i'll take your word for it. i really never heard an entire show of his, only clips and small segments so what i knew of him was mostly positive. i know all about the funding of these so called progressive types(Goodman-Ford foundation etc.) and based on Blood's attitude and defense of GNN it sounds like he probably gets some of the same type of funding. GNN is a cesspool of trolls that lash out at 9/11 activists and others(they get pretty mad when you talk about gatekeeping and funding etc., im guessing because they realize they fit perfectly into that category), i gave up on that place a very long time ago. as far as Sander HIcks goes, i agree hes too LIHOP and refuses to connect some pretty obvious dots but ive seen how effective he can be in some circles, particularly with people who have a mental block and just cant or wont entertain the thought of MIHOP on any level, regardless of how good the evidence is. im not saying let Hicks and others like him off the hook, they should be asked why they seemingly refuse to touch certain areas of research but i blame people with more power and influence in the media like Goodman and others for our current situation. afterall, Hicks isnt really stopping as many people from seeing 9/11 for what it is than a Goodman etc. is, is he? i compare him to Press For Truth, not nearly good enough, leaves way too much out but still does the job in getting certain people started down the rabbit hole. im of the opinion that once most people start on 9/11 they dont stop.