If you like this blog

Don't miss Kevin Barrett's radio shows! And visit TruthJihad.com for more...

Wednesday, June 30, 2010

Tales of Hoffman

I used to admire and respect Jim Hoffman, whose classic studies of the WTC demolitions were among the best of their time. Then he and his girlfriend Victronix appointed themselves the 9/11 Truth Thought Police and embarked on an ever-accelerating course of destructive criticism of some of the best 9/11 researchers and activists.

They protested a David Ray Griffin event in Oakland because Griffin (along with at least 90% of the truth movement) doesn't support their claim that Flight 77 really did hit the Pentagon. They attacked Loose Change, 9/11 in Plane Site, and 9/11 Mysteries -- the three best 9/11 truth videos of their time, which collectively brought this issue alive for tens, perhaps hundreds of millions of people. They started attacking me with an endless barrage of false and distorted accusations. Now, they're at the core of the miniature lynch mob going after Pentagon investigators CIT.

Hoffman and Victronix have always refused requests for radio interviews and failed to return phone calls--a very bad sign, since sincere 9/11 truth advocates are always ready to talk out their differences. Nonetheless I hoped to meet Hoffman and Victronix during my recent West Coast speaking tour, and  set up a talk with the Northern California 9/11 Truth Alliance in part for that purpose. I invited them very politely with my umpteenth peace overture. They didn't get back to me, and didn't attend the meeting.

Instead, their fellow 9/11 Thought Police officer, Brian Good, barged into the meeting (of a group from which he had been banned long ago after sexually harassing a local activist) in a V-for-Vendetta mask and costume, looming over the meeting in rigid, menacing silence for the last hour or so of the event, in what he evidently thought was a protest of my visit. A couple of times he reached into his cape and made lunging motions as if he were reaching for his V-for-Vendetta knife to throw at me. When he finally took off the mask and glared at me, his eyes looked disturbingly like Charles Manson's. (If you put Manson on a rack, stretched him out to about six foot four, and gave him a shave and a trim, you'd have a pretty good image of Brian Good.)

Good continued to stalk me, and Hoffman avoid me, for the rest of the tour. At my final talk, held in a private house in Sacramento, Good stood outside on the sidewalk in mask and costume from 6 pm to midnight, barking out angry remarks about me to passersby.

What in the world does the Hoffman-Victronix-Good clique think they're doing with their empty, destructive attacks on fellow 9/11 truth-seekers? 

Anyway, here are my thoughts about Hoffman's slideshow attacking CIT, originally composed as a long email to recent radio guest Ken Jenkins:

"Debunking CIT Debunking: An Answer to Jim Hoffman and Other Defenders of the South of Citgo Theory"

6 comments:

  1. Seriously? A V-for-Vendetta mask and costume?? Wow. Too bad nobody got that spectacle on video! Brian Good is a joke. Jim Hoffman and his wife Victoria (they married in 2008) are absolute bullies who are desperately fighting for whatever crumb of credibility they have left by attacking CIT. They know darn well that the eyewitnesses documented by CIT remove all ambiguity regarding what happened at the Pentagon and it kills them. It defies all logic to push CD of the WTC while insisting on the official narrative being true in every other way, ESPECIALLY when there is so much definitive evidence to the contrary. They say the Pentagon attack debate causes division in the movement as if THEY aren't the source of this "division". It's beyond suspicious. Thanks for speaking out Kevin!

    ReplyDelete
  2. In an email response to my exasperated analysis of Hoffman's empty slide show, my friend Ken Jenkins had a lot to say about psychology (a subject on which he is an expert) but not much on the disputed evidence. I responded to him:

    Ken,

    I appreciate the psychological insights, but the real issue isn't that complicated.

    I argued point-by-point that Hoffman's slide show offers utterly empty "critiques" of CIT. If this is true, we have a huge problem with Hoffman. If it is false, I will stand corrected.

    Many of Hoffman's statements that I analyzed are empty, period, and you did not even try to claim that they actually mean something. Perhaps you can explain why he is making empty defamatory statements disguised as critiques.

    But perhaps he does have a valid point in there somewhere among the meaningless statements. If so, what could it be?

    In your three responses, the one substantive point was:

    "I thought they said that they interviewed everyone they could find who was willing to go on record with them. If this is true, then they have every reason to make the interpretations they have made. If there is evidence that they refused to interview, or interviewed and refused to release the tapes, some of these other alleged witnesses, please direct me to it."

    Ken: "This is one of the specific points Hoffman made, so you have now been 'directed to it.'"

    Please direct me again! I must have missed this part of the slide show. I would like to see a concise, coherent narrative summarizing and linking the evidence that CIT intentionally suppressed witness accounts, especially good fight-path witnesses (any other kind of witness is irrelevant to the question at hand). And by "witnesses" I do not mean any old names cited in MSM stories, and especially not heads of PNAC.

    Kevin

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thaks for the interesting tale, Kevin. CIT has done good work, as a result, they are getting heat! CIT questions what happened at the Pentagon on 9-11. You could hardly pick a better equipped adversary if they chose to be one! How can anyone accept a massive jumbo jet skimmed but missed the lawn and took out a wall of a defenseless Pentagon after a 270 degree banking manuver by Hani Hanjour? April Gallop crawls out of the very hole without seeing any evidence of a plane. Gallop had to be told it was due to a plane! You have to wonder about Jim Hoffman and his girlfriend?

    ReplyDelete
  4. This is hilarious! I love it...keep up the good work! Nothing beats a good coffee in the morning with this clown show called the 9/11 Truth movement.

    ReplyDelete
  5. There is a team of disinfo agents at work at 9/11 Blogger. No doubt in my mind. Lots of posts denigrating the controlled demolition theory (fact actually), and now all the attacks on this CIT thing. I find it very hard to believe that AA 77 hit the pentagon. There should have been a ton of identifiable debris from the plane, and the fact that not a single video or photo of a 757 approaching the pentagon has ever been released is proof enough for me that something other than the official story happened there that day. I mean, would there not have been at least one plane part with identifiable serial # or registration # left after impact? Has a single, positively identifiable plane part, from any of the 4 alleged flights, ever been released to the public?

    ReplyDelete
  6. I checked one of the links to this ' 911 truth now ' forum and funnily, I saw all the same names that I had remembered from about a year ago when observing the comments on 911truth.org forums. They were the ones who behaved like disinfo agents. The comment above me is spot on.

    Victronix, Truthmover, Truebeleager, YT: all very suspect characters. They dont come accross as people interested in truth, they appear more interested in suppressing particular points of view.

    Their movement is dying because it is run by weaklings who lack courage and brainpower.

    ReplyDelete