Jeff Wells' 9/11 Disconnect
There's something very strange about Jeff Wells, the guy who writes the "Rigorous Intuition" blog.
Fully half of his posts deal with incredibly vague accounts of UFOs and various strange metaphysical occurrences.
Yet for some reason, when he writes about 9/11, he repeatedly and condescendingly dismisses that anything unusual happened on 9/11. Basically, he seems to strongly support the official hijacker story, except that he pushes the idea that the hijackers were patsies and that the NORAD wargames threw off the air defenses. But he can't even wrap his mind around DEMOLITION, for gods sake.
Yet he thinks the US military is using/hiding alien spacecraft/technology?
What the fuck?
Fully half of his posts deal with incredibly vague accounts of UFOs and various strange metaphysical occurrences.
Yet for some reason, when he writes about 9/11, he repeatedly and condescendingly dismisses that anything unusual happened on 9/11. Basically, he seems to strongly support the official hijacker story, except that he pushes the idea that the hijackers were patsies and that the NORAD wargames threw off the air defenses. But he can't even wrap his mind around DEMOLITION, for gods sake.
Yet he thinks the US military is using/hiding alien spacecraft/technology?
What the fuck?
posted by spooked at 9:08 AM
15 Comments:
That just goes to show that questions about UFOs, and the people making those questions, are from 9/11 questions and questioners, as much as anti-9/11-inquiry propagandists would like to lump them together.
whoops - "separate from 9/11 questions and questioners"
I can see your point that he should be open to exotic weaponry, given his views on "alien" technology, but would require him to believe the government was involved. For some reason, that's harder to believe for some people than to believe our government is in contact with aliens and not telling us. Both are easier to believe than the "Flight 175" crash videos.
i agree with your assessment, Spooked. his post yesterday really stuck me as odd. he has no problem writing about some outlandish high cabal UFO theory, yet he won't touch reach issues about 9/11 with a 110 story tower.
from Wells':
It was then that his [speaking of Reynolds] theories became increasingly bizarre and his conduct particularly divisive and fractious. Now, the planes themselves were hoaxes, and the buildings demolished by "directed energy" beam weapons. Among those signing on to Reynolds' theories was David Shayler [plant], "former MI5 agent turned whistleblower", who alleged last September that "The only explanation is that they were missiles surrounded by holograms made to look like planes."
atleast Wells' tactics are the same as the floggers-- mention an aspect of a controversial theory, such as no planes, and associated it with holograms and Shayler ;-) Shayler exists to cast no planers in a dark light and this is exactly what he continues to do. Wells' exists to keep your mind occupied with scifi conspiracy theories and that's exactly what he does. i enjoy some of his writings, but i make sure not to be get to wrapped up in his ideas. he does have some semi-decent writing on DMT and the Amanita Muscaria however, if that sorta stuff is up your alley ;-)
don't pay any attention the fools at rig.int. and D.U. etc.
whether actual shills or simply morons they are lost and can only serve to waste your time.
maybe that is their function?
h.
Ningen--
good point, but I still find his overall worldview fairly incoherent, which is odd because he seems to be very bright, he's a great writer-- I almost have to wonder if he is some type of disinfo.
Shep--
the thing is: yesterday is not the first time he has said those things, he makes very similar comments every couple of months or so. Like I said he's a great writer, and his coincidence theory of 9/11 was something that got me going on 9/11 rearly on, I just can't figure out what he's up to. I never did DMT or amarita...
h-- I was only trying to figure out Wells' game plan. He's not a pure govt shill, but he could certainly be a limited hangout artist.
--spooked
Like I said he's a great writer, and his coincidence theory of 9/11 was something that got me going on 9/11 rearly on
i agree he is a great writer, when he's not 'under the weather' and composing one of his frequent open threads ;-) his site seems more of a distraction to me, especially when you take into account his rigint radio station and tee-shirts for sale. little odd, eh? i've never ventured far into the forum and using just skim his blog. his post titled "Flight of Capital" was really good, IMO, but i am beginning to think the pentagon trillions is another distraction.
Spooked, your blog was the first one i found that got me thinking on a deeper level about the 'taboo' 9/11 issues and continues to be a personal favorite.
He's not a pure govt shill, but he could certainly be a limited hangout artist.
i think he's a distraction-- touch on a few significant topics and then muddy the waters. toss in just enough truth but throughly mixed with some bull$hit.
I never did DMT...
DMT exists naturally your brain, same as in mine. but don't let the DEA find out we've got schedule 1 drugs in our pineal glands.
BTW, where we can get those CovertOps tee-shirts and hoodies? ;-)
Spooked - I agree his motives are unclear.
I know someone who took ayahuasca in Brazil at a Santo Daime ceremony, and had a wonderful experience.
http://www.santodaime.org/indexy.htm
Shep--
I totally agree with what you say about Wells and you make an excellent point about the radio station and T shirt -- not to mention that he asks for donations (I even ponied up $30 for him back when he said he lost his job).
Maybe the deal is this-- he is actually running a business, and it is more profitable for him to sell a limited hangout on 9/11 than full-on hard-core psy-op fakery. The question is, who is buying? Is it just innocent schleps who don't want to think to deeply about it? Or is it someone with deeper pockets? Probably a bit of both, i would guess.
I guess the UFO stuff must sell too...
I remember when Jeff first started blogging he was sort of bragging how his site had hits from a bunch of military and intel sites. I wonder what that was about.
--spooked
The question is, who is buying?
haha, do you really need to ask? coincidentally, a new blog about this very topic appear on 911clogger today, which i don't have to dignity to link to. someone's buying it, apparently not us...
I even ponied up $30 for him back when he said he lost his job
ouch, i feel for ya! but don't worry-- i imagine a few of us have ponied up some dough for a cause we thought was just. i sure have, and NO, it was to ruppert ;-)
I know someone who took ayahuasca in Brazil at a Santo Daime ceremony, and had a wonderful experience.
Ningen, your friend has more balls than me! ayahuasca is bascially DMT + MAOI or orally active DMT. don't ever let someone try and tell you entheogens are anything like an acid trip ;-)
duh....
I even ponied up $30 for him back when he said he lost his job
ouch, i feel for ya! but don't worry-- i imagine a few of us have ponied up some dough for a cause we thought was just. i sure have, and NO, it was not to ruppert ;-)
i couldn't let that little typo stand! ;-)
Jeff explains his agnostic attitude to the physical evidence of 911 in this post and faces some criticism in the comments section.
http://rigint.blogspot.com/2007/03/dot-too-far_07.html
Wells outs himself as a scifi conspiracy theory gatekeeper here and continues to support the OGCT:
Q: Since you [Wells] don't believe the controlled demolition theories, what is your explanation for how they collapsed?
Wells: Planes strike, structures fail. Fall down, go boom.
Rigorous indeed.
Jeff explains his agnostic attitude to the physical evidence of 911
just like Albanese, i suspect Wells' would claim eyewitness reports trumps physical evidence in a court of law.
Eyewitness Memory Research: Probative v. Prejudicia - Ebbesen & Konecni, UCSD
Abstract: Psychologists often testify in court about eyewitness memory research. A critical review of those research areas most frequently testified about suggests that such testimony has greater prejudicial than probative value and therefore should not be allowed in court. Not only does a generally accepted theory for eyewitness identification not exist, but the evidence in many areas is inconsistent, the procedures and measures used to study various relationships are not well tied to legal procedure, and there is no evidence that the experts who testify would be any better at detecting witness inaccuracy than uninformed jurors. Finally, the nature of what is known about human memory is so complex that an honest presentation of this knowledge to a jury would only serve to confuse rather than improve their decision-making.
Sam Hill lays it down over @ rigint:
Jeff's like a pusher who gets you hooked by giving you some relatively clean stuff, and cheap.
Once he's sure you're going to keep coming back for more, he switches the deal from white powdery smack cut with clean lactose to brown horse shit cut with pcp.
Then while you're nodding maybe he'll rifle through the contents of your wallet.
Wake up, suckers. It's a giant con.
perfectly put by Sam.
heh, heh... dummies
Yeah, it's obvious Wells, despite his "I'm trying to be reasonable" approach, is a limited hangout, a time-wasting distraction. I stopped reading his "essays" over a year ago, but found the comments section interesting, for a variety of reasons. Jeff had his little formula of 1. Deep Politics post followed by 2. Swamp Man /UFO bullshit post. Now he is engaged in "me doth protest too much" over CD: the one area his threateners most fear, the one they know they are most vulnerable on, the one with the highest chance of igniting large-scale public outrage.
Wells is increasingly pathetic with his "don't look at the visual evidence, think only of incredibly unproveable and abstruse financial skullduggery," which, obviously, will NEVER appeal to John Q. Buttfuck in the way the video of WTC 7 collapsing would. Jeff's threateners know this, and order him to "derail CD." It's probably embarrassing on some level for Jeff to have to shove his foot further and further into his mouth, but hey, he's a guy who has written copiously on Swmap Man, so how embarrassed can he get?
The commenters are a nice mixed bag of paid trolls (Cuttlefist, Spermdrinkerageddon, NOMO, Phil "I'm a Centaur,") and earnest folk who try for a few episodes to convince potential audiences of the truth of CD. You know that 911 truth in general has come a long way because even at a limited hangout site like RI the idea of conspiracy is uniformly accepted (because anyone with 12 neurons to rub together knows it was a false flag op), only the most volatile issues, the ones capable of fanning prairie fires, like WTC 7 and CD (which leads to such nasty little questions as "who ran the demolition op?") are attacked.
Another issue Wells won't touch is the anthrax attacks, because even casual googling quickly leads one to the name Phil Zack, and that's a name we're not supposed to think or write about.
Wells is getting a nice comeuppance from a poster named "Number1 Sniffer," as well as others, who have the nerve to show how Wells cherry-picks the evidence himself.
Post a Comment
<< Home