In the "huh???" category, check out this article by Darly Bradford Smith, where he calls everyone from 911Blogger to Scholars for 9/11 Truth criminals:

http://iamthewitness.com/DarylBradfordSmith_Michael.html

Huh???????????????????????????????

She also includes links to 911blogger and other sites that promote idiotic theories, such as the airplanes were illusions created by blue screen technology. Also, she promotes sites that cannot find any Israeli involvement in 9-11.

wtf? why can some people not grasp the idea that we do not 'promote' any damn theories. we cover the 9/11 related news, i have never written an opinion piece on anything like what he is suggesting. i believe we have had a total of 1 link to an article on the suggestion that there were no planes (in a grab bag no less). given the massive amounts of information we cover weekly this is nowhere even close to 'promoting' such theories.

anytime i have ever seen anyone criticize this site their criticisms have illustrated the fact that they have no clue about this site, and no foot to stand on in criticizing it.

we have covered articles here from this author, is that to say we were promoting him? or that we are 'promoting' any of his 'idiotic theories'? no. we are covering the damn news.

damned if you do, damned if you dont..

I love the confrontational tone he takes with Charlie Sheen.

Hey Mike - I guess we just figured it would be quicker to get Charlie on CNN to talk about 9/11 than to wait for you to get a top rated TV show.

The Perps main design at this point is to have us fighting amongst each other. Nice to see some of us are obliging. Let's see if we can turn this 15 minutes of fame into 15 seconds.

To be quite honest I can't stomach Mike Ruppert. Ever since he gave his "Elephant Talk" I wrote him off. Thank God he has dropped out of the 9/11 truth movement. We don't need quitters like him. His "Peak Oil" theory is a joke. "Fossil Fuel" is a big oil rue. Try to imagine how many bodies of dead dinosaurs it would take to fill an oil well. I don't want to get into a discussion on Peak Oil. Do a Google search and you will come up with all the answers you need on the Peak Oil myth. Good riddance Ruppert. Don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way out..........Changing the subject, I just returned from seeing Dr. Griffin speak in Oakland. As usual he gave a great talk. The Grand Theater was packed!!! Standing room only. Dr Griffin received a standing ovation at the end of his talk. I will write a full report this weekend and post it on yayacanada.com. Keep the faith truth seekers, we are going to win this thing. The 9/11 truth movement is growing exponentially. It is just a matter of time until we reach critical mass.

Sorry maddog. I understand people may
dislike Ruppert because he said 911
is no more a priority issue. He thinks
greater dangers are flying around. I
agree with him on that even though
I still think 911 is a top priority
for people awareness.

But I think you can't attack him on
Peak Oil. Peak Oil is now acknowledged
by most of the oil industries and the
IEA. When you predict oil will run out, you
predict Peak Oil. I agree there is a debate
on its date of occurence but not on
its existence. However, it is looking
closer and closer as awareness grows.
Most people now think it would occur
before 2020 and many geologists says
before 2010.

wow, is mike ruppert extremely jelous or what?

I am a big fan of both Ruppert and Jones . They both go too far in some respects in their conclusions, but i take the best facts that i can from their research and form my own opinion.

I just dont see the point of criticizing Jones for doing something that Ruppert has never been able to do. It's pure jelously.

The misuse of 911victims families, relatives and friends.

Especially FOX was on the front line, last time with “Sean and Hannity”1, trying to dismiss Charlie Sheens outcoming on his 911 official theory doubts, with the point:
You do harm to the relatives and friends of the 911 victims.

Nothing could be farther from the truth.

In fact, FOX news regurlarly misuse the family factor for their stand-by to the cover-up of the official conspiracy theory.

ItÂ’s quite easy to enlighten this:

How much time did FOX spend to interview the “Jersey Girls”2 and aired their questions and their doubts about the 911 white-wash commission?3

How much time did they on William Rodriguez4, just as one example for the dozens of witnesses that fateful day which didÂ’t follow the official explanations?

Why did they cut the interview with Jeremy Glick on “The O’Reilly factor”5, after Glick came forward with his doubts about the official theory and his plea to not misuse 911 for human rights conflicting unprovoked wars6?

Did they ever show one other singular, sceptical of the 911 victims relatives or friends?

You bet.

So- donÂ’t misuse the relatives of the victims for your mindboggling propaganda. Stop speaking in their name if you donÂ’t let them speak for themselves.

They suffer enough sorrows and pain from their losts. Do not involve them as justification for the ongoing official cover-up.

• 1 http://www.911podcasts.com/files/video/HannityColmes/hannity20060323.mov
• 2 http://www.furnitureforthepeople.com/jersey.htm
• 3 http://www.911blogger.com/files/video/zelikowresign.mov
• 4 http://www.911forthetruth.com/pages/Rodriguez.htm
• 5 http://www.oreilly-sucks.com/transcripts/oreillyglick.htm
• 6 http://mediamatters.org/items/200407210006

Sorry, broken link:

http://iamthewitness.com/DarylBradfordSmith_Michael.html

removebush:

If we were comparing apples to apples, I would agree with you. But the way I understand it, even when you add transportation costs, it is less expensive to import light sweet crude from the Middle East than to refine and transport the heavier crude that would be left in US reserves.

I do agree with you, though, that they're going to squeeze every drop out of the rest of the world before we play our ace in the hole and pump the last of our domestic reserves. And since not everyone in the world thinks their oil should be reserved for Americans who support tyrannies in their own countries, military force will continue to be used to maintain access to those resources, even over the protests of the people in those countries.

I fail to see how Peak Oil is being used to justify 9/11; in fact, the same interests who refuse to entertain any discussion of 9/11 are generally the same interests who refuse to discuss Peak Oil.

Either topic is a challenge to the prevailing wisdom--infinte resources, infinite growth, government as a force for freedom and democracy, American exceptionalism--that makes the wealth of the media, the market, and the military-industrial complex possible, as well as control of the government by individuals more concerned with power and wealth than with democracy or justice.

Most geopolitics is about resources more than about ideals anyway; even in WWII, German military strategy was focused on maintaining supply lines and trying to acquire access to oil in the USSR or Africa. They weren't playing a real-life game of risk just for bragging rights over who controlled the most countries.

I don't understand why this seems like such a radical notion.

http://culturechange.org/cms/index.php

it is interesting that ruppert does not credit other valid researchers or activist efforts.

"it is interesting that ruppert does not credit other valid researchers or activist efforts."

I agree that Ruppert is an egomaniac; he can't stop talking about himself in his latest video.

However, he does credit Nahfeez Ahmed, Paul Thompson, Catherine Austin-Fitts, Jamey Hecht and other researchers (at least occasionally).

What I'm saying is that Peak Oil is a manufactured problem. Therefor it is an excuse, because it isn't necesary in the first place.

DMX'x junkie analogy has some truth to it. My solution is...
Stop being a junkie.

Further, food production is not inherently dependant on oil. Sustainable farming practices shun oil. And corporate farming is not more efficient than small organic farms, just bigger at the moment. But let's not get sidetracked from the original "peak oil" sidetrack...

Ruppert has contributed dearly to 9/11 truth with works such as Crossing The Rubicon. However he does spend most his time researching peak-oil and admits avoiding studying or getting too involved in the physical evidence side of 9/11.

Because of this he seems quick to dismiss some theories that sound very plausible after reviewing the physical evidence. Take the "pod theory" for example. You can take a photo directly from Time magazine - zoom in and clearly defined is a missile shaped anomoloy riding on the belly of the plane. Take classic video clips from many of the mainstream media outlets and not only do you see the same "pod" anomoly, you will also see the bright flash just before impact.

Yet, Ruppert dismisses this theory as "bullshit" after admitting that he doesn't get involved in the physical evidence side of things.

A little contradictive I think.

"In this latest media “frenzy” (yawn) which has Alex Jones parading like a puffed-up superstar version of Edward R. Murrow and a slightly-deranged, multi-pierced, obviously unstable, researcher named Nico Haupt wrapping himself in an ill-fitting label as the new “avant garde” of the 9/11 movement, 9/11 truth has sadly and predictably rounded a corner from Solid Avenue onto Surreal Boulevard."

Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that when Ruppert discusses Alex Jones, he fails to mention that Alex very specifically predicted the events of 9/11 two months in advance.

I've been following Mike for a while now, but I keep getting the impression that he's always trying to sell himself, and his book, and his DVD's, and his FTW service. In just about every interview I see him do, he always has to pump his website and his newsletter. It seems every topic he mentions has to start with "As we reported at least 6 months before the mainstream media on FTW.com......"

I think Ruppert is half right on Peak Oil, and half-right on 911.

Peak Oil
=========
Peak oil is a fact wrt COMMONLY ADMITTED oil fields. What about Gull Island (and other such mega oil fields, if they exist.) Even assuming that mega oil fields in Gull Island are real, whether or not they remain hidden is not up to you and I.

I have to admit I'm a little skeptical that there are not also major oil fields in the "Stans", even if some oil majors have pulled out (as reported by Ruppert). I could be dead wrong, but IMO, oil field detection technology and methodology were quite advanced by 1990, and the oil companies knew damn well what they were getting into. Even so, I am speculating here.

Also, Ruppert has a couple of major blind spots. The potential of nuclear power is awesome (with advanced reactors + "mining" uranium or plutonium - can't remember which, offhand - from seawater), but he generally dismisses it by talking about infrastructure changes taking 20 years. So what do we do, just all die after 20 years??? In point of fact, I saw an article recently that indicated that China was looking to develop seawater mining of nuclear fuel. Good for them. (Japan already has good adsorption technology for this purpose.)

He also seems mathematically challenged in that he confuses a peak with a "cliff". Is he really so naive as to think that higher energy prices will not spur conservation? We've seen huge increases in prices, but we didn't all die off, now did we?

911
========
He's quite right that there's "nowhere" to take 911, in the sense that there's "nowhere in the federal government itself to take 911 Truth to." However, the point that he completely misses is that nothing lasts forever, and that includes the lunatics in charge of our government/military-industrial complex.

Thus, the point of 911 activism is to take it to THE PEOPLE, and to DISCREDIT the US GOVERNMENT as the protector of murderers that it is. At that point, the public will have a choice - either continue in their somnabulent, sheep-like condition, OR get off their rear ends and demand change.

No, the government is way to big to change totally, and human nature means that corruption will always be there. Being realistic about the limits of reform in no way excuses us from not attempting it. The fate of not just the US, but of the world depends on us doing our part. Just ask the Iraqis, who have had what could have been a jewel in the Middle East for a country (yes, even with the constraints of a thuggish Sadaam in charge) ruined, complements of the US taxpayer, and instead have had their country serve as a dumping ground of US DEPLETED URANIUM munitions, which are (I suppose) inexhorably making their way into the Iraqi water tables.

The US government is running amok, and make no mistake about it: our Depleted Uranium munitions are killing our own troops, and killing another 3,000 OR MORE Americans is obviously not a big deal for the lunatics making the decisions.

Re the Peak Oil issue:

To get a perspective on the implications of perpetual economic growth in oil consumption (required by our current economic systems and with our existing technologies), check out the lecture by retired University of Colorado Phsyics Prof Albert Bartlett on steady arithmetic growth and resource consumption.

It's not too technical or math intensive and quite easy for the layperson to follow. It's also relevant in other areas of planning for the future besides oil and energy issues.

Quick Time version (MP4), OK for dialup (you can also right click and select "Save As" to save to your hard drive).

http://news.globalfreepress.com/movs/Al_Bartlett-PeakOil.mp4

You can find other video streaming (Real Player ram format) and MP3 links to the lecture here:
http://www.globalpublicmedia.com/lectures/461