That's a nonsense argument on par with the "Chewbacca defense". You're saying that if I disbelieve some argument that nobody has actually made and that I haven't actually disbelieved, then I must disbelieve this argument as well. That's pure phantasy and has no relation to what happened with AE911; all it does is suggest to the audience that I'm a hypocrite based on something you have only imagined me doing. It's kind of like the stereotypical ditzy girlfriend joke where she wakes up and blames her boyfriend for something he did in her dream.No, I'm saying that if the story had been about something you don't think is true (like the CIA "running" the 9/11 Commission, pulling the strings behind the scenes) then you'd immediately point out that Carriher is a dubious character and that it's all hearsay anyway. Rightly so.
Unless you address the AE911 issue, and specifically the arguments I have made, I'm not going to respond to you.
Now, the only counterclaim you made is that Carriher is a "dubious character", with no reasoning attached to why you think that; and presumably you want us to think she is lying, but you have no evidence of it. If she's a truther, that may mean she repeats lies of others; but you yourself have argued that there are honest, sincere truthers who would not make up a lie themselves; but that's what you accuse Carriher of doing.
There's also no "hearsay" involved; Carriher is not writing about something someone else said. I'd definitely like to know more about the evidence she used to come to her conclusion, but I doubt it's hearsay.