The Sliming Of Pilots For 9/11 Truth And Citizen Investigation Team, Michael Wolsey and Jim Hoffman call our research DISINFORMATION Options

[painter]

First, as most of you know, I'm not around much any more. That isn't to be taken as an abandonment of the ship. I'm just trying to bring some badly needed balance back into my life after years of neglecting necessities such as finances, not to mention my physical and mental health. I'm limiting my on-line time and my involvement in political issues of any sort.

That said, it was recently brought to my attention that Michael Wolsey of Colorado 9/11 Visibility, 911truth.org, and visibility911.com and well known researcher Jim Hoffman of 911research.wtc7.net (among others) have publicly stated that Pilots for 9/11 Truth and Citizen Investigation Team are, and I quote, "a coordinated disinformation campaign" with the purpose of dividing the 9-11 movement and discrediting it with "some of the worst, most speculative and ridiculous theories about what happened on 9-11."

On August 4, 2009, Wolsey posted a lengthy introduction to a recorded MP3 interview with Hoffman conducted some time earlier. The on-line post can be found here: http://visibility911.com/blog/?p=1351 and here is a direct link to the MP3 interview: http://media.libsyn.com/media/visibility91...hoffman_cit.mp3

I am opening this thread in the debate section because I hope that it will give everyone concerned an opportunity to publicly explore this accusation regarding the purpose and nature of Pilots for Truth and Citizen Investigation Team. The debate forum is visible to guests and can be posted in by any registered member who follows the requirements listed below:

First Anyone posting in this thread MUST have READ the above link, LISTENED to the above linked MP3 and, finally, READ this July 2009 post by Jim Hoffman, entitled "Google Earth Exposes Pentagon Flyover Farce or Critiquing PentaCon (Smoking Crack Version). I also strongly suggest that anyone reading Hoffman's critique follow some of the numerous links out from that page to other supporting material.

In the above link, Wosley writes:

One of the main goals we have at Visibility 9-11 is to educate our listeners and ourselves about all aspects of the September 11th tragedy. To this end, we are taking on a more active role in addressing this important issue. In fact, we believe the issue of disinformation to be the most important issue that each of us face as 9-11 activists. As blogger Arabesque has pointed out many times, the “Official Story” is itself disinformation and must be regarded as such. Ultimately, we are the ones in the street and on the blogs and forums who will have to face the ridicule if our facts are not straight and if we are to be successful, we must learn to identify the disinformation and insert caution into your activism.

As pointed out by my guest on this program, it is agreed that central to the various themes of disinformation are the “no jetliner” claims, especially the “no 757? claims for the attack on the Pentagon. In spite of substantial resources being poured into books and videos which claim that there was no airliner crash at the Pentagon on 9-11, Jim Hoffman has published extensive work which would bring these claims into question. Careful examination of Jim’s work reveals a different picture of the Pentagon attack than the “no jetliner” advocates. We at Visibility 9-11 acknowledge that there are many valid reasons for us to believe the “no jetliner” claims. However, a closer look reveals the real possibility that the event at the Pentagon has been manipulated from the start through the use of “official” and un-offical sources.

This program takes a closer look at “Citizen Investigation Team” (CIT) and it’s biggest promoter Pilots for 9-11 Truth and their latest effort to advance the “no jetliner” theory. Their new video, National Security Alert, which is being aggressively promoted on the internet and at public events, alleges that not only did the Boeing jet not strike the Pentagon, but flew over it at the last minute in an elaborate deception that not a single witness has claimed to see, and, contradicts the testimony of hundreds of eyewitnesses in the area.

I certainly agree with Wolsey, Hoffman and many others that DISINFORMATION (defined as the intentional dissemination of false and inaccurate information) has been present in various forms from the outset of the 9/11 event, that it has played and continues to play a debilitating role in the process of both uncovering the truth about 9/11 and disseminating that truth to the wider world beyond the 9/11 Movement. However, I strongly disagree that Pilots for 9/11 Truth and Citizen Investigation Team are "a coordinated disinformation campaign." I am opening this thread here in the hopes that Michael Wolsey, Jim Hoffman and others will at least see it and participate in it directly. I will make an effort to inform them of its existence.

MOREOVER I strongly request that participants in this thread, whether long-time P4T or CIT members or new members KEEP IT CIVIL AND ON POINT. That means NO NAME CALLING and NO PERSONAL ATTACKS. I prefer that there not even be an inference of a personal attack. If you find yourself feeling angry and wishing to say something that does not speak directly to one of the many issues that could be covered in this thread, REFRAIN FROM POSTING AT ALL until you have cooled down and given cooler thought to what it is you are saying.

My hope is that by airing our differences publicly and civilly this thread will begin to bridge the divide that has existed FAR TOO LONG within the 9/11 Truth community between those who, based on their respective research, firmly believe that Flight 77 DID hit the Pentagon (or at least could have) and those who believe it DID NOT (and could not have).

Thank you for your consideration,

Michael Wells : aka painter

[Guest_Turbofan_*]

I can't believe these f$#king pricks! Right from the start they are basing their entire theory
on the chance that CIT coached the witnesses, otherwise how could they possibly reject this
evidence?

I lost a lot of respect for Hoffman after watching his latest interview. The guy seemed to be
on the ball with Jones' thermite paper, but now this?

Even MIKE WALTER saw the plane banking! Does Jim understand the aircraft cannot be in a bank
in order to hit all of the light poles! My god, I want to slap these losers with a swift backhand.
Does he understand the bank described does not show up in the FOIA released data?

Jim, what are the odds 13+ people who never met can describe and draw the same event?

They act as though the FDR data doesn't even exist. What are the chances two altimeters could
be incorrect? RADAR ALT. is accurate to within in few feet, or less! These RF signals get processed
many times per second from three transceivers on the belly of the aircraft...but they'd rather take
a few quotes from media sources instead of knocking on doors and getting facts?

F$%K THEM!

If anyone has a direct contact, let me have it. I'll go head to head with his guy. (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/angry.gif)

Sorry if I'm coming across angry, but it pisses me off when members of the truth movement
attack valid data without researching first.

[dMz]

Sorry if I'm coming across angry, but it pisses me off when members of the truth movement
attack valid data without researching first.

Because there are so many accounts, 911Research has not thoroughly checked the excerpts against the sources to verify that each excerpt preserves the meaning apparent in its source. Readers are invited to do so and report any discrepancies to us. (See our contact information.)

CODE

911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/witnesses/index.html

Ummm, isn't that 2nd sentence exactly what CIT did, and I believe that Rob recently contacted/updated "the Hoff" from my recent research at the "faction."

Well, at least the "tabloid truther" Hoffmanites admit they have NOT done the research, but that didn't stop the multiple, repeated personal/organizational attacks of "disinformation" now did it? (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/whistle.gif)

F'n self-appointed "truth police" anyway. What's next- book burnings- driving a tractor over the CIT and P4T DVD's? (They could throw some Dixie Chicks CD's and the U.S. Constitution under there while they are at it) (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif)

Stay tuned- same Bat-time, same Bat-channel...

Also on Rob's correction to painter- I designed, installed/maintained, operated, and analyzed the output from data acquisition systems for acceptance testing and qualification of avionics and "other" systems on USAF, USN (and NASA) hardware (although this wasn't commercial Flight Data Recorders per se, I am no stranger to data analysis). I did my own independent "audit" of the NTSB-released SSFDR data (twice actually, due to a computer crash). The results are posted in many threads in a certain subforum around here "somewhere." (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif) My results were extremely close, if not identical to the conclusions reached earlier by P4T, speaking of the Scientific Method and verified evidence proper (as opposed to the personal attack "debunka" method currently being employed by certain "tabloid truthers.")

I am reminded of a quote- "Great minds talk about ideas, average minds talk about things, small minds talk about people."