HISTORY OF SEPT 11 RESEARCH

 

The task of documenting the history of real Sept 11 research, to untangle it from the huge volume of plagiarism and disinformation which has smothered it will a be a long and ongoing process. I will address it progressively as time permits.

 

For the moment, please refer to the articles linked below to get a basic idea about why it is so important to preserve an accurate record of who first published what and when. These articles should give a basic idea of how  plagiarism is a vital weapon of those with the agenda of disinformation.

 

Apart from direct plagiarism, a more subtle tactic used by the fake “truth” movement is to simply summarize those selected points of evidence which they find convenient to promote, without any reference to the original research articles or authors. This helps to smother the original research in a sea of  poorly researched, poorly referenced, only partially accurate imitations, without actually committing identifiable plagiarism in a tangible sense. When this tactic is used, it makes it impossible to accuse any particular individual of plagiarism but it collectively creates the same effect. I plan to write articles examining  in detail this phenomenon, which I call “plagiarism by proxy”.

 

One of the worst examples of plagiarism by proxy is Dr David Ray Griffin, an individual who has contributed absolutely nothing in the way of significant original research but has managed to effectively take the credit for, and use for commercial purposes, the work of many others, and in the process falsify in the minds of many people, how long the information has actually been available in the public domain. This is a very important ingredient in creating an escape tunnel for those in the media, politics, and scientific community who knowingly suppressed and ignored the truth for years, but will now be able to claim that they never knew about it until Griffin “discovered “it .

 

Griffin has cleverly kept his hands clean of direct plagiarism in a technical sense. Therefore, explaining Griffin’s sophisticated tactics of plagiarism by proxy, supported by the untruth movement, is a complex process, something which I will write up in detail when time permits. There are many well intentioned people who—quite understandably -  view Griffin as something of a hero, and find it difficult to understand my objections to him.

 

The issue is subtle , and difficult to fully explain properly without a carefully planned article, the production of which will be very time consuming. Until I have time to write such an article, here are some posts of some hastily written emails on the subject, which may at least shed some light on the subject. How much sense they make to you will depend heavily upon how conversant you are with the details of the evidence for an inside job and the particular people involved in the internal squabbles of “the movement”, but for the moment, it’s the best I’ve got. 1   2

 

Also, here is an early analysis of Griffin by “truthling” watcher Angie, who was one of the first to realize that Griffin was up to no good. She approaches the issue from a very different perspective to me .

 

Also an interesting review by George Trinkaus of Griffin’s first book on Sept 11 – “The New Pearl Harbour”.

 

I don’t agree with everything in the articles linked above from Angie and George, but they raise some important points.

 

In the meantime, in the articles linked below, I have exposed in fine detail some of the clumsier plagiarists - Jim Hoffman, Steven Jones and Jim Fetzer,  as case studies of what is going on with the untruth movement.

 

It should be noted that some people who contribute to the plagiarism by proxy effect are not necessarily doing so with malicious intent. There are doubtless many well intentioned people wanting to spread the “truth” to the extent of which they aware of it, who are not experienced enough in web activism and research techniques to realize the problems with failing to credit original research, or else are simply unaware of the original work.

 

As I develop this section of the site, I hope that it will help to educate those well intentioned types who are inadvertently contributing to this problem as to why it is a problem.

 

The research section of my site  teaches by example how to legitimately promote the work of others. The summary article shows by example how to summarize the work of others in your own words while still providing a chain of links back to the work from which you learned it.

 

In the meantime, these articles may help to explain why preserving a record of credit to the original researchers and the true timeline of the research as it unfolded is such an important safeguard against the tactic of disinformation through the carefully orchestrated release of selected “partial truth”.

 

Jim Hoffman Trashes the Stand-down evidence.

Scholars for 9/11 plagiarism and disinformation

Professor Steven Jones trashes the demolition evidence

The Dark Side of professor Steven E Jones

 

 

 

     GERARD HOLMGREN’S SEPT 11 WRITING AND RESEARCH