The 9/11 B. S. Movement Blatant Insanity = Intentional DIS-information
"If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about the answers." -Thomas Pynchon, Gravity's Rainbow
It's a sad day for me, as I have to wade hip deep through this sewage. But, it's come to this. We are drowning in DIS-information, that is deliberate gibberish passed off as a "9/11 conspiracy theory," which is intended to associate all of the 9/11 skeptics with "whack job" ideas about that day.
The rational public will then see the "whack job" ideas dutifully printed in the mainstream corporate press, and they will respond with revulsion to the concept of skepticism of the official 9/11 story. It's simple guilt by association psychology.No one wants to associate with obvious morons. There is indeed method to the madness.
As if we haven't suffered enough ad hominem attacks, we now must defend against deliberate campaigns that are on their face: MAD. And they're supposedly coming from us.In the Beginning
It started with some anomolies at the Pentagon, an initial penetration hole that -- in most photos -- appeared too small to accomodate the Boeing 757 said to have rammed the building there.This was accompanied by strange behavior by both the Pentagon and the FBI to confiscate and keep secret all of the videotapes from the security cameras around the site. These were provocative acts that got a lot of people suspicious of what had really happened there.
All manner of speculation followed. Some people said a missile hit there. Some said a small fighter jet fired a missile, and then it too crashed there. Some said a plane flew right over the top while preplanted explosives blew up the Pentagon.Those who controlled the information drew in skeptics with the sweet lure of a seeming inconsistency. Droves of people bought DVDs like "In Plane Site" to find out more. The "Loose Change" video accepted this "small hole" theory that somehow proved the government was lying about the Pentagon crash scene."A honey pot, in intelligence jargon, is a tempting source of information or 'dangle' that is set out to lure intended victims into a trap. Ultimately the honey pot is violently and maliciously discredited so as to destroy the credibility of anything stuck to it by association." -- Michael Ruppert, "Crossing the Rubicon," p. 184
I was told of a "12 foot hole," a "16 foot hole," and an "18 foot hole" on many occasions, on many websites.
Not true:
(SOURCE: http://www.911review.com/errors/pentagon/imgs/fig_3_8.jpg
"This photograph, reproduced in the FEMA Report, shows punctured walls extending to column line 8, about 50 feet to the north of the impact hole center.")[1]
Not where the real story lay.
If millions and millions of people could be so easily redirected, so easily discredited by their own words, their own deeds, the perps at the top had learned a valuable lesson. The weaknesses of the "9/11 Truth Movement" were that it was vulnerable to distractions, to infiltration, to bogus evidence, and even to nonsensical arguments.
Take the case of Michael C. Ruppert, one of the first, perhaps one of the greatest investigators into September 11th 2001. His Truth and Lies of 9/11 is what roped me into this subject, back in late 2002. Ruppert was a powerful speaker, a devoted investigator, and a serious scholar of ilicit US government covert operations.
So, when everyone expected him to crack the case wide open in his book Crossing the Rubicon, we found out that he had written a book primarily about ... "Peak Oil???"
Sure, there was some information about war games happening during the attacks. But, why was focus lost? Why was 9/11 turned into "peak oil?" These two areas are completely different subjects (...Ruppert would disagree). Michael Ruppert was distracted from the goal, and he suffered as a result.
