USAPatriot Calls Out Colleen Rowley And Other Soft 9/11 Truthers

Jpass's picture

Source: The Real 9/11 Truth Movement Blog - USAPatriot Calls Out Colleen Rowley And Other Soft 9/11 Truthers

The Twin Towers in New York City viewed from belowImage via Wikipedia

I was always taken back at how some prominent 9/11 Truth supporters like Colleen Rowley and Ray McGoven refuse to talk about the obvious Controlled Demolition of the World Trade Center Complex. Colleen Rowley is an ex-FBI agent turned whistle-blower and Ray McGovern is an ex-CIA guy turned whistle-blower. Both think we need a new investigation into the attacks on 9/11 but both refuse to discuss the obvious elephant in the room, that the WTC complex was demolished by controlled demolition and the phony story about 19 Muslim Hijackers just does not add up.

Well a user by the name of USAPatriot put my feelings into words better then I could have. Here is what USAPatriot has to say about soft Truthers like Colleen Rowley and Ray McGovern who refuse to follow the truth where ever it may lead.

The quote below is a response to the video about Colleen Rowley which I've included after the quote.


Afterwards, a few of us from the dc911truth group approached Rowley to ask her where she stood on 9/11 (no camera, unfortunately). She would only go so far as to say we needed a new investigation, that she had signed the petition for it, and she supported the NYC CAN initiative. (She also mentioned Jon Gold…in a good way.)

However, when asked about Richard Gage’s work, the nanothermite paper, and the scientific basis for controlled demolitions, she tensed up, saying she wasn’t a scientist, didn’t have the knowledge, and would need an advanced degree to understand the theories. She held firm and was clearly unwilling to discuss it further.

That was very discouraging. For whatever reason, she would not (publicly) veer from the official script of al Qaeda, the 19 hijackers, Moussaoui and the FBI lapses.

Ray McGovern had the same response. He said he’s looked at the scientific evidence but isn’t convinced that it’s strong enough to support controlled demolitions. Including Building 7, presumably.

This, after a speech about moral courage and the duty to be informed.

It leaves us wondering why these “truthtellers” and “whistleblowers” even bother with events like this. They garner our admiration for having the courage to speak out; they urge us to do likewise. Yet when we do, when many of us risk our own careers and reputations to follow the truth regardless of where it leads, they refuse to go out on that limb with us. Why?

“Unanswered questions” is safe. Saying we need a new investigation is safe. But unless these public figures move beyond that and start using their soapboxes to challenge the official story, with more courage and conviction, nothing will happen. The 9/11 Truth movement will remain stagnant, divided, demoralized -- and contained.

Do they know something that we don’t? - USAPatriot

This is the video that USAPatriot is referring to:

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]