hopsicker on the 911 bullshit movement, john gray, ruppert

[Dreams End]

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>By 'official story', I mean the actual events of the day, e.g., that it was all the hijackers and that the air defenses failed through incompetence, and the hijackers really were motivated to get America, etc.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>But that's the point. If you don't question those details, you are attacked by the 9/11 truthers as buying the official story. Yet, I've seen no progress at all in that line of thinking in terms of telling me things like:<br><br>Who flew the planes (remotely controlled or not)?<br><br>Who planted the thermite?<br><br>Who swapped the Pentagon plane for a missile?<br><br>Etc.<br><br>There is nothing but general fingerpointing that it was the "Bush administration" or the "neocons" or Mossad.<br><br>Hopsicker names names...lots of names. He tracks connections, follows the money and looks into backgrounds. <br><br>The fact that Kashoggi is connected to 9/11 truth should be a neon sign visible from the moon (heh) for anyone involved in this research. The fact that he's also connected to the network that at least "pretended" to train Mohammad Atta to fly an airliner should also be a clue.<br><br>I can't vouch for everything he says, because he's not easy to follow and I've not read the books...only the website. But my point is that the cd type stuff is getting nowhere in terms of getting at the "conspiracy". <br><br>Let's add into that his mentioning some of the things that I think the left in America is really missing, such as the Rockefeller manipulation of UFO cults and the like...such as sponsoring the study that was, in fact, the War of the World's broadcast in 38 (not original to Hopsicker, but he mentions it) and the shadowy connections to other cults like Heaven's gate. This is really important stuff and "my side" (i.e. the left, such as it is in America) has completely missed the boat on all of that.<br><br>I will not engage in speculating which groups are overt intel fronts, which groups merely manipulated by them and which groups are simply sincere (though perhaps influenced by the above), but suffice it to say that I think there are a lot of groups involved...and they are pumping out disinfo for a variety of causes...not just 9/11. It's a fairl large scale and very sophisticated campaign of social control. And they, I'm afraid, are kicking our asses. <p></p><i></i>

[NewKid]

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>But that's the point. If you don't question those details, you are attacked by the 9/11 truthers as buying the official story. Yet, I've seen no progress at all in that line of thinking in terms of telling me things like: <br><br>Who flew the planes (remotely controlled or not)?<br><br>Who planted the thermite?<br><br>Who swapped the Pentagon plane for a missile?<br><br>Etc.<br><br>There is nothing but general fingerpointing that it was the "Bush administration" or the "neocons" or Mossad.<br><br><br>Hopsicker names names...lots of names. He tracks connections, follows the money and looks into backgrounds. <br><br>The fact that Kashoggi is connected to 9/11 truth should be a neon sign visible from the moon (heh) for anyone involved in this research. The fact that he's also connected to the network that at least "pretended" to train Mohammad Atta to fly an airliner should also be a clue.<br><br>I can't vouch for everything he says, because he's not easy to follow and I've not read the books...only the website. But my point is that the cd type stuff is getting nowhere in terms of getting at the "conspiracy". <br><br>Let's add into that his mentioning some of the things that I think the left in America is really missing, such as the Rockefeller manipulation of UFO cults and the like...such as sponsoring the study that was, in fact, the War of the World's broadcast in 38 (not original to Hopsicker, but he mentions it) and the shadowy connections to other cults like Heaven's gate. This is really important stuff and "my side" (i.e. the left, such as it is in America) has completely missed the boat on all of that.<br><br>I will not engage in speculating which groups are overt intel fronts, which groups merely manipulated by them and which groups are simply sincere (though perhaps influenced by the above), but suffice it to say that I think there are a lot of groups involved...and they are pumping out disinfo for a variety of causes...not just 9/11. It's a fairl large scale and very sophisticated campaign of social control. And they, I'm afraid, are kicking our asses. <hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>I'm with you DE, but those sorts of questions about who planted what, and what was the person's name who was sitting in the opcentre controlling the planes could never be answered, anymore than we're likely to ever know the names of the snipers in Dealey. (And I would actually think none of those groups identified would necessarily be the ones. I tend to think private groups would be involved in stuff like that, but there's just no way to really know.)<br><br>I don't have a problem with Hopsicker looking into backgrounds and stuff, that's great. It's all interesting, but it's quite muddled and largely inconclusive. Now it's not his job to put out a theory with a nice bow on it, but then why the ad hominem on and the pounding on the table on events that he really has no idea about? To me, people who scream loud with certainty telling you something need to have really good proof. And he doesn't; he doesn't really have anything in the way of arguments about what happened that day. So why the certainty? <br><br>Now kashoggi, sure, but he's everywhere, and the stuff Hopsicker's written on is pretty stale, and seems to be limited to Gray and maybe Ruppert. And even that is sort of unclear. <br><br>On CD getting nowhere, I've argued the same in the past. And I'm not a big CD guy at all. But it does really depend on what you mean by making no progress? If you mean, details of the events, then sure. But if you mean, political activism and awareness, then I think that's wrong. I think a shit load of regular people got into 9-11 because of CD, and it has alot more purchase than talking about questionable underworld figures in Florida that even conspiracy theorists have trouble following. <br><br>Now, yes of course, Rockefeller and Kashoggi are parapolitical everymen and should be watched for all sorts of disinfo campaigns, but again, it's hard to argue that analyzing that stuff will ever really go anywhere politically either. <br> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=newkid@rigorousintuition>NewKid</A> at: 6/22/06 9:22 am<br></i>

[dude h homeslice ix]

well, thanks for making this into an interesting read, guys. the israeli blind spot is so far the only real problem i can find with emory, though he does tip his hat to israeli fascists somewhere in this broadcast. truthfully i havent even been able to get through the whole thing yet, but one is glad to see the discussion following money and naming names as opposed to videos of the pentagon not getting hit by a plane, etc. <p></p><i></i>

[Dreams End]

Well, I don't want to rehash the phys evidence debates...those are always so cordial. And, for the record, I still hold open some of those theories. For example, CD and remote controlled (or pro-pilot controlled) planes.<br><br>However, I would dearly love to see some much better analysis of what such a conspiracy MEANS. What does it say about the nature of power in our society? <br><br>I'm afraid that the emphasis is constantly on the idea of a small, rogue band that has "hijacked" the otherwise righteous and moral U.S. government. History doesn't support this idea, from the day Columbus landed. (After waxing eloquent on the peaceful nature of the Arawak "Indians" he had discovered in the Bahamas, Columbus writes to the Royals back home: "With fifty men, we could subjugate them all." Those eight words, to me, sum up hundreds of years of Western history.)<br><br>Even if CD is true, that doesn't change the fact that a very large network of intel/military/"organized crime" types seem to be running the world on behalf of some very wealthy corporate masters (though maybe even that distinction isn't relevant anymore.) The best example from somewhat simpler times is the "conspiracy" to overthrow Arbenz in Guatemala in the fifties. CIA run by one Dulles brother, acting on behalf of United Fruit Company for another Dulles brother. Is the issue here one of the Dulles family "subverting" democracy, or is it about how foreign policy is carried out in general? Is it about a rogue family or about the true nature of our ruling class, and how they continue to rule?<br><br>The left dismisses conspiracy outright most times. This is a bad move. At its best, conspiracy theory is merely analysis of the ruling class which NAMES NAMES. But the left is right...err....correct, to warn that concentrating on individuals will get us nowhere. It's not the people that are the problem...it's the system that creates them and which, in turn, they protect fiercely. If the left, for example, truly understood the message that was sent by the assassination of JFK, they would be enriched with a deeper understanding of politics in the U.S. This is why we still continue to get books linking the JFK assassination to aliens or Cuba.<br><br>But I think anyone who is sincere about 9/11 truth needs to take a VERY hard look at who is controlling that movement. It doesn't mean it's all bunk...in fact, it suggests that some of it, at least, is likely true, or there would be no need to control that info. <br><br>The left needs to do the same thing with folks like Ramsey Clark and ANSWR. We need to do the same thing with our understanding of the foundation system and how this controls the opposition and channels it into "acceptable" directions. So this isn't an attack on someone's politics. The "matrix" idea may overstate what we find ourselves in...but maybe not by much.<br><br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[NewKid]

I agree. <p></p><i></i>

[robertdreed]

Sure, the most sensationalistic hypotheses about the Sept. 11 attacks draw the most notice and interest. <br><br>But you can't build your house on sand on these matters. That means that you follow leads that are followable, rather than indulging in paddling in a cul-de-sac of speculation shouting through a megaphone. Sure, you may not lack for attention, but...<br><br>To repeat myself: if you want to know what's under a rug, you lift it up by an edge, preferably a corner. You don't try to lift it up from the middle. And the bigger the rug is, the more that axiom holds true. <br><br><br><br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[Qutb]

<!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>"To repeat myself: if you want to know what's under a rug, you lift it up by an edge, preferably a corner. You don't try to lift it up from the middle. And the bigger the rug is, the more that axiom holds true."</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br>A <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>splendid</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> analogy. <p></p><i></i>

[slimmouse]

<br><br> Interesting.<br><br> Anti Aristo held the rug up by at least 2 corners for long enough on this board, and was derided by many.<br><br> I guess it all depends on the rug dunnit ? <p></p><i></i>

[AlicetheCurious]

And there are at least four corners to the rug, so there's no point in everybody trying to lift the same corner while the others are neglected, right? <p></p><i></i>

[xsic bastardx]

<br><br> Thier objective is complete. Believers of the true nature of government wasting there time bickering over percieved saviours of 9/11 truth. <br> It pains me to see the level of maturity within the minds of the people talking about it right now. Focus on the message not the messenger.....<br> <p></p><i></i>

[greencrow0]

911 truth needs to concentrate on what the law enforcement agencies didn't do after September 11th. They didn't conduct a forensic investigation of a crime.<br><br>This is what has been thwarted all along. And those who don't want us to look at the physical evidence are continuing to do it. I believe that Dr. Stephen Jones of BYU is doing exactly the right thing. He's conducting a methodical examination of the physical evidence. Every single murder trial does exactly the same thing...they don't go looking for motives although that certainly helps a case...but convictions are made every day without establishing motive.<br><br>The disinformation and cover up is thickest around the physical evidence. That is where all the effort to ship the steel came from. There are so many leads to follow that we should not be distracted from examining the physical evidence...and demanding things, like the passenger lists of the airlines, the put options on the stock market...<br><br>the installation of 'cable systems' in the towers prior and the 'power downs' surrounding this project.<br><br>This is all the meat of the case.<br><br>GC <p></p><i></i>