Jakob’s 9/11 Research

9/11 Blogger – Blogging 9/11 Related Alternative News: Dave vonKleist Interviewed by Glenn Beck on CNN Headline News – Video Download

Video in QT or WMV

Discussion at Loose Change Forum

Following the recent release of new (insignificant) Pentagon videos CNN has managed to Find somebody from the 911truth movement to comment on the case.

And they coincidentally came up with Dave Von Kleist. A dubious character that pushes such ludicrous theories that he is by many in the movement considered to be a disinfo psy-op agent.
The TV host of the CNN headline show is very mocking in style, and clearly does not seek a serious conversation. Dave Von Kleist makes a strong impression, and manages to stay his course in spite of Glenn’s attempts to thwart him.

So what is the problem here?

The problem is that Dave Von Kleist agrees to participate in this show, without mentioning that there is a larger movement out there, that carries other far more potent issues than flight 77.

So in effect he helps build the impression that is CNN’s overall goal: That the 911truth movement is not a movement, but just a conspiracy theory and that that theory is only hinged on the Pentagon/flight77 case.

We see the same strategies used here as in the Jamie Mcintyre interview, namely

1. to give the Theories/theorists credit for being ’serious’, but eventually still wrong.
2. The conspiracy theory regarding 911 is only about Pentagon.
3. Avoid mentioning of any other 911 issues.
4. Give unwarranted ’significance’ to the new videos; ‘One frame of white blurry blob’

Embedded youtube video: (more…)

9/11 Blogger – Blogging 9/11 Related Alternative News: Jamie McIntyre Shows Personal Photos of Debris from the Pentagon

Now we begin to see the official spin on the newly released pentagon tapes.

This interview with Jamie Mcintyre shows exactly how the pentagon ‘case’ is being used to discredit 911 skepticism as a whole.

It is no coincidence that ‘they’ allow public attention around the pentagon case while censuring the really explosive stuff like NORAD stand-down and WTC demolitions.

Jamie-McIntyre-CNN-5-21-2006.wmv

What they (CNN) are doing here is that they claim that the goal of releasing these tapes is to “put to rest these conspiracy theories, that no plane ever hit the Pentagon”.

But in this interview CNN never mentions that there are other far more potent branches of 911truth scepticism, even though they show very brief clips from some of the movies where Jamie appears – taken out of context – and some of these movies are bound to also be treating at least some of these other branches of 911truth.

So by not mentioning these other issues, CNN effectively boils all 911 scepticism down to the issue of whether Flight 77 hit the Pentagon or not.

Jamie referes to the mass of info he has gotten about flight 77 theories, and says that some of them are very convincing and scholarly in appearance, BUT they’re still wrong because he was there and saw the debris from a jetliner.

So they manage to handle the threat of the 911 movement becoming more scholarly in appearance and thereby more credible to a broader audience, by using this Pentagon-case as an instrument to show that even though your argument seems very scientific it may still be wrong.

Which by the way is a valid argument, and fair to use against flight 77 scepticism, but here it is unfairly used to degrade any 911 scepticism.

So the movement should drop flight 77, and turn attention to the stronger issues.

Jamie also manages to show color by to other comments:

1. You should get your balanced info from CNN, and not from “Some weird site on the internet”
2. Discussing this issue is an insult to the relatives of the dead victims.

Argument number 2 is a classic spin of what David Ray Griffin calls “The sacred myth”, and we all know it is sacrilege to debate the sacred myth.

If this interview manages to prove anything it is the fact that CNN is still wholly defenders of the official myth and they will still only provide info on 911, that is obviously engineered to give a biased and distorted view of the issue.