I'd like to think that the truth movement has outgrown any one faction's ability to control it (i.e. the LIHOP faction led by people like John Judge, Michael Ruppert, Sander Hicks, etc.) Enough honest people have become truthers that the ratio of real truthers to fakers should ensure the kind of vigorous debate needed to follow every significant lead.

The way the fake truth movement operated just a few years ago was a) to defend the cause deliberately with faulty arguments so as to keep interest in the movement limited to kooky types who no one would take seriously and b) to manufacture consensus around LIHOP thus preserving the Islamofascist myth should their lame efforts succeed or should a real truth movement arise around them (which is what happened!) That's why you had the blatant disinfo like Nico Haupt and the no-planes at the towers brigade squaring off like (fake) pro-wrestlers in staged confrontations designed to lead the credulous into siding with the subtle disinfo LIHOPpers (lie-hoppers?)

The evolution of the movement can be seen to be occurring in stages where each time it looks like one part of the truth is becoming mainstream (like controlled demolition, say) a new crop of fake truthers has to emerge to remain as effective gatekeepers. When LIHOP became untenable for anyone wanting to be taken seriously, LIHOP was mostly abandoned, or at least those pushing it had to admit that the WTC was blown up, which they can't pretend was directly related to the alleged hijackings.

Since a hypothetical case of Israeli agency in the attacks would logically be the most damaging and therefore closely guarded truth it stands to reason that the fake truthers would be willing to concede just about anything before conceding that point. And yet! Thanks to the ravenous and unyielding nature of the crazies in the world of Zionism the tide has begun to turn dramatically against Israeli hardliners such that the public may well be ready to face facts. This presents quite the quandary for the fake truth movement, which (if it knows what's good for it) will effectively retreat and either "live to fight another day" or if they actually have a moral epiphany of some kind maybe even start working towards a real peace through truth and understanding instead of working to shield whoever their paymasters may be from accountability over their involvement.

Of course, 9/11 is not the end all be all of truth and one could argue that there are other examples of historical falsification that make 9/11 pale by comparison so that the 9/11 fraud itself could be sacrificed in the interest of preserving other more valued mythologies. As a real truth movement it is imperative that we keep a running record of what people have tried to peddle in the past so that we can show future truthseekers who the real truthers were and who was involved in the process of gatekeeping described above. The bottom line is that dishonesty or even gross incompetence should be rewarded with ignominy, and rarely if ever forgiven.