If you put the batteries in backwards it keeps coming and coming and coming.
I can talk and talk and talk because I do not lie, ever, so I can shoot from hip and I will not shoot myself in the foot, ever.
Your only cure recalls for a bit more drastic measures. Your tag-along days are over, you may have a big gun (mouth) but you have never been lower on ammo or spare parts.
https://govtslaves.info/2018/11/04/...ce-based-challenge-to-the-official-narrative/
The internet is replete with videos and articles that purport to investigate, analyze, and explain how 9/11 is not what it has been made out to be. The difficulty is in distinguishing the sensational, speculative theories from truly evidence-based challenges to the official narrative.
It seems as though there are those who will readily believe conspiracy theories without needing much evidence, while on the other side there are those who are not comfortable with considering the official government narrative to be a lie. Those are the people who are unwilling to do even the most rudimentary research into the subject.
So one might suggest that any effort to build an evidence-based refutation of the official narrative will result in simply preaching to the converted, and that those who are not ready to shift their paradigm will resist listening to any of the evidence. Certainly, the group
Architects and Engineers For 9/11 Truth have had this experience, doing presentations and trying to get more architects and engineers to join them and sign on to the contention that the official National Institute of Science and Technology (NIST) findings on the collapse of the three towers on 9/11 (1, 2 and 7) is based on flawed science. Their tireless efforts to present and communicate alternative theories to their professional community has been widely met with indifference and skepticism, though bit by bit new professionals have been signing on to the idea that the towers were brought down by controlled demolitions, thus implying that this had to be an inside job with a vast network of conspirators.
Researching Is Believing
I have met and heard from many people who have been willing to research into the issue with an open mind, and the conclusion is inevitably the same:
whether or not they are sure about exactly what happened to bring about the destruction on
9/11, they are sure that there is much more to it than the official story.
On the other hand, I have never met or even heard about a single person claiming to have done extensive research on the anomalies and inconsistencies of 9/11 and have a cogent explanation as to why these exist and how the official story holds up to the scrutiny of objective scientific investigation. Researching this material basically turns non-believers of this ‘conspiracy theory’ into believers. It’s as simple as that.
So why does a fully evidence-based challenge to the official narrative become important in this environment? For some in the fields of engineering and architecture, it provides an important piece of research for detailing evidence-based information to colleagues who maintain a skeptical attitude towards the possibility that the world is not as it seems. For the average person who has already realized that 9/11 is an inside job, reading and selecting information from this volume provides them with the credibility and verifiable talking points with which to continue to challenge those around them into considering that much of the official story is a lie.
