Frank Legge Makes His Position Clear

gretavo's picture

Reading through this excellent thread again

I was struck by one small sentence. After quoting Jim Hoffman pointing out that the evidence about what hit the Pentagon was inconclusive, and saying that this should not be surprising, given that the authorities have denied access to a lot of material, Gregg said:

” We need to be willing to let the official story stand unless the proof to the contrary is extremely solid."

That is such a simple, irrefutable proposition. It is the recipe for harmony and a unified front in the 9/11 Truth and Peace movement. Why is it so difficult to accept and follow? There is no solid proof that AA77 did not hit the Pentagon. It is not supporting the official story to let it stand provisionally. Still I am attacked for simply letting it stand.

I observe the efforts by P4T to find proof that the FDR file was not from AA77. Their argument is based on the finding that the plane did not appear to depart from the correct gate. It is obvious however that the position reporting system drifts while the plane is on the ground so it cannot be relied upon. It drifts so badly that the plane appeared to taxi over the top of a building on the way to the runway, but that apparenlty does not bother those who try to find reason to dispute the idea that a plane hit the Pentagon.

Sadly the dispute continues. What will be the next illogical argument to divide us?


I will refute this "irrefutable proposition" as follows:

Given that we know with certainty that some of the claims of the official 9/11 narrative are deliberate falsifications, there is no need to let any aspect of the official story stand unless the proof of its veracity can be deemed indisputable.

As we know, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.  The entire official 9/11 narrative is an extraordinary claim made up of numerous individual extraordinary claims, virtually all of which lack the required extraordinary evidence.  The only claim of the OCT that I believe is supported by extraordinary evidence is that (some type of) planes hit the twin towers.  There is insufficient evidence for any of the other claims to be considered credible(the identity of the planes, the nature of the damage at the Pentagon and in Shanksville, the claim that no explosives were used at any of the sites, and the assigning of responsibility for the planning and execution of the events.)

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Annoymouse's picture

Well said Gretavo. Frank Legge is a fraud.

Nice turning of the tables. Only a dimwit or an outright deliberate fraud would advocate the position Frank is advocating, and the fact that he is in a position of "leadership" leads me toward the latter. The PTB have not proven their case even though, as you said, the official 9/11 story is a cumulative extraordinary claim comprised of numerous individual extraordinary claims, and many of these claims HAVE been proven false beyond a shadow of doubt. To assume that various claims of the OCT are true by default is to turn on its head the very essence of what real truth investigating is all about.

Annoymouse's picture

Frank Legge Censored at 911boggler?

Have the tables been turned on the TrueFaction anti-Pentagon Truth 'darling' Frank Legge? Has he finally run afoul of Mistress 'Icky Vicky' and the 911boggler 'Ministry of Truth' 'moderators?'

See the google cache for "Its time to bite the bullet on the Pentagon"
Submitted by Frank Legge on Thu, 08/18/2011 - 10:39am

Or read more here at Pilots for 911 Truth:
Frank Legge Begging For Peer Reviewers For Pentagon Paper, gets deleted at 911Blogger, LOL

Also see related thread here at WTCdemolition:

Very revealing concessions from Frank Legge