Friday, August 05, 2005

9/11 Coverup : Current Status

By the way, real old-timers will recall that we had to take offline a few weeks after we published our first two 9/11 investigations in late September, 2001. That URL is back online and currently points to the same page as

'Two Hardware Stores' as 9/11 Goes 'Nuts'

9/11 Coverup Status Report
by Fintan Dunne, 5th August, 2005

There are some overlapping Cointelpro-style Ops running among the fake 9/11 sites right now. A little background makes explaining this much easier.

Some people were startled that I recently questioned Alex Jones' coverage of the London bombs. But, it's not as if everything was sweetness and light among the 9/11 Fakes when I raised that issue.

Alex Jones had already been at it hammer and tongs with Victor and Lisa of WingTV. Their on-air and internet 'war' had been going on for months. WingTV have also been at war for months with Mike Ruppert, Jeff Rense and Jack Blood.

And WingTV themselves have been nicknamed 'wingnuts' by Dan Hopsicker -who, by the way, also criticizes Ruppert, Alex Jones and John Grey. Not to mention that Hopsicker is just as vocal about the LetsRoll911 'Pod People'.

As is Mike Rivero, who has also been dissing the 'Pod People' for months.

Phew! If I wanted to criticise anyboy I'd have to elbow my way into the scrum. No wonder people have pleaded for unity in the 9/11 movement. It's been a sh**storm for quite a while.

We need grassroots unity -not organizational unity.
Because there is a gameplan behind all these spats.

This should help illustrate. There's a very interesting story, from a guy called Brian who helped me out back in 2003 -when I was peering through a similar smokescreen on another issue:

About 20 years ago I read what was said to be a true story written in the late 1960s or 70s. It took place in a borough of New York City. The author started the story from the time he was a boy, and talked about two hardware stores in his old neighbourhood.

The two stores were right next to each other, and both were run by single men. The two men had nothing in common except for hardware and their hatred for each other. If the first store had a special on hammers, the other would cut his hammer prices lower in an attempt to steal business.

If the second store cut his paint prices in half, the first store would cut them by two-thirds. The two owners would argue constantly, calling each other names, questioning each other s mental capacities and mocking the other s looks. They were vicious and unrelenting and their behaviour went on this way for 30-40 years.

The people in the neighbourhood tended to side with either one or the other, but not both. They'd shop at one hardware store exclusively because they didn t like the other owner. The customers themselves were defined by which store they shopped at.

The author mentioned that both men stayed bachelors their entire lives, and that each lived in apartments at the back of their stores. He said that at the time he never understood why they would live and work next door to someone that they hated so much.

Years later, one of the two owners passed away, and his store s contents were sold off. Within a couple of months, the second store owner retired, sold off his stock then moved away. When the two empty stores came up for sale, everyone in the neighbourhood learned the motive for the long-standing feud between the owners.

They found that between the apartments in the rear was a common door which linked the two dwelling units together. It had turned out that the hardware owners were not bitter enemies, but were actually brothers. The brothers had been playing the local customers off each other through their feud. It didn't matter which store sold more hammers or more paint, the two brothers still made their profit.

They did far better in business pretending to be two feuding competitors than if they ran it as one store, because they instilled fierce loyalties from their customers. The customers were not shopping simply on price, but on allegiance to which one they loved and which they hated. It didn't matter to the brothers which was loved and which was hated, only that the attention and business of others were focused upon them.
So.... the intel gameplan was to start with a reasonably sensible 9/11 movement. But they don't want a functioning 9/11 movement around forever.

The longer-term idea was to have the whole host of investigators and activist leaders take each other out, and thus run the movement into the ground.

If you remember back, Ruppert was to first to bite the dust, in a controversy over his promotion of the Peak Oil issue [a pro-nuke power psyop]. Now, that was no accident. Ruppert was/is disposable. You see, they all are.

The next pre-planned outing was John Gray of -whom Daniel Hopsicker linked to funding by arms dealer, Adnan Kashoggi.

Once again -no accident. Build up 'heroes' of the 9/11 issue. Then later expose their deliberate flaws to cause their supporters to loose heart.

About a year ahead of the Kerry presidential bid 'defeat', they began a slow escalation of the process of undermining their collective credibility.

Also note when the official 9/11 report was released. This was timed so that activists would be busy with opposition to the Iraq War and the forthcoming Kerry presidential bid. But, the big idea was that the 'defeat' of Kerry would be the final blow to 9/11 activists already reeling from seeing their heroes' feet of clay and being befuddled by all the flame wars.

Furthermore, as soon as Kerry was 'defeated', left-wing activists were chasing their tails about the stolen election. So, by the time that was all over, the 9/11 issue was firmly on the back-burner.

Which is when the next phase kicked in. The mainstream takes it's first bite with feature articles 'debunking' the conspiracy theories. It's just a brief visit. They will be back.

Now the new plan is that those who started out making some sense on the 9/11 issue will do research which is more and more shoddy; will become more hysterical in tone; and will slowly turn into virtual carricatures of 'conspiracy nuts'. Make that 'actual' carricatures.

The occult [fave discreditation] will become the order of the day. Likewise satanic rituals. Homosexuality and child prostitution have already emerged as key themes [cf Jeff Gannon].

All this happens slowly. But already the whose thing is looking seedy. It's meant to. Such themes turn off the picket-fenced, middle-class.

Meanwhile, left-wing internet forums begin to try marginalize 'conspiracy thories' --using as evidence the rantings of the leading stooges. There are less people following the 9/11 issue -so this is easier now.

And... We are finally ready for the mainstream to move more sneeringly against the '9/11 Conspiracy Nuts'. Discovering the issue just as the planted stooges are at their most rabid. We are almost at that point.

The best defense is for 9/11 activists not to over-depend on 'movements' and take more of their own initiatives. Many have become experts in their own right on these issues. Acting individually, in loose networks of co-operation we can ride out the pre-arranged fall of the fake 9/11 movement and keep burning the flame of truth -for however long it takes.

The hidden benefit in all this is that we are all wiser. As that gangster, President Klutz once tried to say: "Fool me once...."

Yeah. We will be harder to fool again.