Please watch from 6:00 to 15:00 in this video as ‘CIT’ conduct an interview with Flight 77 eyewitness Keith Wheelhouse (hopefully I've linked it so the video starts on the 6 minute mark for you): -
So Keith is contacted as an eyewitness to the events of 9/11, he gives up his spare time (he doesn’t have to) to give his story, he sits in front of ‘CIT’ and sketches the south of citgo (official) flight path that he witnessed (which you will see if you watch up to 15:00).
Then what do ‘CIT’ do? Does the interview find its way into the main presentation of eyewitnesses? Of course not – he’s an official flight path witness - ‘CIT’ set out to discredit and slander Keith based on some minor discrepancies in the account regarding distance and timing which Keith himself stated as ‘guesstimates’ and are notoriously difficult for the human mind and memory to judge.
Look at the abuse ‘CIT’ aimed at Wheelhouse: -
They accuse him of being a part of a cover-up, label his statement a charade and call him a liar.
This is not nice behaviour – this is not how we treat people.
It’s the same pattern over and over with any official flight path witness ‘CIT’ encountered. Not only do ‘CIT’ treat eyewitnesses in this way but also their biased presentation deceives genuine researchers. Fortunately this is quite apparent to any objective person who has thoroughly researched the eyewitnesses and Pentagon event.
Please click and read each of these very brief slides from the 911research site: -
Of course ‘CIT’ were nice to you because you don’t challenge their ‘theory’, but no wonder a large part of the truth movement have disassociated themselves from these characters.
However, I'm not in the habit of challenging conspiracies theories much especially the ones I know very little about. Like the laser beams theories, I know sod all about laser beams, even if I think they sound absolutely absurd and something like a James Bond villan would use.
You see the problem I see with the truth movement/groups in general is that it is too divided. Its not enough that they all agree that the official story is a lot of crapola. These groups are fighting amongst themselves about which one of their theories is more relevant or closer to the truth than the other groups theory, instead of concentrating on the one thing they all agree on, the crapola. I find it puzzling to be honest and I don't think they realise that they have manage to divide their own groups because they all think that they have to agree with each others pet theories.
That is why I just work with possibilities, I do not claim to know the truth even though I might come across as someone who is convinced of his own conviction, what I wish is that all these groups would concentrate on the one thing they all agree on, which would get closer to answering the truth than all of their pet theories put together, a new investigation.