States apparatus were somehow complicit in the event are big enough as it is.

However, proselytizing campaigning and persuading are one thing; personal investigation and research are quite another and I've now seen enough on that site and other related ones to persuade me that the whole issue of video and photographic fakery, as it might apply to 9-11, is worthy of such an effort - in much the same way as it is proving on the Apollo program. Who knows it could just provide another 'nano-thermite' type breakthrough; but unless and until it does, I agree it is not an issue that warrants agressive 'on-the-front-foot' treatment