to insult Prof. Griffin and insinuate that he is deliberately attempting to undermine the truth movement. I don't think DRG's work is perfect by any stretch, and I have and will point out when I think he's wrong. Same goes for David Chandler, who I consider to be a good and honest researcher despite his unwillingness to distance himself from Jeffrey "Shure" Hill, who is among the fake truthers who has accused DRG of deliberately harming the truth movement. Fact is, David Ray Griffin is not harming the truth movement. David Chandler *is* doing some damage by lending his credibility to a charlatan like Shure, but I don't think he's doing so deliberately. On the other hand, people like Shure, Jesse Ventura, Steven Jones, YT/Cosomos, Victronix, Jon Gold, Jim Fetzer, SnowCrash, Judy Wood, Charlie Sheen, and so many others have demonstrated time and again that they should not be trusted. On the face of it, we're supposed to believe that the fact that those in my heavily abridged list don't always agree with each other--in fact accuse each other of being agents, etc.--is a sign that they are part of a diverse group of individuals among whom there are serious disagreements and from whom a reasonable consensus representing the "real" truth can be expected to emerge. This diversity is not real though, as it's become clear that 911blogger was selected from early on as a focus of efforts at cognitive infiltration. How could it be otherwise? Are we to believe that 911blogger, the premier forum for 9/11 skeptics, has been left alone by the powers that be and the 9/11 perps and their apologists? Of course that's absurd, and of course 911blogger is a mess of infiltration. Real, honest truthers should not be propping up its legitimacy by continuing to post there--the sincere researchers and activists duped into participation there are the cover that they need to perpetuate the illusion of authenticity that they would otherwise find very difficult to preserve given how much BS it is used to disseminate. Let's not forget that people like Charlie Sheen, David Shayler, Mark Dice, and Jesse Ventura have always been hyped using 911blogger as a primary vehicle with nothing but token criticism allowed until it's too late, after each individual in question reveals their true nature. Incompetence theorists might just say "well, you can't expect 911blogger to see through these charlatans when they do such a good job of faking their interest in 911 truth" but that's just not true--as WTCD has shown over the years by calling out people and ideas well before it was kosher to do so on 911blogger.