At Red Pill University and Red Pill Expo, the only belief on which agreement is required for participation is that individualism is superior to collectivism. That is the conviction that binds our coalition together. Beyond that, the sky is the limit.
It is impossible to provide objective information on liberty, politics, health, and corruption in high places without challenging conventional wisdom and ruffling feathers. This is especially true when opposing views on controversial issues are welcome. We do this, because the only way to discover or confirm truth is to allow it to do battle against its enemies. Truth always wins in a fair contest. When advocates of an idea insist on using coercion to forbid any challenge to it, we can be sure it is not truth.
Allowing competition among ideas does not mean we do not have favorites in the contest because, in most cases, we assuredly do. Where the issues are particularly vexing, we feel an obligation to let it be known what our viewpoint is — at least what it is at the present time. We are all truth seekers, which means we are not embarrassed to admit we don’t know everything. We reserve the right to be wrong, and we are not too proud to change our minds upon discovery of new truths.
Theology and Religion
The advocacy or denunciation of a specific theology or religion is not allowed at Red Pill University and Red Pill Expo. This is not because we have no interest in such discourse or that we are hostile to spiritual themes. It is because there are many faiths represented in our coalition and pitting those of one faith against another would weaken or shatter the unity of our coalition. The concept that God is an expression of energy in vibration and that variances in all things are determined by the frequency of that energy, is considered to be Frequency Theology and, therefore, is subject to the same policy as the world’s great religions and the smallest parish or congregation.
Cause of building collapse on 9/11
There are four theories to explain the cause of building collapse on 9/11: (1) Fires weakened the steel structure; (2) Controlled demolition severed the support columns with high heat and explosives; (3) A directed-energy weapon destroyed the support columns and just about everything else; and (4) Controlled demolition and directed energy were used together.
We do not claim to know with certainty which of these theories is correct, but we can say with certainty that the fire theory is too riddled with contradictions and anomalies to be credible.
The directed-energy theory has in its favor several facts that are difficult to explain any other way, such as the burned and melted vehicles parked at a distance from the collapsed buildings and the near instant disappearance of building debris. However, not having an explanation is not proof that an explanation does not exist. A weakness of the directed-energy-weapon theory is that, although it is widely assumed today that such weapons probably exist, it is a stretch to assume they were in existence and deployable on such a grand scale in 2001.
We favor the controlled-demolition theory because it has the most fact-based evidence – as opposed to theory and conjecture – and it is based on technology fully deployable in 2001.
However, the most important aspect of this issue is not which theory we favor, but that all theories – other than the bizarre theory of fire – lead to the mind-crushing conclusion that 9/11 was an inside job. That is what we should be talking about, not which theory we favor. We do not intend to let the perpetrators of this horrific crime get us sidetracked from the main issue and become ensnarled in disagreement on the secondary issue. Our policy, therefore, is to provide access to analyses and documents on all views of this issue and then ask everyone to move to the main issue, which is that we have a lot of high-level housecleaning to do.