Kevin Barrett: " Anonymous cyber-entity... Arabesque [makes]... deceptive attacks on CIT"
By Arabesque
In the past, Kevin Barrett has attacked me for directly quoting his own words. Outlandishly, Barrett claims that quoting his words is an example of "libel". In his latest attacks against me, he states:
These brave researchers [Craig Ranke, and Aldo Marquis of Citizen Investigation Team] have been repeatedly smeared by -- who else? -- the anonymous cyber-entity that calls itself "Arabesque." This web handle (I have no idea if an actual person corresponds to it, or whether its true name is Operation Arabesque) specializes in cherry-picking little out-of-context word-turds from the internet, and assembling them into deceptive TIN RATS (They'll Never Read All This S**T). The result looks somewhat like actual scholarship to those unfamiliar with the genuine article, and provides those guided more by emotion than intellect -- especially people who are deathly afraid that the 9/11 truth movement will become identified with a claim that looks outlandish to the general public (!) -- with reasons to embrace their knee-jerk emotional reactions rather than engage intellectually with the evidence. (Check out this excellent deconstruction of Operation Arabesque's deceptive attacks on CIT.This is not the first time that I have been attacked by Kevin Barrett. However, it should be noted that Barrett's claim that I have "attacked" CIT is completely false, and it is noteworthy that he does not provide a single example where I have done so. By making this statement, Kevin Barrett is slandering my reputation with a false claim, which he provides no evidence to support it with. In contrast, there are numerous examples of CIT attacking and slandering other 9/11 activists, just as there are many examples of Kevin Barret attacking 9/11 activists.
It's funny how the opinions of real 9/11 truth leaders like David Ray Griffin and Richard Gage (who recently endorsed CIT's work) are ignored by certain 9/11 sites, while the deceptive nonsense spewing from the cyber-orifice of Operation Arabesque is accepted. It makes you wonder about the judgement, if not the sincerety [sic], of the people who run these sites.
As for the "excellent deconstruction" of my work, I have partially responded to that on my blog already. Far from being "excellent", these deconstructions by "Stefan" take my words out of context, distort the actual words of Craig Ranke, and insinuates that witnesses who describe the plane hitting the Pentagon do not count as evidence of the flight path of the plane.
