Jim Hoffman Tells Huge Lie in Interview With Michael Wolsey

gretavo's picture

http://media.libsyn.com/media/visibility911/visibility911_hoffman_cit.mp...

At around 19:00 you'll hear Hoffman claim (bemoan the sad "fact") that the only physical evidence dealt with by Thierry Meyssan in his books was the lack of a Boeing at the Pentagon. He says this as a way of accusing Meyssan of dooming the truth movement from the outset by burdening it with this "ridiculous claim". Curious about this accusation, and owning the English version of Meyssan's first book published in 2002, L'Effroyable Imposteur (9/11 The Big Lie), I checked.

Meyssan, in fact, spends only the first chapter talking about the Pentagon. In the following chapters he talks about reports of explosions in the towers, of the complaint by Fire Engineering's Bill Manning that the investigation was being compromised by the destruction of evidence, the comment by Van Romero that it looked like explosives had to have been used, and that building 7 appears to only have been explainable as a controlled demolition.

So Hoffman's statement is patently (and one can only assume deliberately) totally incorrect. As in false. Not just that but his entire premise that people like Meyssan were guilty of dooming skepticism to fruitless avenues is belied by the fact that after discussing the Pentagon and the explosives at the WTC, Meyssan went on to cover virtually every early issue from the put options to the threat made against Air Force One to warnings from intelligence agencies abroad, the fact that AA77 was being tracked by military radar on its way into Washington, I mean the list goes on--given its date of publication it is an amazingly good start, so the fact that Hoffman feels he has to misrepresent it in such a gross manner I think says a lot about his and his supporters' motives.

What say ye, truthers?