Sunday, March 13, 2005

Open Letter on Infiltration into 9/11 Truth Movement

This is an open letter on the subject of possible manipulation or infiltration into the 9/11 truth movement by larger and better funded powers (whom I will define below)

I´m sending this letter to three groups of people. As the people in the first two groups are very public about advertising their contact emails on their websites I don´t think there´s anything wrong with naming them...

First group -- People who don´t necessarily know me well or at all but have been public in their criticism of the 9/11 Truth mafia (I will define them below) and/ or the Peak Oil/ Die off theory

1. Wing TV
2. David McGowan
3. John Kaminski
4. Nico Haupt (who does know me well)
5. AngieSept11 (who does know me)
6. Brian Salter
7. VoxFux (who met me once briefly)
8. Bruce McBurney of HiMac who was treated like retarded dog at the Toronto 9/11 conference but claims to have a technology that could use gasoline far more efficiently

Second Group -- Three individuals whom I still have a measure of respect for, but for one reason or another still seem to be associated and in two cases very closely associated with the 9/11 truth mafia

1. Jim Hoffman
2. Michael Kane -- co-author of Crossing the Rubican with Michael Ruppert
3. Jamie Hecht -- editor of From the Wilderness -- Michael Ruppert´s web editor -- if I´m not mistaken

The third group of recipients of this letter are a handful of personal friends of mine whom identifying would serve no purpose.

I want to begin by displaying the quote from Angie´s website which gave me the deep inspiration to write this letter. To do something like this, I really have to have some deep inspiration as my soul is so sunk in the deepest cynicism imaginable. Please first read this quote.


There's also been another possible motive for the 9-11 attacks that I've speculated about since the beginning. Have you ever wondered why the 9-11 official story was so implausible and so sloppily put together? (you know, the simultaneous hijacking of four different planes by people armed with mere boxcutters, the suicide notes found in luggage that inadvertently didn't make it on the planes, Arabic flight manuals left in cars in the airport, and a million other things they did which seem like obvious plants, or things they didn't do or create which would have squelched many of the 9-11 skeptics early on.) It's as if they want us to see through the whole thing. Could the perpetrators, in fact, want a 911 Truth Movement to flourish? And if so, why?


I believe that Angie´s next paragraph is interesting and I am going to put it at the bottom of this letter as a footnote, but I think the quesiton is actually more interesting than her particular answer and I want to have my own shot at addressing it. To see her full essay use the URL above.

Before I begin my discussion of this question, I want to also cite the following URL from Brian Salter´s website which is below which discusses the shocking background of many of the signers of a recent 9/11 petition. While I was already somewhat aware of the critique of Daniel Hopsicker about the human garbage John Grey... this essay really made a lot of things more clear to me.

First of all I want to state something about my 9/11 truth activism. I began as a legal researcher and community legal organizer around ground zero of communities effected by the toxic dust on 9/11. A year later after seeing Mike Ruppert speak in New York I joined the underground video collective Shadow Government TV which Nico Haupt was once heavily associated with and Michael Kane is now heavily associated with.

From late 2002 to mid 2003, I was one of most active people organizing for the movement in New York City until Kyle Hence came into town and somehow appointed Premila Dixit to be the new leader of the movement. From then on I was marginalized, gagged and finally on September 9th, 2004, ejected from a 9-11 truth event. An incident that was witnessed by Vox Fux as he was also being either gagged or thrown out by Kyle Hence.

Two days later I witnessed both Nico Haupt and even local toady Nicholas Levis physically thrown out by brutal security guards (and yes I mean DRAGGED OUT) of the big 9/11 event on the orders of eccentric millionaire Jimmy Walters. I wrote a short, off the cuff note which surprisingly was actually webpublished all over the world which resulted in close friends of mine attacking ME for making an off the cuff comment about Jimmy Walter´s medical condition.

All through this time it was many times alleged to me that all these problems were petty personality problems. I was too high strung. I was too prone to yell at people. If I would just calm down and accept thing, none of these problems ever would have happened. Etc Etc. Case in point was the incident at Riverside Church on September 11th 2003 when I WAS GAGGED AT AN OPEN MIC. In this incident which was caught on tape, I waited hours to speak. Given my background in the movement one would have thought in a 4 day event I would have been on a panel. But here I waited hours to speak and was cut off by the moderator, someone who had never done any 9/11 activism in NYC... The point here is that there is no doubt I was caught on tape screaming at the moderator and telling him to go fuck himself. But the real point was, I waited to speak for hours just like everyone else and I had a right to my time.

The complete story is already on my

I have to say that without the work of Wing TV, I would still partially be blaming myself for all these incidents. I would still be saying to myself, maybe if I took an anger management class or something like that, I could have walked away from the movement having only wasted 3 years in my life without uttering so many 4 letter words.

But having had a lot of time at the computer in what seems to be becoming an annual trip down to South America, I have to conclude that there is a lot more too this.

And I have not come to these conclusions rapidly or lightly. In fact if you read my first blog posting, it is very very clear that I was desperately trying to at least partially defend Mike Ruppert from the attacks of WING TV. If the WING TV people are taking the time to read this email and if Viktor remembers my first phone call to him he will perhaps recall that I spent the time trying to tell him that Ruppert is really a decent guy and the real enemy is Kyle Hence.

Since then, WING TV has become much more critical of Kyle, but not critical enough. But I have been researching the work of WING TV, Brian Salter, Angie and David McGowan on Ruppert and unfortunately and I really have to say unfortunately because I do have a soft spot for the man, I have to conclude that they may be right. I have a soft spot for Mike Ruppert and always will because he treated me with great courtesy one night when I was stranded at the New Haven railroad station. But the fact that he seems capable of great kindness and courtesy at times, cannot excuse his bizarre and reprehensible policy of threatening to sue other activists for defamation when there just is no need.

Threatening penniless bloggers with civil action in a United States court of law has a very chilling effect. It really makes you want to think twice before you even want to start a conversation with the man.

A good source on Ruppert´s threats to sue Dick Eastman and WING TV are here

But besides this childish behavior, on the part of Ruppert, I want to make a few general observations on the evolution of the 9/11 truth movement.


When I first went to Mike Ruppert´s website in November of 2001, it seemed to be a great learning tool for me. I managed to use to site to get to

1. Jared Israel´s site
2. Webster Tarpley´s book on the elder Bush
3. It´s where I first heard of Barry Zwicker
4. It´s how I first heard of Daniel Hopsicker and his work
5. And through the Ruppert lecture I first became aware of Kyle Hence and Unanswered Questions, Nafeez Ahmed´s book -- The War on Freedom, I met Nico and became familiar with his work, and I met SGTV

But it was only through reading Nico´s a few months ago that I became aware of WING TV and only through WING TV did I become familiar with people like John Kaminski and David McGowan among many others.

This is after 3 years in the movement and I still wasn´t aware of the existence of many of the people who did the original research that really built the movement. And this is after attending every major conference that I´m aware of other than the one in SF which I missed.

Now look what happened to this original list above

1. Jared Israel became a dyed in the wool Zionist and spends all his time apologizing for Serbian and Israeli nationalism. His original work on the airforce standown that played such a huge role in the birth of the 9/11 truth movement seems almost like ancient history. I still think Jared Israel has some amazing political commentaries on his site, but of all the people in the so called movement, he seems to be one of the most desperate to avoid any discussion with me. After three years of attempting to contact him, I have never suceeded. And this is from someone who claims to be a fearless debater

2. Daniel Hopsicker and Ruppert have become total opponents with Hopsicker doing trenchent exposes of the bizarre funding behind 9/11 truth movement financier John Grey

3. Barrie Zwicker, one of the seemingly nicest people I´ve ever met had a lot to do with making this movement a movement and he continues to be heavily at the center of the 9/11 truth mafia. How he manages to ignore the objective actions of the people around him is more than my poor mind can understand.

4. Kyle Hence has done more to destroy militant 9/11 activism than any other person. He is such a punk that he has finally hit the radar of many people in the real movement. He has been surprisingly open in his refusal to pin anything on the US government other than incompetence -- which is covered by the doctrine of SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY. The US government can be held responsible for building a defective parking garage, but not for giving billions to the Afghani muslim fanatics. So what´s the point of proving them negligent? And yet Kyle is and I guess will always be a respectable member of the 9/11 truth mafia.

See how Ruppert defended him in this attack on WING TV´s guests
“Oh, and your vaunted list of 911 researchers … with the exceptions of Web Tarpley, David Ray Griffin, Jim Hoffman, Tom Flocco and Kyle Hence, all of them are flakes or well-intentioned neophytes who, because of their associations with UFO’s, David Icke and the like are certain destroyers of 911 credibility if the issue were ever to reach the mainstream.

What I´m trying to show here is that in my traditional opinion people like Kyle Hence and Barrie Zwicker played a good role in the beginning because they helped make the 9/11 Truth movement a movement -- as opposed to say Jared Israel who needed to build his own sect.

But little by little this movement has turned into a bureaucracy that has marginalized most of the original researchers.

Well that was my old theory. My new theory is that there is something WAY more sinister going on here and there always was.

--------------The website test

I have a theory about 9/11 truth websites

The way you can tell a real 9/11 truth website from an infiltrator sponsored website is that the real 9/11 truth websites look like shit.

Look at or 9/11 they look great. Because they have MONEY. Look at David McGowan´s pathetic looking website. He obviously has no money to pay a webprogrammer so he´s hacking it out by his own html coding skills. I mean hey no offense to WING TV because their program rocks but their website still looks like they have no money. But look at the content of say McGowan who has one of the worst looking websites versus the GATEKEEPERS like Ruppert or 911

or look at the quality of the content that Nico and Billy Pilgrim used to post on globalfreepress before they ran out of MONEY. I mean hey, globalfreepress needed only 250 dollars a month to keep going and Ruppert has 20,000 or something like that subscribers giving him 20 or something like that bucks a year... Something on the order of a bit less than half a million dollar a year. almost 200,000 dollars were blown in Toronto by Barrie Zwicker. Jimmy Walters is blowing money through his butthole to buy advertising on ESPN... and no one could come up with money to save globalfreepress.

-------------- the real issue

Ok let´s talk about the real issue here which is that the 9/11 truth mafia is covering stuff up and pushing the Peak Oil population decline mantra.

First I want to make a little chart comparing the views of Ruppert, Hence and the 9/11 collective on two issues, Peak oil and population implosion and demolition of the towers

1. Ruppert ----- Obsessed with Peak Oil ---- seems to believe in Demolition but doesn´t want to talk about it because he´s afraid that will make people believe more in the government´s story

Say what? Yes... read his full story here. He doesn´t want to talk about physical evidence because he´s afraid it will STRENGTHEN the government... ok
the blurb below encapsulates his opinion

"I don't for a minute believe that an airliner hit the Pentagon. And no one has ever seen a video of an airliner hitting the Pentagon because there isn't one. It doesn't look like the WTC towers collapsed because of the impacts and the way that they collapsed doesn't make sense. But if I, with some measure of journalistic credibility, and my readers on Capitol Hill and in universities start writing stories about these things, I wind up in either a journalistic suicide mission, or in the improbable place of having to explain where the airliner that didn't hit the Pentagon went or how the towers were brought down. There is a mountain of physical evidence that blows the government story in my mind, but my experience says that it will never penetrate the consciousness of the American people in a way that will bring about change. What will penetrate, from my experience, is taking non-scientific reports that most people instantly accept as credible, whether news reports or government statements or documents, and merely showing that they are lies. That opens the wedge, and removes any reliance upon expert or scientific testimony which is typically used to confuse simple facts. From there, you can begin to show people all the other documentary evidence of foreknowledge, planning and participation."

2. Kyle Hence ----- doesn´t seem very into Peak Oil ----- won´t talk about demolition or anything even remotely close to it. In fact Hence seems to be only one step more radical on 9/11 than Michael Moore in that he will at least talk about the air force stand down

3 The 9/11 mafia ---- open to Peak oil but not obsessed with it --- will sometimes talk very vociferously about demolition

And this is interesting to me because as the 9/11 truth mafia have congealed themselves they will never attack Ruppert or Hence who engage in blatant self censorship but they are open to working with people like Hufschmid, Jimmy Walters, Don Paul and Jim Hoffman who are the best expositors of the demolition theory.

So who is being gagged here by the 9/11 Truth mafia. Not the demolition people. But it seems that the people who are being gagged most openly are the people talking about abiotic oil, and who are raising questions about the Peak oil stuff and a few people like me who REACT TO ANTI DEMOCRATIC MEASURES WITH RAPID FIRE STREET SLANG.

It seems to go like this. Argue with Ruppert about Peak Oil and he may threaten to sue you. Invite Ruppert to a TV interview to debate Peak Oil and he may sue you too. Talk about demolition and you can´t play in Kyle Hence´s sandbox. But you can play in Barry Zwicker´s sandbox. Try to show up to a 9/11 event that you have been invited to by the entire NY 9/11 movement to sell Tshirts and you get thrown in the streets. Complain to people like Barrie Zwicker and Cynthia Mckinney and all you get is a smile.

Conclusion: Criticizing Rupperts Peak Oil theory is a the flashpoint of conflict in this movement, NOT anymore the demolition theory. For some reason the nicer people in the 9/11 Truth mafia group will NEVER break with Ruppert or Hence or criticize them in any way no matter what insane things they do, but they will talk about demolition and they will act like decent human beings.

But radical activists have a tendency to identify bullshit and move away from it and this is why I see a whole new movement forming and I can only agree with WING TV´s comments on John Kaminski´s essay The Second Wave. But I can add something to this. As opposed to even the most radical criticism I have heard, I have to say that given my long experience in observing the congealing of the 9/11 truth mafia, the Second Wave can only be worth anything if it dedicates itself to exposing the First Wave as a blatantly anti democratic bureaucracy funded by mysterious sources.

For example, why would anyone like John Gray give thousands of dollars to the 9/11 truth movement. The guy is a complete moron who got a degree from a diploma mill. The man actually BOUGHT his way onto the Toronto conference panel. His speech was ridiculous.

I was an eyewitness to this crap, but I got this off of Salter´s website
see my excerpts below as footnote 2

I was also an eyewitness to Kyle Hence trying to get Professor Michel Chossudovsky to shut up about John Gray and telling everyone in a meeting of about 25 leaders of the 9/11 truth movement than no one can talk about this and no one can talk about Kyle telling us that we can´t talk about it. Appalling to have to watch someone like Kyle with an IQ of around 20 telling someone like Professor Chossudovsky with an IQ of 200 to shut up.

One other little point about Toronto... The reason Barrie Zwicker lost over 150,000 dollars was because the tickets cost over 60 Canadian dollars a day. The rooms were 90% empty. Only 200 people came over the weekend to the Convocation Hall which could seat 3000 people. It was like the whole thing was marketed to the WEALTHY. Who don´t really care about this stuff because they feel like if everyone is sent to the gas chambers they will at least be the last.

It´s almost as if they were TRYING to lose money.
-------------------------SECTION ABOUT PEAK OIL------------------------------------------------------------

Now let´s talk about Ruppert and his peak oil obsession.

Why did I used to have faith in Ruppert on Peak Oil? Because every time I read an article about Peak Oil, the price oil went up. And that´s been happening for three years now. It has seemed as if Ruppert was maybe UNDERSTATING THE CASE FOR PEAK OIL...I mean geez like since I first attended Rupperts lecture the price of a barrel of oil has gone up by 30 dollars.

So since reality keeps seeming to correlate with Ruppert´s predictions, it has seemed to be sensible to give him the benefit of the doubt and that´s why I have been very skeptical as I have watched the presentation of material on WING TV and David McGowan´s website...

I also read all of or almost all of Lyndsey Williams online book and saw nothing there that seemed convincing enough to really change my thinking.

But a couple of things have made me think a little more deeply into the matter

Look at Rupperts debate with Jerry Russel on abiotic oil.

First look at the kind of language Ruppert uses to the other side in the debate!!!
Ruppert modus operandi

Listen, let's take the passive-aggressive gloves off here you asshole.

You have already lost the bet and I have more than enough information to
prove you wrong. What I haven't done yet is write it up or finish
reading the Russian piece thoroughly to see if I can learn something.
Now from the first URL you can read about the debate and then there are several URLs where you can jump to the Yahoo group where Ruppert pleads to his Peak Oil expert buddies to dispose of Jerry Russel.

In the dialogue between Ruppert and Dale Allen Pfeiffer, there is not the slightest hint that Ruppert has ANY CONCERN ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE MATERIAL SUBMITTED TO HIM IS TRUE OR NOT. Ruppert draws his conclusions without bothering to do

1. Any research on his own
2. Having even a slightly open mind
3. Giving off the impression that he really knows anything about the subject himself

Which left me the impression that Ruppert is just winging it. One has to ask why does he believe in Peak oil, because Dale Allen Pfeiffer has a cute smile? Because Dale Allen Pfeiffer is a good writer? Because a lot of other people who claim to be experts support Dale Allen Pfeiffer...and so what then its majority opinion? Science is not a majority opinion thing. A scientific conclusion can only be drawn after the careful weighing of material evidence which apparently Ruppert didn´t even have the slightest interest in.

Then the next URL is Ruppert´s reply to Russel and you can see that

I mean like, supposedly the fate of human life on earth is at stake and Rupperts repsonse to Russel denying his claims is just cut and pasted out of some emails from his buddies. The centerpiece of the scientific argument was that two people didn´t show up to a conference. And Ruppert is 100% sure than he doesn´t owe Russel 1000 dollars. A more honest person would have obviously stated that neither side had put forth anything conclusive... but Ruppert typically makes these absurd fraudulent $1000 bets with the world that no one will ever collect without taking him to court because he will always find some way to worm out of anything.

By the way, these 1000 dollar bets of Ruppert are legal contracts and he can be sued. Not to say that anyone should bother, really they are just silly ridiculous rhetorical devices. Just like his refusal to debate with anyone who won´t put up 1000 dollars for the privilege. Obviously he´s got money and most of the rest of us don´t.

So where is he getting his money from? Real use the URL at the top of this article.

As far as I´m concerned Peak Oil could be true, Abiotic oil could be true. I haven´t seen enough evidence either way to make an informed opinion. But between Russel, McGowan and WING TV, I will say that they have presented a fair case that abiotic oil is NOT absurd. That there are prominent scientists mostly in the former Soviet states that have published a lot of material on it. And thus, this accusation that anyone who wants to challenge Peak Oil is just looney is unfair.

But, I want to approach this question from another angle.

Let´s summarize how Ruppert gets from Peak Oil to Die off...

1. Almost all the easy to get at oil in the world is gone
2. The rest of the oil will be harder to extract
3. Oil demand is rising and will continue to rise until it hits around 180 a barrel
4. Without oil we can raise food, transport vehicles, heat houses, conduct energy
5. Replacing oil will natural gas, coal, uranium etc will make these resources run out more quickly. Wind and solar can only replace a small amount of the energy from so called fossil fuels.
6. What will result is mass starvation not simply because the powers that be are mean and awful but because there´s just not enough resources out there.
7. Solution: buy a subscription to Rupperts website ie give Ruppert you money, buy PHYSICAL GOLD --- an investment which has 0% capital appreciation except in case of a collapse of the dollar --- and . . . . well not a heck of a lot else.

In a sense, I think the abiotic oil crowd like WING TV, Jerry Russel and David McGowan have made a tactical error in debating Ruppert.

I don´t think that it´s very easy to prove abiotic vs biotic oil without pouring over months worth of scientific information. Maybe more than months. Maybe the abiotic people are right, maybe they are totally wrong. I don´t know.

But I do believe that there is a very easy line of attack against the Peak Oil people and Mike Ruppert especially. So i will pursue this argument and we will assume for a minute that Rupperts points 1-3 are correct. We are almost out of oil and oil is about to skyrocket and natural gas, coal and uranium aren´t solutions because they too will run out forgetting about the environmental consequences. Do we get to INEVITABLE die off? Meaning not die off because the Henry Kissinger types will see the oil crisis as an opportunity to do what they always wanted to do but because essentially we are on a row boat with only enough water and food for 1 tenth of the people on the boat and it doesn´t matter who is in charge.

Jerry Russel has a very good page on solar power and this is especially interesting

and here is his link on wind

In any case, Denmark is already producing, I believe, almost a 5th of its power through wind. And they use off shore platforms. Meaning on the SEA... So if you total up all the wind out there that sweeps across the sea on the whole planet... Well that´s a lot of energy. And of course, it costs a lot of money to set up those platforms but once they are set up they produce a heck of a lot of electricity.

Now of course, if oil goes to 180 dollars a barrel, wind power is going to become a heck of a lot more economical than it is technological advances are steady.

Of course there is resistance from people who say wind power is ugly and it hurts migratory birds... I due submit that if people are faced with the choice of being eugenicized by Ruppert´s favorite spiritual depsot the Dalai Lama or losing some migratory birds and having an ugly seascape, they will choose the second.

As far as solar goes, Russel´s link shows the remarkable fact that solar power may drop in price in the next few years by 95% as manufacturing techniques pioneered by the computer industry are applied to producing solar panels out of plastic.

Now this is really interesting, because unlike large windfarms that need a very large capital investment, this kind of revolutionary solar technology could be rolled out by anyone on a house by house, backyard by backyard basis and could even put the electrical utilities and the oil industry out of business.

In fact, the results could hypothetically be so dramatic that they could reduce inflation, reduce pressure on the dollar and stave off a collapse of the housing market leaving people who buy physical gold once again with a bunch of non income producing rocks.

To argue that this is not probable, you would have to argue that the guys at Nanosolar will probably fair...and because of the technological hurdles not because they get assasinated by the oil mafia.

Remember, Ruppert says don´t buy land, buy gold. He could be right. Let´s say the whole economic system collapses, the dollar collapse, interest rates skyrocket and land values plummet because of skyrocketing oil. Then gold will be valuable.

But let´s say solar power plummets in price due to nanotechnology. The price of energy especially in the sunbelt (but solar panels can catch energy even on a cloudy day) collapses and millions of people around the world go off the grid. The sunbelt sprouts with solar farms, the American economy becomes a leader in nano solar power fueling another 90´s type boom. In such a situation, Rupperts investment strategy would be terrible. Because land will skyrocket in value due to an INCREASING POPULATION....

A sound investment advisor would give both possible scenarios, Ruppert only gives one. Collapse is inevitable.

Check out another technology.

When I was at the Toronto conference, I met a man named Bruce McBurney who argued with me that it is possible to build internal combustion engines which would be far more efficient and even improve the efficiency of existing engines simply by building a superior carbuerator.

When I approached Barrie Zwicker regarding this matter, Zwicker merely commented that he had talked to McBurney and felt that there was nothing to it. And what, Barrie Zwicker is now an expert on engine design? Just like Ruppert, an ex police officer is an expert on geology?

Mcburney presents compelling evidence that all sorts of alternative fuel and engine experts over the course of decades have been systematically murdered.

Now that I´ve read something about the abiotic oil stuff, I´m starting to get the picture that maybe the elites want us to think like this...

1. No oil
2. No way to burn oil other than through traditional wasteful and polluting carbeurators
3. Wind, Solar can´t make up for the oil
4. Solution is endless war, tsunamis and mass eugenics

Whereas Ruppert and Zwicker say:

1. No oil
2. No way to burn oil other than through traditional wasteful and polluting carbeurators
3. Wind, Solar can´t make up for the oil
4. Solution is buying Ruppert and Zwickers videos, subscribing to Ruppert´s website, buying physical gold and mass eugenics with the Dalai Lama as the person in charge.

and Ruppert and Zwicker with no scientific credentials between them are SURE they are right and we as the SKEPTICS COMMUNITY should just believe them and kiss their ass?

With millions of qualified scientists on this planet we won´t be able to come up with any energy solution no matter if the skull bones people are in charge or ANYONE is in charge. They think that even if David McGowan and Bruce Mcburney were global dictators and had all the economic resources in their hands, we STILL would all die.

And not just that, we should even discuss alternative energy. I have attended about 7 Ruppert lectures and he has never spent more than 5 minutes talking about alternative energy and only in the discussion section when bothered by pesky attendee.

One time it was actually Kyle Hence that prodded him to make a comment. And one other thing he always talks about how pesticides are also made of oil.. Never considering that maybe there are other solutions other than pesticides like biological control of pests.

And I want to say one thing about Rupperts speech at the Commonwealth Club

I have larger excerpt of the following quote below as footnote three with the URL

Maria Gilardin writes: This was one of the more surreal experiences of my recording "career". The very mainstream San Francisco Commonwealth Club had invited Mike Ruppert to speak on the eve of the publication of his new book: CROSSING THE RUBICON (- with a foreword by the amazing Catherine Austin Fitts). The Commonwealth Club is mostly a place for the power elites. Here was Mike Ruppert accusing some of those whose portraits are hanging on the walls of having had a hand in the events and/or the cover-up of 9-11.

Are the people who run the Commonwealth Club STUPID... .I really doubt it. It´s very hard to imagine that Ruppert would be allowed to speak at the Commonwealth Club unless they support his agenda and visa versa on some level.

And this is a typical example about how people are so easily fooled into thinking that an alternative movement is hitting the mainstream when in actuality its being totally coopted.

Lets go back to Angies question

There's also been another possible motive for the 9-11 attacks that I've speculated about since the beginning. Have you ever wondered why the 9-11 official story was so implausible and so sloppily put together? (you know, the simultaneous hijacking of four different planes by people armed with mere boxcutters, the suicide notes found in luggage that inadvertently didn't make it on the planes, Arabic flight manuals left in cars in the airport, and a million other things they did which seem like obvious plants, or things they didn't do or create which would have squelched many of the 9-11 skeptics early on.) It's as if they want us to see through the whole thing. Could the perpetrators, in fact, want a 911 Truth Movement to flourish? And if so, why?

------------------ Could the perpetrators want a 9/11 Truth Movement, and why?

The why question is obviously a little difficult. But look at what we have. Mike Ruppert can´t get on Amy Goodman´s show, but he can speak at the commonwealth club. Meanwhile any non white non male hate America fanatic can have hours on Pacifica like say our good old Ward Churchill.

And so that he can get invited to the Commonwealth Club, Ruppert can´t talk about demolition or the Pentagon. Because he can´t lose his crediblity with... the Commonwealth Club I guess?

--------------------footnote 1...angie´s answer
Perhaps the perpetrators are deliberately setting up the U.S. to be the bad guy to the rest of the world, perhaps to give the rest of the world the notion that they'd have to consolidate to fight the sole superpower, getting us that much closer to a one world government that so many global elite long for. Perhaps the 'transparent 9-11 inside job/ mass murder deliberately painted on others for a non-ending war pretext' is just a part of that, part of the intentional plotting to have the U.S. be seen as the real rogue nation that others must get together to fight against.

------------------footnote 2 John Gray on 9/11

Earlier this year, a controversy erupted over the participation of John Gray, "Ph. D" in the 9/11 Internation Inquiry held in Toronto. Gray is famous as a "relationship guru" and the author of "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus" series. Researchers Michel Chossudovsky and Matthias Broeckers discovered an alarming connection between Gray and the notorious Iran-Contra conspirator and international con man Adnan Khashoggi. The latter had been deeply involved in running a spectacular stock scam through Genesis Intermedia, a company with which Gray had been associated for years and was a part owner.

The story of the Genesis Intermedia (GENI) affair and its aftermath are summed up in this article from Businessweek:

New York 9/11 researcher Nico Haupt also played an important role in pursuing this connection, and in pressing for disclosure of information concerning Gray's funding of the Toronto 9/11 Inquiry as well as a 9/11 activist organization, Those involved with Gray, including the Toronto Inquiry organizer Barrie Zwicker (who has disclosed that Gray is helping him finance and produce a new 9/11 video project), Nikos Levis, Bill Douglas of 9/, and others, were quite defensive and asserted that Gray was a victim of Khashoggi's GENI scam and that the two did not have any relationship of importance (Some of these denials reached the point of outright ridicule towards those raising questions about Gray, which is disturbing in itself).

Question from an audience member:
"John, in conclusion of your speech, I understood you to
say that we could heal ourselves by forgiving the government
for letting the terrorists commit the attacks. My question to
you is what makes you believe this long after 9/11 that
the terrorists who committed the attacks weren't within
the U.S. government?"

John Gray's Answer:
"I've written several books on forgiveness, and whenever anybody
talks about forgiveness they always think, it's like if you have a good excuse, then I forgive you. Like, let's say I'm late for dinner, my wife's upset with me, and I say, but honey there was a fire on the bridge and I rescued a child, and she say's oh, okay, that's a great excuse, I forgive you. That's not what forgiveness is. That means she doesn't need to forgive me because I have a great excuse. The government doesn't have a great excuse. These are murderers. The people we really
need to forgive are the Congress that allowed them to do it, because they know a lot of the details. And they're kind of like on the edge and they don't know ALL the information. So finding forgiveness for a government doesn't mean that you say that they had good reasons for it. They didn't have good reasons for it, they're killers and there's murderers and there's a few of them, there's not a whole lot of them. So, we want to forgive the
whole government because they were fooled just like we've been fooled. And for those people we forgive them as mentally ill and we put them away and we make a big show of it. I would personally like to even, I'm always out of the box a little bit, but I think that I would like to make a big show of it and demonstrate through brain scans the problems with their
brains. My research in the last 10 years is about brain research,
differences between men and women and brain research. And I bet every penny I have that if we could do live brain scans, that these men who run that will have very inactive prefrontal cortex which is associated with people, and this is a fact, there's people who can't feel happy unless there's violence in front of them, unless they're dropping bombs. And let me give you one brief example of that, in America, I know the statistics there, 1 out of 5 boys, 1 out of a 100 girls, and 1 out of 5 boys is taking Ritalin for ADD symptoms, which is an inactive prefrontal cortex. But, you put 'em on a videogame with bombs and immediately the brain starts producing more dopamine which
is pleasure and their brain begins functioning in a cogent, clear way. So what happens is these are smart guys, some of them, some of them aren't (George Bush), but they're smart guys, but they're unable to experience pleasure in their lives without some sort of stimulation. And I believe that before anybody could ever be
elected to a high authority position that we should do brain scans on their brains, make sure that their brain chemicals are normal because these people don't have normal brain chemicals."

------------------------footnote 3
Maria Gilardin writes: This was one of the more surreal experiences of my recording "career". The very mainstream San Francisco Commonwealth Club had invited Mike Ruppert to speak on the eve of the publication of his new book: CROSSING THE RUBICON (- with a foreword by the amazing Catherine Austin Fitts). The Commonwealth Club is mostly a place for the power elites. Here was Mike Ruppert accusing some of those whose portraits are hanging on the walls of having had a hand in the events and/or the cover-up of 9-11.

On the eve of the publication of his new book, Crossing the Rubicon, Mike Ruppert spoke at the prestigious San Francisco Commonwealth Club. His research, laid out on 600 pages and supported by over 1000 footnotes, shows that members of the Bush administration knew about the impending attack of 9-11 and helped them succeed.