Forum

TruthMove Forum

TruthMove Forum » TruthMove Main Forum

Craig Furlong ... (3 posts)

  1. Billy
    Member

    Craig Furlong ...

    claims to have discovered a smoking gun regarding 911! There's a new related article posted on The Scholars for Truth website. What's everyone's opinion? Is it truly a smoking gun? Can the two time discrepencies be used in a court of law? Thanks.

    http://colorado.indymedia.org/newswire/rate/14211/...

    Posted 17 years ago #
  2. truthmod
    Administrator

    15 second differences?

    i'd say this doesn't mean much and is no more a smoking gun than any of the other rock solid pieces of evidence we have.

    how about the 3 minute discrepancy between the official crash time of flight 93 and the recorded seismic event!?

    sorry, but this seems to be a waste of time/analysis to me.

    Posted 17 years ago #
  3. truthmover
    Administrator

    Beware the smoking gun

    Billy,

     You found a good one worth adding to the portfolio, but in my opinion, its not a smoking gun. Few cases are made with one piece of evidence, and this case has thousands. Sifting throught everything, and prioritizing is essential. Those pieces of evidence most admissible in court, that best make the case, should be most prominent in the movement. However, to this point, there is no one piece of evidence which provides the "slam dunk" for which so many are searching. There are probably no smoking guns to be found in the present public record. New revelations will most likely arise from the release of further documents during some of the criminal and civil trials that are pending and in process. 
    
     That there is one area of research, such as CD for instance, that will by itself make the case is a dubious claim. In fact, some of our infilitrators make exactly this claim, or something close to it. While members of our research community will certainly pick their areas of interest, those who publically promote '9/11 truth', choosing only to include  the physical evidence, or the video/pictorial evidence, or the most easily disputed evidence, or the mainstream evidence, are simply not responsibly covering the issue. The exception would be sites that make it clear that they intend to pursue a specific focus. I have nothing to say about the 'no plane' enthusiasts having sites that only discuss that one issue, so long as they make the specific nature of their focus very clear to the audience. 
    
     So keep searching for those little nuggets of truth. Make a list. Share it with people.
    
    Posted 17 years ago #

Reply

You must log in to post.