If you think that truthaction's dismissal of evidence that proves 9/11 was an inside job is a proper way to react, then go knock yourself out. I think it's exactly what's wrong with that site, and I'm sorry to see you follow suit.

Adam S. suggested I join this site, because it was all about cutting through all the LIHOP crap we keep seeing on truthaction and blogger, and actually confront the MIHOP evidence plainly in front of us, but I now have to wonder whether folks here are truly interested in that or not.

Obviously, many people might indeed think they can tell that no big Boeing crashed into the Pentagon simply looking at the "crash site," but you know perfectly well that a portion of the truth movement has nonetheless persisted in believing a 757 (and in some cases, Flight 77) somehow crashed into the building anyway, based on either their belief in government-supplied data or eyewitness testimony published in the mainstream media.

If you've actually watched National Security Alert, you know that the already well-established questions about the lack of damage and lack of large pieces of debris are outlined very succinctly in the "prima facie case for deception" chapter.

But it is CIT's independent evidence, re-interviewing eyewitnesses right on the scene, that has helped convinced anyone still skeptical - including me - that the government story of a 757 impact (along with the very necessary south-of-CITGO flight path this plane must by definition have flown) is completely unsupportable, in essence the 'smoking gun' evidence that dispels any remaining doubt over what happened, and yes, I think it is infinitely more convincing to have such a large body of eyewitnesses who SUPPORT the prima facie case that no plane hit.

Now, as far as how people will react to viewing the evidence in National Security Alert, I think they will be shocked, amazed, angry, and hopefully inspired to do something about it.

If you and everyone else at this site chooses to accept and support the rather undeniable implications of this evidence, I feel that would be a good thing - as opposed to continuously casting doubt on it with reckless and unsupported claims of "paid" witnesses or disintegrating north side impacts.