Ruppert/Hecht: THE NY TIMES PUTS 9-11 QUESTIONS IN THE GRAVE

[Qutb]

Not endorsing Ruppert, but this caught my interest:<br><br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>"Not long before “Loose Change” was released, <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>a recently retired high-ranking US Naval officer approached me and tried to sell me on the claim that no plane hit the Pentagon</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->. He even claimed that he had been inside the Pentagon on 9-11 and had seen no aircraft wreckage. He kept pushing but could not persuade me, because (as I told him) I was aware of more than 130 independent, non-military eyewitnesses who had been traveling on nearby I-395 who swore that they did see an airliner hit the Pentagon. Having driven on I-395 many times, I know that they had a perfect view."</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> <p></p><i></i>

[Gouda]

If he is not lying or spinning this, then he knew to beware too-good-to-be-true confidential information from a military/intel official. Bummer if the official was (by rare exception) sincere, or even correct in such a loaded matter of high stakes - but that is not usually how these things work, especially when it comes to whispering sweet nothings to media-savvy mouths like Ruppert and Alex Jones (not equating them for their 911 work, only their attention-getting skills). It would be a rarity if the mil official's info was in fact genuine. <br><br>***<br><br>And to add another hand to the other, other hand: On the other hand, all this "pay no attention to the pink elephant" showbiz does tend to make people curious about pink elephants and may entice them to have a peek, which opens up the risk that they get lured into honeypots and other disinfo sinkholes. <br><br>Ah, but life is full of risks. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=gouda@rigorousintuition>Gouda</A> at: 6/8/06 6:11 am<br></i>

[Bismillah]

It's incredible how many people here are insinuating that Ruppert is a shill or a spook, or complaining that he's sabotaging the "9/11 Truth movement". Those who are slandering him so lazily also make it all-too-clear that they have only a vague and passing acquaintance with his work, if any. <br><br>Full disclosure: I've met him, once - when he spoke at a 9/11 conference I co-organised in 2003 - and I can confirm that he can indeed be bumptious and aggressive. I'll also say that he's capable of apologising generously and without reservation, and that I like the guy and admire his guts, his honesty, his perseverance and his ability to focus steadily on what matters. <br><br>None of which is of any importance whatsoever. <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>It is not a niceness contest.</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> And Ruppert's book is simply indispensable reading for anyone hoping to make a solid case against the Bush Gang. <br><br>After Popular Mechanics, the government's "9/11Myths" site, and the NYT with its "sine qua non", anyone still focusing on no-planes, holes-in walls, and the rest of that gee-whiz CD stuff is doing the Bush Gang a huge and very welcome favour. You are never, ever, going to nail them with any of that stuff. Never. <br><br>So choose between attempting to make a case in the real world and being content to carry on making a commotion on the World Wide Web. I don't have to be Einstein to have a pretty good idea which option Dick Cheney would prefer to see us all take. <p></p><i></i>

[OnoI812]

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>I wish those results could have been obtained by anyone but Alex Jones..I don't have anything significant against the guy, but he really goes over the top sometimes..<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>What are you talking about?<br><br>Alex jones has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with obtaining those results.<br><br>all he did was have the person that did obtain the results, on his radio show...and then be in agreement with said results.<br><br>The results don't come from one person...you should listen to the interview again. <p></p><i></i>

[Sweejak]

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>I wish those results could have been obtained by anyone but Alex Jones..I don't have anything significant against the guy, but he really goes over the top sometimes..<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>AJ is prone to hyperbole, I've already given my personal views about him and his style but in the end you have to give him his due, which is considerable.<br><br>As far as physical evidence it's always worth keeping your eye on what may come up, the thermate for instance, meanwhile the political consequences and uses of 9-11 are something I can witness everyday.<br> <p></p><i></i>

[OnoI812]

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>You are never, ever, going to nail them with any of that stuff. Never.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Who said anything about nailing them?<br><br>Most serious students of parapolitics know that they can never be nailed, They friggin control the courts fer christ sake.<br><br>and even if they were nailed, they'd just replace their puppet with another shill.<br><br>but scientifically proving to people the extent they're being lied to, and unmasking the charade, IS important.<br> <br>No matter how much someone says it's unimportant any longer. <p></p><i></i>

[CyberChrist]

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Good point. I've been reading about The White Rose movement of WWII lately. Basically a bunch of leaflet printing students who managed to put enough fear in to the PTB that the groups leaders were caught, tried and beheaded on the same day.<br><br>Fuck this digital thing. It's getting us nowhere. <hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Come on guys, it's gotten us plenty and continues to do so. the truth movement, whether it's about 9/11, Iraq, the NWO, and everything else in between would not be anywhere as prevalent as it is now if it was not for the Internet.<br><br>Movies like "Loose Change", for example, wouldn't have gotten the exposure that it has gotten if it was not for the Internet. And we wouldn't be able to get the word out to all corners of the world, including places behind the great firewall of China.<br><br>I hate to say this, but technology is imperfect and there will be outages, but that happens with just about anything. Printing presses are not exactly infallible either and they too would break down from time to time.<br><br>Jeff, I maintained a blog on blogger.com as well and I feel your pain, but frankly if you don't want to be at the mercy of Google, then get a domain name, get a hosting plan with a decent hosting company, use software like WordPress, and post your blog through there. It will probably be much more reliable and since you'll be paying for the hosting, you can actually pick up the phone and call someone if something goes down. If you don't have experience with getting any of that set up, then I am sure that many of your readers, including myself, would be more than happy to help you.<br><br>But let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater and start saying that "this digital thing" has gotten us nowhere. It has indeed changed the world in my eyes. <p>--<br>CyberChrist<br>http://www.hackerjournal.org<br>My brain is hung like a horse.</p><i></i>

[isachar]

"It's the same all over, isn't it?" - Pug<br><br>Possibly, in most advanced western countries. But then, that is my point. Only,as you point out, it could be extended to include much of Yurp and Canada.<br><br>Me,? Yup I'm an a'merican.<br><br>And, my opinion stands (without insult to you or those who are active and trying to make a difference). While most (finally!) of my fellow 'mericans, now say they don't like what the Bush admin has done, few are willing to do a damn thing about it beyond saying so to a pollster.<br><br>Where are the massive anti-war demonstrations? There was one - well attended (300K +) - in DC last September. No large massive rallies have occurred since since then. Why haven't the students shut down the campuses? Where are the massive "people power" protests to oppose the phony war the related assaults on the Constitution being waged by the Bush admin and the complicit elected officials in Congress of both parties?<br><br>It will take such efforts, along with a strong anti-war mobilization among veterans and currently serving military personnel, along with international sanctions against the U.S and protests in other major cities throughout the world to turn this corrupt fascist war machine around.<br><br>Until these things happen (it took about 5 years for these things to arrive at critical mass during 'Nam), then I think my admitted generalization that "most" americans are too lazy to do something about it is reasonable. <br><br>I'd be happy to be shown to be wrong.<br> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=isachar>isachar</A> at: 6/8/06 1:01 pm<br></i>

[FourthBase]

The Google video of the WTC2 corner with the supposed thermite reaction. And I'd never seen thermite in action before until that skyone video. And now I'm a little bit more open to the idea. Someone better find me video of molten aluminum acting like that spot on WTC2 or I might begin to believe Jones. <p></p><i></i>

[Avalon]

<!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>He kept pushing but could not persuade me, because (as I told him) I was aware of more than 130 independent, non-military eyewitnesses who had been traveling on nearby I-395 who swore that they did see an airliner hit the Pentagon. Having driven on I-395 many times, I know that they had a perfect view."</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br>And who exactly did they "swear" this to? <br><br>Who was able to cross-examine them to see if there were contradictions in their stories?<br><br>What was the penalty if they were not telling the truth? <p></p><i></i>

[Et in Arcadia ego]

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>What are you talking about?<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>What I'm talking about is the considerable resistance 'normal' people have to him and his websites. He sensationalizes damn near eveything, and worse, inserts himself into every piece of information he presents. I'm very much aware that he didn't do the research, but he is a vehicle for presenting the info, and as such, by default, alot of people will disregard it as a result.<br><br>That's EXACTLTY what I'm talking about.. <p></p><i></i>

[CyberChrist]

Remember when AJ was going on and on about Schwarzenegger being the next President? That was funny. <p>--<br>CyberChrist<br>http://www.hackerjournal.org<br>My brain is hung like a horse.</p><i></i>

[monkeymcgee]

Ruppert has too many spook connections and has accused too many people of disinformation for me to take him seriously on that topic. His exchanges with Dave McGowan are hilarious.<br><br>You saw that quote about “Disinformation, in order to be effective, must be 90% accurate.” Yeah--apply that to old MR.<br><br>I signed up for FTW after reading that timeline he put up in Oct 01. It was great stuff (or so it seemed) and set a lot of precedence for the research that followed. Looking back on it, that seems a little fishy given what's happened since then and what causes Ruppert has pushed.<br><br>9/11 truth seekers would do well to remember the Man X scene in JFK. Listen to what he says and connect the analogs to 9/11. The key things are the war games, the travel plans of high officials, Bush's actions in Florida, the fighter plane response. I'm not saying the rest isn't important, but there's too many ways "they" can spin it even if you can prove there was controlled demolition or a missile hit the Pentagon.<br><br>If you believe the government was complicit in the events, then you should probably concentrate on the aspects of that day where only the government could control what happened.<br><br>Now back to your regularly scheduled pissing contest... <p></p><i></i>

[DireStrike]

How about this story: <br><br>The movement grew and grew, and at first it seemed like there was no stopping it. EVERYBODY believed something was wrong. But then people came in. Profitseekers and people pushing agendas and pure, simple crazies. They overwhelmed the movement and tried to take it in a thousand directions, so they ended up going nowhere. Despite all this, it kept growing and growing - people had the impression that something was up. Eventually it made it all the way to the mainstream media, yay! They celebrated and felt good about themselves. But, aww, unfortunately the stories they told were not credible or provable, and the MSM gave up. The bloggers realized it was over, and lamented. The end.<br><br>That's my story about the story that They would like to tell. And they're trying very hard to tell it. After all, they already control most of the characters in the story. The entire MSM, certainly some people in the movement, and likely some of the bloggers.<br><br><br>Don't buy their story. Stories are nice, but they aren't true. They might be partially true or largely true, but in the end even one falsehood makes them fiction.<br><br>And notice how their story doesn't address the truth at all? What happened on 9/11? Who caused the explosions and why? Perhaps later we will figure out how.<br><br>It doesn't matter how many people shot Kennedy, but who controlled him or them and WHY they killed him. And how they got away with it.<br><br>I'd like to tell a story one day about how the truth won out. After so many decades of manufactured bullshit, people just adapted and saw through it. Lies and truth, fiction and reality... you can only confuse them for so long. That's why those people didn't get away with it.<br><br>Let's all work to tell that story. <p></p><i></i>

[Hugh Manatee Wins]

He did a great job of showing how keywords negatively framed <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>and</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> discredited 9/11 truth seekers.<br><br>Learning how that works would go a long way in helping identify the intent of an article and whether the author is friend or foe.<br><br>(on edit: yikes. left out the 'and' between 'framed' and 'discredited' which made it look like the opposite of my meaning. oops....) <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=hughmanateewins>Hugh Manatee Wins</A> at: 6/9/06 1:56 am<br></i>