McGee, I got to hand it to you. You know how to promote. Thanks for all you do.

after an almost daily release.

I think the best way of combating it is to act as if it did not exist. We need to be the reasonable ones that look at the evidence and report on it.

A reasonable person would have expected a thorough investigation right from the start. I was appalled that the NIST report(s) were not forensic reports. When we look at the forensics that were done IE: The FEMA report appendix C and the WTC Dust Signature Report Composition and Morphology done by RJ LeeGroup inc. We know that there were temperatures that exceeded what we would expect from hydrocarbon fires.

We also know by reading the RJ LeeGroup report that "As a result of the extreme forces produced by the WTC Event, the chrysotile fiber bundles within the WTC Towers were commonly broken down to thin bundles and fibrils." and "Mineral wool has also been widely reported as a major constituent of WTC Dust. Mineral wool found in Background Buildings typically existed as long fibers as opposed to the short, fractured fibers found in WTC Dust.". These findings indicate the use of explosives.

Your own research has found what looks like the cause of both phenomena. (Both the high temperature and high order damage).

Regarding the chips themselves it is apparent to me that they are the residue of an explosive device. The fact that the metal portion exhibits signs of fracturing is the key. We are looking at the outer casing of an explosive device. The fact that these particles were intermixed with the rest of the dust indicates they were intimately involved with the event. The fact that the unreacted nano thermite remained unreacted indicates that the event that created the chips was explosively fast. The explosion was fast enough to hurl the outer casing away from the center of the explosion before the temperature got hot enough for a reaction to start. Although this seems obvious to me I would really like input from others.

Then there is the presence of elemental aluminum, not found in nature in its isolated, pure form.

I used to think that surely some whistleblower with the 9/11 equivilant of Ellsberg's Pentagon Papers in their possesion would surface and eventually blow the lid. When reporters reported and self evident facts were accepted as such, that would have been possible. But with mainstream "news" now so thoroughly declawed, I kind of wonder. Most young people don't even know what used to be meant when we referred to the Press as the Fourth Estate. The maddening thing is that there are plenty of investigative reports published about 9/11, as Prof Jones knows as well as anyone, but their signals get lost in the Great Noise.
I had great hope that ProPublica would rise to their stated mission--Journalism in the Public Interest--and do some serious reporting on the Big Lie of 9/11, and I've emailed their entire staff more than once wondering what's stopping them, but so far those communiques have been met with profound silence. They did do some decent Anthrax reporting recently, so maybe they're testing the waters. One can only hope. Their entire staff is listed, perhaps a hundred or two thoughtful evidentiary emails could open a fissure in the WALL?.
Where are the Woodwards and Bernsteins of this generation?
When I went to journalism school, we all pined for a story as deep and significant as the 9/11 Coverup. I really can't believe what used to be our press got so thoroughly co- opted. Joseph Goebbels would be seriously impressed at the scope and compliance of the current GLOBAL Propoganda Machine.

One solution seems to be a steady dose of counter-propaganda - the kind diseminated successfully by activists during the past decade.

Ordinary, continuous, wide-scale activism. Word-of-mouth, freeway blogging, DVD distribution, e-mails.

The public imagination has been shaped into remaining within "the box". Understanding false propaganda requires out-of-the-box thinking.

Though I don't endorse his suggested solutions to the problem, Albert Einstein penned some insightful words in his essay "Why Socialism?:

Private capital tends to become concentrated in few hands, partly because of competition among the capitalists, and partly because technological development and the increasing division of labor encourage the formation of larger units of production at the expense of smaller ones. The result of these developments is an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society. This is true since the members of legislative bodies are selected by political parties, largely financed or otherwise influenced by private capitalists who, for all practical purposes, separate the electorate from the legislature. The consequence is that the representatives of the people do not in fact sufficiently protect the interests of the underprivileged sections of the population. Moreover, under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education). It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the individual citizen to come to objective conclusions and to make intelligent use of his political rights.

To my mind, the BIG LIE problem and the MSM's failure to adequately cover the 9/11 Truth Movement are integrally related issues. Most people in our society believe that if the 9/11 Truth Movement had any legitimate merit, it would be thoroughly exposed in the MSM. There are many facets to this predicament. Why is the MSM almost completely silent? Why do people so blindly trust the MSM? How do we reach people without the MSM playing their appropriate role? How do we restore the MSM to a state of integrity?