|
|
|
|
|
 Eric Hufschmid is “Ground Zero” for all the ambiguous and spurious information endlessly being regurgitated in the so-called 911 movement. Who funded his slick book and video at such an early and crucial stage in the investigation?
Hufschmid was first to mass market and essentially invent the “POD people” movement, invent the “no plane hit the Pentagon” scenario, invent the “controlled demolition” of the towers, introduced us to the first round of questionable “engineers” to support each theory.
911 was the callous execution of a top level plan, but have we been purposely pointed in the wrong direction all along?
Eric Hufschmid and the 'Conspiracy Du Jour'
by Hawk, 20 October, 2005.
Eric Hufschmid is “Ground Zero” for all the ambiguous and spurious information endlessly being regurgitated in the so-called 911 movement.
Let’s start with his demeanor; you might say that his meek and mild manner is an affectation of a nerdy and dedicated investigator who can be trusted on face value … BS! He is the perfect, spineless shill to be used and abused in any public forum or public debate regarding the whole issue. He’s just another agent preaching to the converted.
 And I will pose the question, who funded his slick book and video at such an early and crucial stage in the investigation? Hmm, could it be that the German government may be an Eastern European lapdog of the US and Britain, funding this whole mess? Why aren’t these damn questions being asked?
Hufschmid was first to mass market and essentially invent the “POD people” movement, invent the “no plane hit the Pentagon” scenario, invent the “controlled demolition” of the towers, introduced us to the first round of questionable “engineers” to support each theory, invented the plan to discredit and put an end to the whole, disgusting, cynical issue … do some research, it’s all out there for you to ponder.
911 was the callous execution of a top level plan, but have we been purposely pointed in the wrong direction all along? Is it remotely possible that most of these so-called professional sources, which tend to be “ex” employees, are just downright disgruntled liars or worse, operatives … agent provocateurs?
This whole concoction of information can be interpreted as a preemptive plant of disinformation to get the “tin foil hat” crowd’s panties in a bunch and boy have we fallen for it, hook, line, and sinker! Good for you Eric, but we are currently experiencing our rebirth; although the foil hats were not the best armor, it bought us enough time to relearn how to be connected, aware, humans again.
To be sure Eric, your supporters down the hall, the sloppy and naive pseudo reporters made a few bucks while selling your line … this is a capitalist economy now isn’t it? Let me clue you in to another theory much bigger than yours, just maybe the fall and public distain of the current administrations in the US and Britain are designed to make us beg for a more socialist solution, proposed and implemented by the permanent military cabal … now that is just perfect isn’t it?
Over the last 4 miserable years, we have slowly learned to stay awake and even jump far ahead of your ilk. It’s the unfortunate aspect of Karma, that you’ll never fully reap the benefits of your betrayal … you should have chosen a better team.
So where does this leave us folks? Its NOT enough to data mine the internet for theories or opinions that match your programming. When some obscure site says “according to my source”, an “unnamed” one naturally, remember that the source always has an agenda and it is usually not good for us. We all like to think we’ve got that bit figured out already but … not yet, we are continuously proven wrong by our lack of scrutiny of the subtle patterns in the current information shit storm.
Its all there, they are very accustomed to the ease in which we are manipulated, they may have gotten sloppy! It’s in that laziness we will outsmart them, us furry little animals who give birth to live young … given just a little more time.
Blind passing of the “conspiracy du jour”, is not in our best interest. Passing a dumbed down and overtly simplistic analysis of complex patterns is usually a tool used for disinformation impact. Spending an ounce of energy to play the corporate “CYOA” (Cover Your Own Ass) game has been the plan all along, hasn’t it? If we are wrong here, we should admit it, correct it, and move on, keep your eyes wide open and plugging away.
Peace,
Hawk
POSTSCRIPT by Hawk on 23 October, 2005
Hufschmid, Belief and the 'Conspiracy du Jour'
I feel begrudgingly dragged back, by the dull/numbing rumble of discontent, back to revisit my initial post. In person, as a corporate entity, you could never accuse me of being subtle, but when using the written word I take the time to express myself, subtly.
The initial post was an exorcism of beliefs planted in my head by those who have been misleading me/us all along. There are many shills who could fill the boots of the ilk I am dismissing. I concluded the post by stating that we must admit when we are wrong and move on! This is my admission, plain and simple. I was wrong for allowing Hufschmid and others (fill in the blank) to lead me down the dead ends of their truth. If you don’t like it, so be it, post your own opinion, still won’t change my intuition.
Let’s put subtlety aside and continue to look at the issue from 20,000 feet and maybe you can understand my thought process. Science is a good thing; it is the logical outcome of our need to see/feel patterns in the otherwise chaotic nature of reality. The greatest thing about science, is that it has to be (by definition) consistent, to be considered science in the first place. I will start with the premise that science is an anchor of reality.
Hufschmid’s premise at first is nothing more than a feeling/observation that there was something wrong with the whole 911 event as it was presented or projected. This is not unlike a religious leader’s premise that there is something wrong with our interpretation of the reality around us. Both premises are nothing more than hunches based on their current point of view. Now we have just observed the birth of a belief … no facts or references to the ordered world of science, just another belief.
This belief is just vapor (byproduct of the ether) without some ordered background principles. Who would latch on to this belief without the careful and calculated use of scientific principles? A smart reptilian (sic) would realize that "it" needed more to sell "'it’s" beliefs. Exploiting science is the perfect solution to the otherwise subjective analysis which created the belief. The misuse of science never discounts the validly of science … it’s a calculated construct designed to get you to play along. Throw in a few obscure/questionable “scientists” for the ride and poof, like magic out of the vapor (ether), we have the formation of a believer. Now that "it" has solidified a “movement”, with followers who dump money and energy into "it’s" creation, what next?
Again, the smart reptilian (sic) simply wets "it's" finger and pokes it into the wind to see which way it's blowing. Hmm, looks like its time to invent a little dogma to keep the flock playing along … what else could a good seller of beliefs do? This is the point where the followers should have started to pose questions, based on information found outside the realm of their newly discovered belief system. I chose this point to dismiss Hufschmid, just like any other dogma generator of the past; I parted ways with his whole disinformation project.
Those of you who chose to stay muddled in this belief system, have been indoctrinated to the nonsense theories of “peak oil”, “widespread child sex slavery rings”, “mandatory homosexual hazing in the military”, “masochistic fetishes soaked in blood and violence” and the ever present “alien technologies”. At what point did Hufschmid’s truth end and his bullsh*t begin? Or is it the other way around?
I have my own theories about 911. I can assure you that I will never misuse science, or solicit your money and energy to prop up my potential beliefs. I can also assure you that I will never use “agents” to support my beliefs. Leave my mind alone and I will offer you the same courtesy.
Peace,
-Hawk
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
| |
|
Rating
| Eric Hufschmid and the 'Conspiracy Du Jour' | Log-in or register a new user account | 640 Comments |
|
| Comments are statements made by the person that posted them.
They do not necessarily represent the opinions of the site editor. |
|
|
