Comments - Check out; pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=21054 - 9/11 Scholars Forum2024-03-29T15:33:58Zhttps://911scholars.ning.com/profiles/comment/feed?attachedTo=3488444%3ABlogPost%3A10306&xn_auth=no"DISCLAIMER: CIT does not sup…tag:911scholars.ning.com,2011-02-06:3488444:Comment:103082011-02-06T22:47:04.000ZThoth IIhttps://911scholars.ning.com/profile/ThothII
<p>"DISCLAIMER: CIT does not support or welcome the "work" of Jim Fetzer. A common tactic disinfo operatives pull is trying to associate with their target so it appears they are on the same side. Hence, Fetzer is trying to blend in his crap with us and bring down this very important response piece and thread. CIT does NOT support no plane/video fakery/holograms/space beams at the towers, Fetzer or Judy Wood."</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The ignorance, logical fallacies, etc. of this statement are immense…</p>
<p>"DISCLAIMER: CIT does not support or welcome the "work" of Jim Fetzer. A common tactic disinfo operatives pull is trying to associate with their target so it appears they are on the same side. Hence, Fetzer is trying to blend in his crap with us and bring down this very important response piece and thread. CIT does NOT support no plane/video fakery/holograms/space beams at the towers, Fetzer or Judy Wood."</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The ignorance, logical fallacies, etc. of this statement are immense and so typical. What exactly do they mean , for example, by not supporting or welcoming Jim's work? You mean they do not support scientific method? I could spend 10 paragraphs analyzing the logical fallacies in these statements, but we've done it all a million times before. These groups all claim to be "truth" groups, but theoretically speaking, do they even understand what "truth" means? </p>