Very good arti­cle, Dave. Truth­ful­ly, how­ev­er, I must be hon­est and say that I don’t think all the Truthers are bad peo­ple and that there should be dis­tin­guish­ment between the good peo­ple who may be just mis­led in a vari­ety of ways and the bonafide fas­cists, provo­ca­teurs, dis­in­fo agents(Eric Huf­schmid may a damn good exam­ple), and use­ful idiots of all kinds, and I was kind of hop­ing this arti­cle could per­haps be edit­ed to bet­ter reflect these real­i­ties.

Speak­ing of use­ful idiots, ever ran into this char­ac­ter by the name of Daryl Brad­ford Smith who runs ‘The French Con­nec­tion’ web­site? Guy’s from New Eng­land orig­i­nal­ly and lives some­where in France, which, btw, is the rea­son for the nam­ing of his site(and not as a homage to the clas­sic movie from 1971, in case that thought could cross some­one’s mind). Some of his ear­ly mate­r­i­al was interesting(back then, but not now.), but it seems that he was ‘turned’ about 5 years ago or so and he’s been allow­ing, and even par­rot­ing some pret­ty screwed up B.S., main­ly of the anti-Zion­ist vari­ety, on his show(one guy claimed that Jews invent­ed jazz as part of a con­spir­a­cy the­o­ry!). (I have to admit I was kind of a dupe back in the day so I end­ed up just tun­ing out the cra­zier stuff, instead of con­fronting it like I would today.)

What’s real­ly iron­ic about all this is that he does­n’t actu­al­ly seem to hate on ALL Jews, and has even spo­ken fond­ly, ever so often, about a Jew­ish lady who actu­al­ly kept him fed and clothed dur­ing his col­lege days in Man­hat­tan. Frankly, this guy may be in some need of psy­cho­log­i­cal ther­a­py of some kind, it seems to me.

BTW, for those who are REALLY curi­ous, you can check out the web­site over at iamthewitness.com. But be care­ful, there is a LOT of B.S. on there. If you are eas­i­ly offend­ed, please just move on and avoid this URL. Thanks.

(P.S., one last note: This guy seems to be reg­u­lar­ly fea­tured on a South Africa based net­work called ‘Chan­nel Islam Inter­na­tion­al’. Does any­one know any­thing about this com­pa­ny? It smells a lit­tle off to me but I don’t hon­est­ly know much myself.)

Also, one last thing: Daniel Hop­sick­er is a real frack­ing hero! =) For­get Daryl Smith and Dylan Avery, Mr. Hop­sick­er is the real deal, and so is Dave!

@Steven L.–

Sev­er­al points: First, that post does express a very real ele­ment of bit­ter­ness, dis­taste and frus­tra­tion.

I did so, how­ev­er, through my acer­bic, dark sense of humor. Nitzsche observed that “A joke is the epi­gram on the death of a feel­ing.”

The Truthers have noth­ing going for them. I com­mit­ted four com­ments by them to the trash. None of them showed any evi­dence of hav­ing exam­ined any of the infor­ma­tion in the post or FTR #599.

I have no prob­lem with intel­li­gent dis­agree­ment, but I absolute­ly insist that it be pred­i­cat­ed on care­ful exam­i­na­tion of the infor­ma­tion I present. Pre­dictably that was not the case.

I was think­ing of approv­ing them and then tear­ing them each a new one, but fig­ured it was cru­el, gra­tu­itous and, above all, a waste of space and time.

One of them just repeat­ed the same old nonsense–scary sto­ries told by liars and fools.

Slick Willie Rodriguez describ­ing the “explo­sions” he heard and sim­i­lar tales of woe by oth­er igno­ra­mus­es.

I encour­age you, Steven, and any lin­ger­ing Truthers to care­ful­ly exam­ine Items #3, 13 in the web­site I linked.

You will notice that, before a build­ing is implod­ed, IT HAS TO BE COMPLETELY GUTTED FIRST!

Implo­sion (con­trolled demo­li­tion) is a form of exact­ing de-con­struc­tion. Just as the sup­port­ing ele­ments of an edi­fice pre­serve the struc­ture upright and intact, so, too, those ele­ments must be care­ful­ly and sys­tem­at­i­cal­ly removed so that the remark­able implo­sion phe­nom­e­non can be real­ized after the det­o­na­tion of the cut­ter charges.

In addi­tion, the cut­ter charges are not only impos­si­ble NOT to hear (and feel) but they bring down the shell of the build­ing in a mat­ter of a num­ber of sec­onds from the det­o­na­tion of the first charge.

What the Truthers would have us believe is that no one in either of the Twin Tow­ers or WTC 7 noticed that the build­ings in which they worked had been com­plete­ly gutted–a process that would have required months of work, an army of con­trac­tors, and a fleet of trucks to haul away the debris!!

What is so fun­ny about the horse s* dis­sem­i­nat­ed by the likes of Slick Willie Rodriguez and the oth­ers who claim they heard explo­sions, con­cerns the obvi­ous fact that if they had heard the det­o­na­tion of cut­ter charges they would have been DEAD with­in sec­onds!!

Again check out the build­ings in Item #3 in the linked web­site. They go down pret­ty damn quick­ly!

They may well have heard explosions–computer ter­mi­nals, for exam­ple, explode when enveloped by flames. Do you think, Steven, that there just MIGHT have been some com­put­er ter­mi­nals in the World Trade Cen­ter?

It should also be not­ed that one does not det­o­nate bat­ter­ies of high explo­sives in a crowd­ed down­town area of one of the world’s largest cities on the sly!

That would, to say the least, draw atten­tion!

I sug­gest that peo­ple on the West Coast take the time to go down to San Clemente, about an hour south of L.A.

Best known as the home of Nixon’s West­ern White House, it’s a nice lit­tle town with two main attractions–The Tres­tles, one of the world’s pre­mier surf­ing beach­es and Camp Pendle­ton, a major Marine Corps base.

You can spend a delight­ful day by the beach watch­ing the surfers and you will cer­tain­ly hear (and FEEL) the artillery prac­tice MANY MILES AWAY at Pendle­ton.

I will close by not­ing that the Truthers gen­er­al­ly fall back on “Box Boy” Gage’s hustle–“Architects and Engi­neers for Truth.”

To make a long sto­ry short, it isn’t an orga­ni­za­tion, not in the sense that peo­ple have come to believe.

It’s ONE guy–Gage. He is an archi­tect (and life­long Repub­li­can), but has nev­er designed a build­ing taller than 3 sto­ries.

He has a few shills who func­tion as, in effect, stage props, but the big group of engi­neers and archi­tects rep­re­sent­ed to the gullible are peo­ple who have signed peti­tions after hear­ing one of his pre­sen­ta­tions.

They are sig­na­to­ries.

There are all kinds of engi­neers in the world–software engi­neers, water purifi­ca­tion engi­neers etc.

We should note, in this con­text, that the rel­e­vant pro­fes­sion­al cat­e­go­ry here are struc­tur­al engi­neers, of whom there are about 130,000 work­ing in the Unit­ed States.

At last count Gage had man­aged to hood­wink a grand total of four into sign­ing his petitions,and they prob­a­bly nev­er checked out the dubi­ous verac­i­ty of his orig­i­nal claims.

When chal­lenged by a retired NYFD offi­cer who had writ­ten a book about WTC 7’s col­lapse to appear oppo­site him on an inter­net TV show, nei­ther Gage nor any of the rest of the crew would appear, includ­ing David Ray Grif­fin. This sug­gests VERY strong­ly that The Usu­al Sus­pects know that they are lying, and are not sim­ply “deceived” or “mis­in­formed.” That would make them acces­sories after the fact to 3,00 counts of first degree mur­der.

A Well-Placed Source, very cred­i­ble, alleges that there were some charges used to col­lapse WTC 7 so that the flames would not reach the thou­sands of gal­lons of heat­ing oil in the build­ing, nor the pow­er sub­sta­tion under­neath. When trans­form­ers go, they explode like bombs and start intense fires.

In effect, the source alleges that the flames were suf­fo­cat­ed, not unlike the way that Red Adair, the famous, Texas-based oil well fire-fight­er, det­o­nates charges to suf­fo­cate oil well fires by deny­ing them oxy­gen.

This was done to WTC 7, accord­ing to this source. I’ve seen no cor­rob­o­ra­tion and have my doubts. This per­son is, how­ev­er, nei­ther a liar nor a fascist–unlike the Truthers, who are both–Alex Jones, in par­tic­u­lar.

Again, I have my doubts–the per­son was describ­ing a broad­cast inter­view on the day of the attacks. The inter­vie­wee may well have been dis­cussing a con­tin­gency plan. I’ve seen no cred­i­ble evi­dence that cut­ter charges were used on 9/11.

The fires on numer­ous floors were trig­gered when a 48 sto­ry sec­tion of one of the Twin Tow­ers (which did NOT col­lapse in their foot­print) laid out across WTC Plaza, trash­ing WTC #‘s 3, 4, 5, and 6 in the process, and rip­ping the cor­ner off of WTC 7 to the height of 18–20 sto­ries.

You’ll notice that nei­ther Gage, nor any of these front-run­ning morons EVER talks about what hap­pened to WTC 3, 4, 5, or 6! again, all of those build­ings (in addi­tion to WTC 1, 2, and 7) were trashed on that day.

To be valid, an hypoth­e­sis must be able to explain all observed phe­nom­e­na and to accu­rate­ly pre­dict future occur­rences.

Because the so-called “Truthers” don’t even deal with 3, 4, 5, and 6. They not only aren’t in the game, they haven’t even paid the fee to get into the park­ing lot.

This, too, sug­gests VERY strong­ly that they KNOW that they are lying in their teeth and are not just “mis­in­formed.” Again, that makes them acces­sories after the fact to 3,000 counts of first degree mur­der.

NYFD had lost too many fire­fight­ers and equip­ment in the col­lapse of the Twin Tow­ers to con­tain the mas­sive con­fla­gra­tion in build­ing 7 and did­n’t want to risk any more loss of life.

BTW–this same source not only scoffs at the notion of a “con­trolled demo­li­tion” or implo­sion of WTC 7 or any of the rest of the build­ings, but claims in no uncer­tain terms that the “con­trolled demo­li­tion, cruise mis­sile hit the Pen­ta­gon” dis­in­for­ma­tion was cre­at­ed and financed by the very male­fac­tors, in the U.S. and the Mid­dle East, who planned and launched the attacks in the first place!

Specif­i­cal­ly, the source alleges that the ini­tial infu­sion of funds to gen­er­ate the “Truther” move­ment came from the short-sell­ing of equi­ties in the run-up to the attacks.

Again, this is Some­one Who Would Know.

BTW–I have years of expe­ri­ence in the build­ing trades.

The Truthers are part of the cov­er-up, acces­sories after the fact to 3,000 counts of first degree mur­der and trea­son.

And the dupes who fill the inter­net forums with their non­sense could­n’t tell a dirt road from a chick­en with lips.

Best to you Steven,

Dave

@ Steven: I agree with you that “Truthers” are not all bad peo­ple, and the same can be said of a vari­ety of folks who are involved in groups that are ques­tion­able. To give a con­crete exam­ple, and you know I like to talk about that, every week I meet peo­ple who are frankly anti-zion­ist and anti-Israel, but I can see in their eyes that they are sin­cere about it and con­vinced to do the right thing. We may find peo­ple like that in every kind of enter­prise.

That is why it is so hard to fight the crowd belong­ing to any fifth col­umn in any coun­try in the world. You have the few screw­ers at the top who con­trol the pro­pa­gan­da and then you have the rest of the sheeple, a mix­ture of either mis­in­formed, sin­cere, seek­ers, men­tal­ly ill, des­per­ate, naive, unin­tel­li­gent, etc.

I think I have a good capac­i­ty to sep­a­rate the good from the crap, so as soon as I got to know For The Record show, I put aside the trash of the “Truthers”. Their mate­r­i­al does­n’t stand crit­i­cal exam­i­na­tion, and most­ly, it does­n’t stand just good com­mon sense either.

I agree with Dave. The Truthers, the lead­ers at least, are the media staff of those who pulled off, or facil­i­tat­ed, 9/11, and their job is to cov­er the tracks of the per­pe­tra­tors. Our job, is to con­vince as many peo­ple as we can to always use their intel­li­gence before any­thing and to always COUNTERCHECK every­thing by your­self. Don’t trust any­one, is the best advice I can give to the peo­ple I meet. Do the research your­self.

Keep up search­ing for the truth. You and Pter­rafractyl have shown so far a lot of good qual­i­ties and it is a good sign for the future.

I’m still look­ing at these issues but one big ‘what if’ occurred to me years ago. Let’s sup­pose a sce­nario in which the build­ings did­n’t col­lapse but only sus­tained heavy dam­age from plane impacts. Hun­dreds of peo­ple would have died and the plan­ners would have been well pleased with a suc­cess­ful ter­ror attack. The ‘offi­cial’ war on ter­ror and the abro­ga­tion of the Con­sti­tu­tion would have pro­ceed­ed apace. What­ev­er the evi­dence or lack there­of for plant­ed charges, the sec­ondary attack seems redun­dant and makes the insid­er expo­sure risk much greater. I’ve nev­er heard any truthers address why they would use such a (to me) non­sen­si­cal twofold strat­e­gy when the pri­ma­ry attack by planes would have served them well enough. In the puta­tive script the build­ings could­n’t have been implod­ed with­out plane impacts as the ini­tia­tor, but since the plane impacts of and by them­selves were sure­ly enough to accom­plish any goal, why add the mad flour­ish?

@Dave: Okay. I did under­stand the humor, btw, but I was a lit­tle con­cerned that some may not. (P.S. good points on the event itself as well. I will also look at the links. Thanks for the info. =) )

@Claude: Well, I have to agree. Sad­ly, a good num­ber of the Truthers are indeed fraud­u­lent, Eric Huf­schmid and Mike Delaney(known as ‘Pro­Think’), being two real­ly good examples......the lat­ter, btw, was behind the “9/11 Miss­ing Links” so-called ‘documentary’(read: agit­prop dis­in­fo piece).

Daryl Brad­ford Smith is a high­ly unsta­ble and deranged indi­vid­ual.

His site con­sists of not-so-thin­ly-veiled anti-semit­ic filth.

It also con­flates anti-Zion­ism (ie, the objec­tion to a state based upon reli­gious affil­i­a­tion) with anti-Semi­tism which is thor­ough­ly erro­neous and decep­tive.

In the past I had lis­tened to sev­er­al of his audio pre­sen­ta­tions as an exer­cise in “know thine ene­my” and as a study in Fas­cist/­neo-Nazi pro­pa­gan­da. Whether he was “turned” or not is irrel­e­vant.

As for “Jews invent­ing jazz...” Fact is that Louis Arm­strong did reside with a Jew­ish fam­i­ly for a time after being released from the Col­ored Waif’s Home in New Orleans, so there you go. Proof!

@Stu:

Just so you under­stand, Stu, I no longer lis­ten to DBS.
Truth be told, I had been inter­est­ed by some of his ear­li­est pro­grams, but when I took a good hard look at some of the stuff he was pro­mot­ing, much of which, iron­i­cal­ly, was intro­duced to him by dis­in­fo mon­ger Eric Hufschmid(whom he now claims to hate btw), I soon real­ized that things weren’t what I thought they were. TBH, at first, I tried to see some good in the guy(perhaps out of some naivete, I admit, as well as my good nature.) main­ly by tun­ing out the real­ly crazy stuff his guests were feed­ing him, but I even­tu­al­ly came to the under­stand­ing that such was futile, and so, stopped lis­ten­ing alto­geth­er, some­time in the era of late 2008/early 2009.

In all hon­esty, though, you do have a good point. Does­n’t real­ly mat­ter now whether he’s been turned or a plant, like his for­mer pal Huf­schmid or Anti­Think Delaney. What mat­ters is that spew­ing bull­shit all over the air­waves.

How­ev­er, I do believe we can per­haps use some of his pro­grams to edu­cate peo­ple, in a course of ‘know thine ene­my’, as you so elo­quent­ly put it, Stu, as exam­ples of just how dis­in­fo agents and use­ful idiots of all stripes oper­ate and how we can counter their B.S.

[...] No, No Nano-Ther­mite [...]

One more corol­lary to my pre­vi­ous post.. As a fur­ther thought exper­i­ment, it’s not true but assume that the planes only sce­nario and the planes plus some­thing else sce­nario car­ry exact­ly the same evi­den­tiary weight. It would be a tossup, except that in the real world the rabid pro­mo­tion of the lat­ter has brought us not one cen­time­ter clos­er to expo­sure and arrest of the crim­i­nals and, in fact, has had the oppo­site effect. An enor­mous amount of of men­tal and emo­tion­al ener­gy has been wast­ed and that was prob­a­bly the point of it all.
For broad­er human­i­ty the issues of pri­or­i­ty in these crimes are 99% the why of them and 1% the how of them. That ratio has been suc­cess­ful­ly reversed by the truth com­mu­ni­ty. They won this round. I’m mov­ing on to oth­er things.

@Dwight: We MAY be able to reverse this, though.

“un-crit­i­cal mass”, indeed. Good term, Dave. On Lim­baugh­’s long defunct TV show his audi­ence would ani­mal-grunt in uni­son, unabashed that they were repli­cat­ing scenes out of Plan­et of the Apes. I’m con­tin­u­al­ly bemused at these advo­cates for the ‘indi­vid­ual’ and ‘free­dom from gov­ern­ment’ who have to run in packs. Real indi­vid­u­al­i­ty with its often soli­tary nature ter­ri­fies them. On a psy­cho­log­i­cal plane far below ide­ol­o­gy, one of fas­cis­m’s attrac­tions is that it offers a chance to lose one’s self in mob sadism. Mus­soli­ni should have added “Fas­cism is atavism.”

@Joseph: I got­ta admit, Dave does have a pret­ty decent sense of humor. And at least we got the punch­line. (P.S.: I remem­ber you now, too, btw! I real­ly liked your Blogspot page a while back and thanks to Dave, I’ve just redis­cov­ered it. Time to start brows­ing again. =) )

http://www.algemeiner.com/2013/05/29/former-conspiracy-theorist-when-they-say-%E2%80%98illuminati%E2%80%99-or-%E2%80%98reptiles%E2%80%99-they-mean-jews/

For­mer Con­spir­a­cy The­o­rist: When They Say ‘Illu­mi­nati’ or ‘Rep­tiles’ They Mean Jews
May 29, 2013 7:26 pm 2 com­ments
Author: Zach Pontz

A reformed con­spir­a­cy the­o­rist is giv­ing an insid­ers look into the world he once sat at the cen­ter of, and it’s not a pret­ty one.

Char­lie Veitch says that the mod­ern con­spir­a­cy nar­ra­tive involves the deeply embed­ded belief that the few con­trol the many, and that the “few” are the Jews. Speak­ing to The Tele­graph, Vietch says that anti-Semi­tism was par for the course, and he was often the tar­get.

“Loads. Loads. I was once accused of being a Jew because of my olive skin and my nose. They said, ‘We can’t trust him’.” When they say the ‘Illu­mi­nati’ or ‘Rep­tiles,’ do they actu­al­ly mean Jews? the Tele­graph reporter asks him. “It’s slight­ly com­pli­cat­ed but, most­ly, yes,” he says.

Veitch gained a fol­low­ing as a vocal pro­po­nent of the belief that the 9/11 ter­ror attack was an inside job, a con­trolled demo­li­tion car­ried out by the U.S. gov­ern­ment. His online videos sparked the inter­est of high pro­file con­spir­a­cy the­o­rists such as Amer­i­can radio host Alex Jones.

But the turn­ing point came when Veitch took part in a BBC doc­u­men­tary, Con­spir­a­cy Road Trip, made to mark the 10th anniver­sary of 9/11.

Dur­ing the film­ing Veitch met experts includ­ing the chief air traf­fic con­troller on duty dur­ing the 9/11 attacks, demo­li­tion spe­cial­ists and archi­tects. At the start, Veitch was defi­ant, but as pro­duc­tion con­tin­ued he began to change his mind.

“This is hard, you know, because I’ve hung on to these ideas for years now,” he told the film’s pre­sen­ter, Andrew Maxwell. “I’ve always hung out with peo­ple who say, ‘Yeah, con­spir­a­cy! 9/11 demo­li­tion!’ But now I’ve spo­ken to a guy who’s explained it. And it makes sense.”

Veitch now has few kind words for the world he once inhab­it­ed. He describes it as a world full of “evil-wor­ship­ping para­noia. As some­one who’s been deep in it, and seen the hatred and the insan­i­ty, I think big ter­ror­ist attacks will come from con­spir­a­cy the­o­rists.”

“Con­spir­a­cy the­o­rists,” he says, are often “bul­lied peo­ple. Peo­ple who maybe didn’t get the girls at school… So they see a lot of rug­ger bug­ger types and they’re against any­thing to do with them. They will side with the dev­il, as long as the dev­il is against the West.”