| -Caveat Lector-
http://www.questionsquestions.net/WTC/review.html#update1 Update, 31 October 2005 Here are a few comments in response to Nico Haupt's analysis of this article. First of all, Haupt brazenly mischaracterizes my article as a critique of "activism" when in fact it is a technical rebuttal of blatantly false no-767 theories and an analysis of the pathological and technically incompetent thinking that led to those mistakes. It's regrettable that I was not able to accurately describe the current thinking of ex-hologram theorists, but that really doesn't matter. The misinterpretations of visual anomalies are the same whether they are used to support hologram or media overlay theories. Thus the substance of my visual analysis is germane to both theories and doesn't need to be revisited. As a matter of fact I'm absolutely delighted that the non-falsibiable, sci-fi hologram theory has been abandoned in favor of the media overlay theory. As I pointed out, you don't even need to consider the visual evidence to dismiss this theory, it is so utterly impossible: it falls apart on logic and common sense alone. It just might be the worst conspiracy theory in the history of conspiracy theory. Given this, I really could and perhaps should end my arguments about the no-767 theories right here, forever, and move on to other things. But a few more comments on Haupt's analysis will confirm the pathology I talked about in my commentary. Haupt attempts to evade responsibility for his embarrassing advocacy of fanciful interpretations of a spot of dirt on a windshield by complaining that I used the term "UFO" instead of "whatzit". As if using the term "whatzit" makes the analysis of a spot of dirt credible! Then he complains about the 13 helicopters that I don't explain. This is a common game that is played by this crowd, bringing up some "new" smoking gun that I haven't covered that supposedly PROVES something was amiss. So let's talk about the helicopters. Just what would the perpetrators of 9/11 be doing with a fleet of 13 helicopters? Nothing I can think of, at least nothing that couldn't be accomplished from a discrete, hidden location. Were they trying to advertise that this was a staged event? What really were these helicopters? Obviously, the gathering of news, police, fire, and medical helicopters that you would expect, and that would have had the time to gather by the time of the collapses. Haupt's bug-eyed insinuation of something fishy going on is a perfect example of the utterly idiotic, discrediting, crackpot interpretations of ordinary phenomena, driven by "smoking gun fever," that I alluded to in myarticle. The public has a well-conditioned impression, created by official disinformation machine, that conspiracy theorists are half-mad, technically incompetent fools who see extraordinary conspiracies in ordinary events. The presumptuous sloppiness of Haupt and crew feeds right into this perception, just one of the ways they are helping the fascist perps they claim to be fighting. Inside the movement, their behavior lends moral authority to those pursuing limited hangouts by making more radical interpretations look ridiculous. Haupt's claim that there is "one" official live footage of the crashof the second plane is false. I have digitized a videotape of the live broadcast of channel 11 in New York which shows a shot from their news copter that I have never seen before. Once I get an internet connection in my new home in exile in the Andes, I'll post it. This piece of footage cuts to the heart of the absurd argument that the perps could have had control over ALL the live and taped footage of the foreign and domestic networks, the local affiliates, the independent videographers and the ordinary people who had their cameras running. The one single complaint Haupt makes which I find reasonable is that I didn't make a strong enough distinction between the no-plane and the substitute 767 theories. Of course the latter is at least possible, and in fact I have carefully made a point to acknowledge this specific possibility in the past, but the fact remains that the evidence we've seen so far is either inconclusive (the departure gate confusion) or totally unreliable (the eminently hackable flight database). Because of the weak evidence, no one deserves to be castigated as an obfuscator or "official story supporter" for finding this theory lacking, yet Haupt and crew have consistently made these kinds of unjustifiably divisive and acrimonious accusations over this issue all the time. This line of Haupt's takes the cake: "Salter seems to be not concernedabout the political situation worldwide and appears like a well earning digital coach potato." This is the usual ad hominem attack that the no-planers resort to when their "analysis" fails to convince.Of course, any reasonable person can see the huge amount of work and care that went into my article. I must add that I have chronic disabling back pain as a result of scoliosis and thoracic outlet syndrome, as well as the lingering side effects of four major surgeries attempting treatment, all of them failures. It happens that 7 or 8 years ago I couldn't even sit on a couch to watch TV. Even now, sitting down for hours at my computer to hash through crackpot crap is a big sacrifice for me. As for "well earning," I have to admit that I am on the government payroll! In a sense... I receive a pittance from the Social Security Disability Insurance for my health problems, an amount that didn´t even pay my rent when I lived in San Francisco. Luckily, it's just enough for me to live on in a poor, developing country. I suppose, however, that Haupt should recruit Gerard Holmgren to invent some fanciful, imaginary reasons why that disability pension indicates I'm an agent. This article, and my previous critiques, were not enjoyable for me, and are not the kind of thing that I would desire to do. I wrote them simply because I felt it was necessary, and because of my background and training this was an area where I was particularly qualified to make a helpful contribution to 9/11 research and activism. Some fellow activists who agree with my positions have nonetheless argued that I have spent too much energy on a "fringe" element, and that I was drawing too much attention to a divisive distraction that they felt would quickly become a forgotten flash-in-the-pan. Unfortunately, I think that the way things have played out over the past year, particularly considering the recent example of Morgan Reynolds, shows that I was right. That said, all the time I was spending on this article I was grumbling to myself about what I would really like to be reseaching:
Haupt will recognize the above issues. He's helping to discredit and reverse the difficult, hard-won progress of more thoughtful and responsible researchers on these issues by constantly mentioning them in the same breath as the no-plane garbage. That's all I have to say. At this point, since the self-evidently moronic media overlay theory is the remaining area of inquiry, I can permanently wash my hands of the no-plane issue, and focus instead on confronting the fascist perps of 9/11 and the NWO directly, instead of the intellectually debauched fools who are inadvertently helping them. Eric Salter Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/ <A HREF="">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om |
