Daniel Hopsicker blackens the third eye of the "9/11 Truth Movement" in his Sept 28 piece, COINTELPRO 9.11. This makes uncomfortable, and essential, reading.
As my quotation marks hopefully suggest, I don't exactly embrace the term. Truth, especially with a capital "T," is elusive at the best of times, and these aren't they. We ought, rather, to be 9/11 skeptics, of not only the official story but also the competing narratives, because if we abandon critical thought and lapse into solipsistic dogma, we become nothing but evangelizing priests of a conspiracist cult. (And if that happens, then my wife is going to say "I told you so.")
I believe those perpetuating the cover-up wish precisely such irrelevence for us, and are never so happy as when they set us chasing phantom pods and missiles, sending us spiralling into silliness. For instance, consider this latest absurdity, touted on the website as the "Holy Grail": puffs of smoke as the WTC was hit somehow demonstrate "pre-demolition" charges. Such a page screams - at least to my sensitive ears - COINTELPRO. I'm wary of any "9/11 Truth" site which provides no genuinely valuable 9/11 links; seemingly arises out of nowhere; is graphically intensive and makes an extreme claim based solely upon interpretation of grainy video footage; and is registered by proxy, so we can't learn who's actually behind it.
Whether such a website is contrived with malice or well-meaning foolishness, the bad guys haven't lacked for any number of useful idiots.
And I feel Hopsicker's pain at the acclaim given theologian and 9/11 latecomer David Ray Griffin's rather addlepated The New Pearl Harbor, while Hopsicker's vastly more important Welcome to Terrorland remains widely unknown and unread by American readers, even those prepared to challenge the 9/11 Commission's insulting half-truths. (German readers, at least, are another matter.)
But I disagree with Hopsicker's thrashing of Michael Ruppert and Catherine Austin Fitts, because I value what I've learned from each of them. That they may have accepted speaking engagements from a company which functions as a glorified pyramid scheme suggests, to me, nothing more sinister than bad judgement.
Hopsicker has called Ruppert "Mr Peak Oil," and said he should be making better use of his detective skills. No one has done the on-the-ground and foot-in-the-door work that Hopsicker has, and he deserves some skilled company. Still, establishing motive is essential for solving a crime, and no less the crime of 9/11. And Ruppert's forthcoming Crossing the Rubicon looks likely to make a persuasive and comprehensive case.
A rapprochement someday would be welcome - it was nice when Dean Martin hugged Jerry Lewis - but it's irrelevent so long as they keep doing good work, and we skeptics reap the benefit.
19 comments:
You nailed it.
I was going to post on this too. It's really a shame to see the 911 skeptics in such a dysfunctional state. I'm late to this party, and everybody already seems to hate each other.
I do admire Hopsicker, am currently reading "Welcome to Terrorland" but he does seem to be a bit of a judgemental crank. Hopsicker is hardly the be-all and end-all of 9/11 research.
He's too harsh on Griffin, I think. And I also agree that Ruppert seems to have developed a bit of a bad reputation that I don't really understand. I think he's done good work.
Hopsicker's great strength is in the miniature. That is, the Florida crime scene. He's said he wants to avoid the big picture, and I think he gets on shaky ground when he fails to follow his own advice.
Dear Daniel Hopsicker:
I've read your latest "article" that mixes some truth with some blatantly wrong material. There are so many mistakes here that it's hard to know where to start.
First, you're right to point out that there are some cointelpro type disinfo artists masquerading as 9/11 skeptics. The "pod and flash" people are perhaps the most blatant example of this, although the topic certainly attracts non-governmental groupies whose enthusiasm is not matched by fact checking or even a skeptical approach to wild claims that are based on bogus photos. I recommend looking through http://www.oilempire.us/bogus.html -- a page that our friend Kris Millegan has given great praise to, and one that has attracted attacks and ugly abuse directed against me (but no substantive rebuttals).
Second, Ruppert has similar journalist credentials as you do. Neither of you publish for a major institution. Both of you have dug up some original material on 9/11. I hope there's not too much jealousy going on. Who gives you omnipotent power to determine who is and who is not a journalist?
It is fascinating that in your attack on him you don't dare discuss the information that is disclosed in "Crossing the Rubicon" such as the six war games that were underway on 9/11 that paralyzed the Air Force protection of Washington and New York. That is a very interesting omission. I don't know anything about the "Pinnacle" company you discuss, whether it is honorable or sleazy or neutral. But whether it is wonderful or a scam does not have any relevance that I can see to the factual material in "Crossing the Rubicon." When I attack folks for putting out things that aren't true, I take the time to read their material before putting my foot in my mouth (such as the "bogus.html" page referenced above).
It would also be interesting to know in your allegations about the Toronto inquiry being supposedly funded by Mr. Khashoggi if you would dare to point out that the organizers are deeply in the hole financially (partially some poor decisions that resulted in an event that was too long and poorly attended compared to the expectations of the organizers). Mr. Khashoggi is even wealthier than Teresa Heinz Kerry, and if he really was funding all of this stuff, those of us scraping dollars together for ISP fees and copies would be flush with cash (and not merely deception dollars). If he's funding this stuff, how come I haven't gotten my check yet?
Some simple fact checking would have prevented some other glaring errors. 911visibility.org has nothing to do with Mr. Fred Burks (the 911visibility folks are quite perplexed at your inability to discern who is who, which doesn't reflect well on your investigative reporting skills). Perhaps if the "we" that you write in (when you mean "I") would be better if you had an editor to fact check basic claims such as this. I did attend the Berkeley Unitarian event last fall that you lampoon. It must be wonderful to have such finely attuned psychic ability to be able to discern how the event went when you were not there.
As John Judge has stated, the key question with 9/11 is how the protection of the Pentagon was turned off -- AFTER the second tower had been hit. This is one question that the powers-that-be dare not answer. I don't buy the "no plane" theory at the Pentagon (see http://www.oilempire.us/pentagon.html), but I would love to know how a flight school drop out managed to spiral dive into the nearly empty, recently reconstructed and strengthened sector of the compound, thereby minimizing casualties. It is actually strong circumstantial evidence that remote control flight technology was used (hijacking the hijackers?) - see http://www.oilempire.us/remote.html I know that Kris Millegan's "Fleshing Out Skull and Bones" book has some info on this, too.
Your discussion of the San Francisco Inquiry in March suffered from inventing bogus claims to discredit it. I was there the entire time, and did not see the fabled "alien footprints" that you claimed were for sale. I did see material there that I thought was bogus, but it would have been much more useful for establishing truth to point out the material there that is not true, instead of making up material to discredit the event. What sort of journalism is it to invent fake facts?
Also, your citing of John Kaminski in order to discredit the inquiry suffered from a misunderstanding -- Mr. Kaminski is probably not an authentic 9/11 researcher, given his promotion of blatant disinformation (Search "Shadows of a Hologram" for details) that claims there wasn't a plane at the North Tower and his promotion of neo-Nazi Ernst Zundel (search for "kaminski zundel"). No planes and no gas chambers? It's probable that this is a dirty trick against the 9/11 movement to muddy the waters and discredit by association, although it is possible that he is merely completely incompetent yet very prolific.
Finally, if you're going to be holier than thou about all of this, you might want to consider the links that you have on your "madcowprod" website. It's not consistent to attack Mike Ruppert and link to his website. It's not consistent to make up a story claiming alien footprints were central to the 9/11 inquiry and then link to rense.com (which is notorious for promoting disinfo) and davidicke (who claims that the rulers of Earth are alien reptiles). TomFlocco.com is a mixed bag -- he has done some decent reporting on 9/11, but also praises the phony film "InPlaneSite" and the associated bogus website "letsroll911" (both are deconstructed at http://www.oilempire.us/bogus.html ) AmericanFreePress praises holocaust denial and now even claims that there wasn't a plane in Pennsylvania, even though there were plenty of eyewitnesses and physical evidence that there was. ConspiracyPlanet.com is yet another site that offers readers a mix of real scandal and nonsense that muddies the waters (I don't link to it on my site).
Hunter S. Thompson wrote "gonzo" journalism very well, but I don't recall him ever writing in the first person plural to describe his own thoughts. At least he had the excuse of massive drug use to cover up his mistakes.
Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
Sincerely,
Mark Robinowitz
www.oilempire.us
Peak oil is a motivation for allowing the attacks, not the mechanic of the attacks. This is a classic non sequitor that would flunk a freshman logic course.
Peak oil does bear quite a bit of relationship to the WTC attack -- it created the psychological shock that allowed the Iraq invasion to happen. It's like the old saying by bank robber Willie Sutton: "why do you rob banks? that's where the money is" Read an excellent analogy comparing 9/11 to a bank robbery at http://www.oilempire.us/911.html and how the proven evidence around 9/11 does fit an "inside job" paradigm at http://www.oilempire.us/understanding.html
I assume you know about patsies, Lee Harvey Oswald, false flag operations, the Reichstag Fire (and the luring of Mr. Van Der Lubbe into the Reichstag), and Operation Northwoods.
As for your false claim that
The “Remote Controllers” scenario results in no one getting indicted, for example.
I direct you to the information about Mr. Dov Zakheim, Comptroller of the Pentagon from 2001 until early this year (2004), who came from a company that builds remote control flight systems. He should be a witness in any real investigation, if one with subpoena power is ever held.
http://www.oilempire.us/remote.html#zakheim
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0206/S00071.htm
In addition, while it is not possible to take "peak oil into custody," it IS possible to establish motivation(s) for allowing 9/11 to happen (ie. by suppressing multiple investigations that would have prevented it) and the probable technical assistance provided to ensure the paralysis of the Air Force response to the hijacked planes and the guidance of the third plane into the mostly empty part of the Pentagon.
Do you really think the fact that Atta was violent and that the flight schools had sleazy connections is the central issue of how the Cheney administration allowed (at the very least) 9/11 to happen?
Your Barry and the Boys book was much better at avoiding the "scenery" (as the Jim Garrison character in "JFK" put it) and focusing more on motivation. Would you now go back and focus on the alleged Oswald character as a nut case (in his many staged incidents before Nov 22 1963) and claim that this proves he wasn't the patsy after all? Do you really believe the FBI found a Koran and an Arabic language Boeing manual in the parking garage at Logan Airport, or that they found a paper passport of a hijacker on the streets of Manhattan that somehow had passed unscathed through the fireballs?
All of these claims (below) are phony with the possible exception of the WTC7 claim. What is YOUR explanation of how this 47 story building suddenly fell symmetrically without the towers or a plane falling onto it?
http://www.madcowprod.com/mc532004.html
The “No Arabs aboard” attack was fail-safed and backstopped with missiles hidden in the undercarriage of the airliners, explosive charges secreted inside WTC7, and a voodoo hex placed on the WTC by the Spiders from Mars.
It’s not an excuse to hold a UFO Conference with an entrée for every conspiratorial taste—like the 9/11 Conference in San Francisco—where attendees can check out everything from plaster molds of alien footprints to literature written by alien abductees to presentations on "The Reptilian Perspective: Serpents of Wisdom or Snakes in the Grass.”
Earth to Mike: It wasn't “Peak Oil” slitting passenger’s throats on those hijacked airliners.
“Peak Oil” bears the same relationship to the 9/11 investigation that the Iraq War bears to the World Trade Center Attack.
I wrote about this today on my blog. The division between 911 researchers is disconcerting for those of us coming in late.
Sppoked, you said "I don't know why Mike Ruppert has gotten a bad reputation". Well maybe it's because he says we have to de-populate the planet, in his words at the Commonwealth Club, "We can do this the easy way or the hard way". He also falsely claims there are no alternative energies that can take oil's place. Maybe it's because no one has had the money or ability to develop them! Look at what happened to the Diesel engine. Ruppert has done some great research and inspired a lot of us, but I don't like research or information to be tainted by Blavatskyian thinking.
Hopsicker does more exposing and naming names and that bothers people. Ruppert just writes about pentagon classfied info that he "comes" across.
How is he to harsh on David Griffin? I've heard Griffin and he has a lot of great points but again, if you invlove a framework or belief, like religion, in your work, it is tainted. Why have religious people and organizations infiltrated movments over the centuries?
As to Jeff...Hopsicker is the only journalist to have gone to Florida to investigate Atta. You question Hopsicker's journalistic credentials and then don't ask why those you would say are "credited" journalists haven't gone there or touched it.
Anonymous....get off the peak oil payroll and read some scientific reports that aren't funded by Haliburton and Unocal. There is more oil in Alberta than in Iraq. There is no peak oil, only eco-terrorists perpetuating the "Peak Oil" scare.
I still fail to understand how anyone, after the past 4 years, can question anyone's journalistic integrity because that journalist is not part of the mainstream gatekeeping media that people like "anonymous" claim to profess to disdain.
Isn't it time to re-examine the definition of journalism? Isn't it time to accept the fact that the mainstream news no longer serves the public?
Rather than tearing everyone apart on the internet who has an opinion or information that is contrary to the established, why don't we work on building trust between us and figuring out what we can agree on and move forward with.
Hi, what a great page! Really enjoyed it, keep up the great work!
spy kid 2 gadget
southern california home for sale
Information => southern california home for sale
We had been blogging trying to find how our world sees computer game. It has been a lifeline for us. Your site provides some of the best examples of this sort and we will bookmark yours. Another one we found was and appears to be related to yours is computer game site/blog. It pretty much covers computer game related stuff.
The home of the infamous european toxic clan, psycho urban fraggers that pawn the virtual return to castle wolfenstein enemy territory battlefields.
Just Pub, a dumb return to castle wolfenstein enemy territory comic strip by feuersturm.
Jual Obat Kutil Kelamin Wanita
Obat Kutil Kelamin
Obat Kutil Kelamin Ampuh
Obat Kutil Kelamin Tanpa Operasi
Mengapa kutil bisa tumbuh di alat kelamin pria serta bagaimana mengobatinya, kutil tumbuh di sekitar kelamin pria bisa tumbuh pada batang penis pria, ujung penis pria, pangkal penis pria bahkan bisa tumbuh di sekitar anus pria. hal ini karena di sebabkan oleh virus yang bernama HPV (human papilloma Virus) sebelum melakukan pengobatan terlebih dahulu akan saya jelaskan mengenai virus HPV ini sehingga nanti kedepannya khsusunya untuk kaum pria dapat menjaga diri agar terhindar dari penyakit ini.
Bukan hanya pengobatan medis saja tapi ada juga pengobatan rumah alami yang dapat digunakan untuk menyingkirkan penyakit kutil kelamin ini. Intinya, karena kutil ini muncul di daerah yang sensitif, maka anda harus mencari pengobatan yang terbaik pada kulit Anda dan jika diperlukan juga dibantu dengan tenaga medis yang professional. Sebab dokter akan menjadi sumber informasi yang baik untuk mengobati penyakit ini.
Bismillahhirrohmaanirrokhim.... *********************************
MANTAB *************************************
Bismillahirrohmannirrokhim ...............................
111111111111111111111111111111
manjur manjur manjur manjur manjur manjur manjur manjur manjur manjur manjur manjur manjur manjur manjur manjur manjur manjur manjur manjur manjur manjur manjur manjur manjur manjur manjur manjur manjur manjur manjur
obat sipilis raja singa obat sipilis raja singa manjur obat sipilis raja singa herbal obat sipilis raja singa alami obat sipilis raja singa mujarab obat sipilis raja singa herbal manjur
obat sipilis raja singa obat sipilis raja singa manjur obat sipilis raja singa herbal obat sipilis raja singa alami obat sipilis raja singa mujarab obat sipilis raja singa herbal manjur
Post a Comment