• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories
  • You may need to edit your signatures.

    When we moved to Xenfora some of the signature options didn't come over. In the old software signatures were limited by a character limit, on Xenfora there are more options and there is a character number and number of lines limit. I've set maximum number of lines to 4 and unlimited characters.

Michael C. Ruppert’s “A Presidential Energy Policy” published today!

1. You wrote: "Rigors of analysis (and journalistic integrity) would demand that you and Ruppert not include Vreeland in the first place. As an editor you should have known that the inclusion of two full chapters of Vreeland's testimony would at least detract from whatever point the author was trying to make." No. Mr. Vreeland claimed to have a document that demonstrated foreknowledge of the attacks. The two chapters are about the reasons to credit that claim and the reasons not to. Read them. THEN talk more about it.

I didn't talk about the reasons to believe Vreeland after reading the book. I wondered why you included him in the first place. You had to know that local Toronto radio stations had already investigated the guy. Maybe you didn't. I figure that's part of the reason Ruppert is an ex-cop and not an actual cop. He ignored the reality of the court cases and went ahead to include spurious claims that even his own attorney had a hard time believing.

You have a bad habit here.

No I don't, Dr Hecht. You have a bad habit here. You know from reading Brzezinki's work that he says nothing whatsover about "necessary wars" for resources. Unless you didn't read Brzezinski. Again, same thing as above. You include a source and claim to have edited the footnotes without realising that the conclusions were based on speculative interpretation. First Vreeland. Then Brzezinski.

Not much left of Ruppert's book once you remove those, yours and Kane's contributions, and the Google-fuelled speculations about "Buzzy".

In reality is a big part of the boring, violent, law-breaking, dreary, abysmally cynical way things get done on a day-to-day, year-to-year basis in the USA and elsewhere. People with enough power --either to circumvent the law or shape it to their own requirements-- get together with like-minded, mutually-interested others; together they make plans and some of those plans get executed, sometimes with partial or even near-complete success. The only ways to deny that are a structuralist view of history so extreme as to claim that only faceless social forces can ever "do" anything, or a heroic individual model of history where nobody ever cooperates (that is, conspires) with anyone else except for lawful purposes. No adult really thinks that way. You have simply been conditioned to hear, and to say, the term "conspiracy" as a code word for flaky skepticism. That is debilitating you, but it also makes you feel like one of the cool kids. You just might continue to speak in terms of "belief" rather than persuasion, "conspiracy" rather than deep politics, for the rest of your life. Up to you.

What a wonderful philosophy. In that case, I can see why you would stoop to make things up about Brzezinski's book and to include perjurers as proof of this conspiracy you made up on the fly.

I did not attribute the phrase "necessary wars for oil and gas" to Zbig, but if you doubt that he is speaking of precisely that, then you and I are perhaps even more different that I thought. When the Nazis made their semi-suicidal, desperate grab for Baku, hundreds of miles inside the Soviet Union, do you think they did it for the pretty flowers that grow there?

So why did you employ the phrase? You desperately want him to have said it or you wouldn't have said it in the same breath. The facts are that Brzezinski has been one of the most publicly strident critics of the Bush Administration's Middle East and Central Asian policies.

Nice touch at trying to Godwin our conversation in your final sentence there.

Zbig writes, on page 31 of Grand Chessboard, "Eurasia accounts for 60 per cent of the world's GNP and about three-fourths of the world's known energy resources."

So what? What's your point? That shows that Dick Cheney arranged for the murder of people in New York City?

Brzezenski states a fact (much unlike Vreeland, verifiable and undeniable) and suddenly Dick Cheney's a treasonous scumbag? I might agree with you on the scumbag part but I think you have the guy all wrong. As Brzezinski. As Vreeland. Probably as Ruppert.

See how this technique feels when someone does it to you:
Well, Stilicho, there is nothing in Mr. Brzezinski's book to suggest that he is an employee of yours, nor does the book say anywhere that you are from Helsinki.

Except that you are speculating (again, sigh). But you were an employee of Ruppert. And really coming to your own rescue and not his.

I appreciate, as always, talking about the core resources Ruppert uses for his books. What do you know about his "Buzzy" stuff? I found "Buzzy" immediately by Googling CIA and Wall Street. I used Google to find this guy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_R._Howell

There isn't a CIA link but just look at this blackguard. He's worked for Pfizer (drug link), Halliburton (Dick Cheney link), and DeutscheBank (9/11 link). Why does "Buzzy" get into Ruppert's book but not this guy?

Has Ruppert even interviewed "Buzzy" or any of his current or former co-workers? Has he investigated W R Howell?

I will find you the Toronto radio station stuff about Vreeland, too, in case you're still interested. It would have been available just by calling any media outlet in Canada at the time Ruppert was researching his book. I think I might even be able to find you Vreeland's lawyer who scarcely believed a word he said.

Thanks for contributing.
 
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/nov202001.html

Scroll down third of the page to:

'A War in the Planning for Four Years

HOW STUPID DO THEY THINK WE ARE?'

All I saw was the ravings of a lunatic. What do you see there?

By the way, you're now using pronounced Keynesian and monetary expansionist Galbraith in your signature, JihadJane. Remember, sweetie, that you don't like him because you're kind of a Eustace Mullins in pumps.

How many times have I caused you to remember your signature line is inappropriate for someone with your perspective? :rolleyes:
 
This thread is completely derailed, by the way. I will read Ruppert's latest as soon as it's free on an indymedia-type site. I finally managed to get both Brzezinski and Ruppert (b/w Hecht, Kane, et al) onto the same drive after losing track of them for several years. Never thought we'd have an opportunity to debunk them again.

So, Dr Hecht, if you're interested in discussing Ruppert v Brzezinski, I'd be happy to accomodate you on a thread of your own choosing on the Conspiracy Theories forum.

The discussion should be limited to:

1] Specific references to Brzezinski and the context added by Ruppert.
2] Endnotes in Ruppert's work.
3] The Vreeland chapters.

I would naturally prefer to limit it to Brzezinski since we have original works and context with which to work.
 
Man, i would've really liked to see more responses. This was gettin' good. And welcome, Jamie.
 
'COLLAPSE', the movie about Mike Ruppert's life, to show at Toronto Film festival:

Americans generally like to hear good news. They like to believe that a new president will right old wrongs, that clean energy will replace dirty oil and that fresh thinking will set the economy straight. American pundits tend to restrain their pessimism and hope for the best. But is anyone prepared for the worst?

Meet Michael Ruppert, a different kind of American. A former Los Angeles police officer turned independent reporter, he predicted the current financial crisis in his self-published newsletter, From the Wilderness, at a time when most Wall Street and Washington analysts were still in denial. Director Chris Smith has shown an affinity for outsiders in films like American Movie and The Yes Men. In Collapse, he departs stylistically from his past documentaries by interviewing Ruppert in a format that recalls the work of Errol Morris and Spalding Gray.

Sitting in a room that looks like a bunker, Ruppert recounts his career as a radical thinker and spells out the crises he sees ahead. He draws upon the same news reports and data available to any Internet user, but he applies a unique interpretation. He is especially passionate about the issue of “peak oil,” the concern raised by scientists since the seventies that the world will eventually run out of fossil fuel. While other experts debate this issue in measured tones, Ruppert doesn't hold back at sounding an alarm, portraying an apocalyptic future. Listening to his rapid flow of opinions, the viewer is likely to question some of the rhetoric as paranoid or deluded, and to sway back and forth on what to make of the extremism. Smith lets viewers form their own judgments.

Collapse also serves as a portrait of a loner. Over the years, Ruppert has stood up for what he believes in despite fierce opposition. He candidly describes the sacrifices and motivators in his life. While other observers analyze details of the economic crisis, Ruppert views it as symptomatic of nothing less than the collapse of industrial civilization itself.

- Thom Powers


Chris Smith studied film at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. His first documentary, American Movie (99), caused a sensation at the 1999 Festival and won the Grand Jury Prize for best documentary at the Sundance Film Festival the same year. He has also directed the features American Job (95) and Pool (07) and the documentaries Home Movie (01), The Yes Men (03) and Collapse (09).

http://www.tiff.net/filmsandschedules/films/collapse
 
Last edited:
What is a "9/11 Truther" and what is a "'Woo Merchant' flat"?

For one, someone who artfully avoids MIHOP arguments except to occasionally embrace them and encourage their appeal, even though he's either inadequate in the fields at question or willfully being dishonest. I had to call him out for including this in Crossing The Rubicon about Flight 77
the miracle plane. The one that nobody actually saw hit the Pentagon; the one that left no recognizable debris matching an airliner; the one [Thierry Meyssan] did a pretty convincing job of proving never hit the Pentagon because the hole was way too small and the damage pattern […] was totally inconsistent with a mid-sized passenger jet like a 757; the one where the engines melted, disappeared or evaporated, or were transported into space by the Starship Enterprise and never found; the one that flew like a fighter plane or a cruise missile. [p 351]

I haven't studied peak oil and global narco-economics and CIA-Wall Street connections as much as the Pentagon attack, so I'm agnostic on his other issues. For the record I was once a major fan, but having seen charlatanism in one of the few areas I have mastered, well, to put it softly, I'm not sold at the press release.

Oh, I also found another patch of error, along with titilating leads, in his LIHOP leaning Rubicon arguments. Dated piece, from my "Truthier" days but some good points still.

Maybe this thread could discuss what's in the book and what value there is or isn't in it, in, like, detail.
 
<snip>
Sincerely,
Jamey Hecht, PhD

Wow, thanks for stopping by here! Sorry, I didn't read the tiff going on here, or even know you'd signed up, but there might be some good discussion here and it would be nice to see your post count here get a little higher.

BTW Altough t means I nearly missed it, I'm glad this thread's not in the CT forum.
 
Rupperts books have proven lies in them. They are strewn all over the place like threads Red Ibis has abandoned.

That JJ has to post them in recommended reading threads on this forum speaks volumes. Perhaps Jamey can defend the Pentagon lies?
 
For one, someone who artfully avoids MIHOP arguments except to occasionally embrace them and encourage their appeal, even though he's either inadequate in the fields at question or willfully being dishonest. I had to call him out for including this in Crossing The Rubicon about Flight 77

Thanks for your comments. My understanding of Ruppert's position on this is that he sees misinformed no-plane-hit-the-Pentagon theories as serving to discredit 9/11 skepticism in general and inside the Beltway in particular.

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/122705_identifiying_misinformation.shtml


I haven't studied peak oil and global narco-economics and CIA-Wall Street connections as much as the Pentagon attack, so I'm agnostic on his other issues. For the record I was once a major fan, but having seen charlatanism in one of the few areas I have mastered, well, to put it softly, I'm not sold at the press release.

Oh, I also found another patch of error, along with titilating leads, in his LIHOP leaning Rubicon arguments. Dated piece, from my "Truthier" days but some good points still.

Maybe this thread could discuss what's in the book and what value there is or isn't in it, in, like, detail.

Isn't understanding 911 in the context of peak oil, global narco-economics/politics and the way that money works central to Ruppert's analysis?
 
Thanks for your comments.
Thanks for saying thanks.
My understanding of Ruppert's position on this is that he sees misinformed no-plane-hit-the-Pentagon theories as serving to discredit 9/11 skepticism in general and inside the Beltway in particular.

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/122705_identifiying_misinformation.shtml

First, that link is by Mark Robinowitz, re-posted at FTW, so not really Ruppert's or FTW's take, tho one they can endorse. I did read somewhere just about that sentiment from IIRC an FTW source, but it was all about what to talk about. Essentially, sure something other than 77 happened at the Pentagon, we all agree, but let's not make it the main point. Either Ruppert was just gullible enough to accept Meyssan et al, or was strategically trying to avoid alienating other gullible idiots needed for Truther Unity.

Kind of a cop-out if the latter. (cop-out vs. CIA? Sorry couldn't resist).

Now of course this is all a minor side point, as we agree it was never an FTW plank and only got a paragraph in a mammoth book. It's just what I know - flat wrong and badly so on this point. Therefore you ask

Isn't understanding 911 in the context of peak oil, global narco-economics/politics and the way that money works central to Ruppert's analysis?

Yes, these are more complex issues I can't pin down as easily, so until I can vouch for or against his main points, my criticism is of very limited importance.

Plus, going into details on this, Vreeland, Zbig, etc. will go off-track from the central - economic/energy - points this thread was started for. Someone should post notes from reading the book or at least some online synopsis/review/etc. stuff.
 
Last edited:
Someone should post notes from reading the book or at least some online synopsis/review/etc. stuff.

Good idea!

The contents pages and extensive extracts can be found here:

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...esult&ct=result&resnum=6#v=onepage&q=&f=false

(I remember stilicho saying he/she had read the entire book online somewhere)

Deborah Baker wrote a good review/synopsis for 'Free Press', which is worth reproducing in full:

*** "Crossing the Rubicon' bares all! Cheney, Bush complicity in 9/11; CIA on Wall Street and other financial scandals; End of Civilization?
by Deborah Baker
October 8, 2004

Mike Ruppert's "Crossing the Rubicon" describes the horrendous crisis our civilization is headed into because of the coming end of the age of oil. I found the book refreshing. A slice of truth--or at least honest speculation to explain the very bizarre behavior of some in our government, which the media and (according to polls, reliable or not) the public seem to be accepting with few questions.

Oil, gas, and other petroleum products power our transportation, help grow our food (as raw materials for pesticides and fertilizers), heat us in the cold, cook our food, supply us with plastics--in short, they enable our economic system to be as successful as it is. Unfortunately, petroleum is a finite resource, and we have now used up about half of all known reserves. At the same time, the world's population keeps expanding, and less developed countries are developing, including the giant China. Thus, as petrol product demand is rising, the oil itself will be more and more difficult to get out of the ground. This means oil will become increasingly expensive, which will put a huge brake on economic growth. We can look forward to the time when $2 a gallon for gas will sound cheap!

Also unfortunately, our capitalist system depends on unlimited, never-ending growth. In other words, our economic system, on which our political system is based, is doomed. This, according to Ruppert, is what 9/11 was all about. Ruppert, a former LAPD cop and one of the first voices questioning the official storyline on 9/11, lays forth his evidence in this 600-page tome of how Peak Oil (the end of abundant supply and beginning of decline) gradually entered the consiousness of "elite" decision-makers, including politicians and the very wealthy, in the 1990's. Wanting to keep their advantage through to the very end, these low-down "elites" made plans. These include Zbigniew Brzezinski's 1997 book "The Grand Chessboard: America's Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives" and the Project for a New American Century's 2000 report "Rebuilding America's Defenses", among others. The gist of these documents are that the US must press its international advantage now while it is still the world's superpower, in order to ensure its access to valuable resources, particularly oil. This will ensure the primacy of the US in the future.

Again unfortunately, the secure future being sought is only for those low-down "elites", not for the majority of Americans or other people of the world. Remember the reports a couple years ago about how a few trillion dollars of taxpayer money was strangely unaccounted for at the Pentagon? Ruppert and Catherine Austin Fitts, a former Assistant Secretary at HUD, describe how trillions were looted from the Departments of Housing and Urban Development and Defense, Social Security, and other government accounts.

Around the same time, corporate executives, thanks to their criminal behavior, walked away with billions of dollars of small-investor money.

This money has been used to play the system to the thieves' advantage, for instance by their investing in elections, media companies, CIA "assets", etc. In fact, Ruppert, who has been studying the CIA for over two decades, finds the CIA heavily involved in the financial world. He details connections between high-ranking CIA officials and Wall Street. He describes how an estimated $500 billion in drug money is laundered through finanacial markets every year. He explains how the CIA helps fund itself by being the world's biggest illegal drug concern. This, for example, is why the Taliban stopped Afghan poppy farming (only) in 2000 (to deprive the CIA of that money--the Afghan war was expected even before 9/11), and why the heroin production has again risen now that the Americans are in control in Afghanistan (and why heroin is now found for the first time in Baghdad).

The low-down plans to gain US access to the world's resources had to involve military force. Not all countries with those resources would be willing to hand them over. In order to begin and continue these wars, the "elites'" plans required putting their team in the White House--thus the rigged 2000 elections, which brought Iran/Contra criminals back to the Executive branch, as well as energy and defense industry big shots. To moblize Americans behind these wars, a modern-day "Pearl Harbor" was needed--thus the 9/11 attacks. Ruppert doesn't just present us with his theory. He shows us the same evidence he's looking at. Again and again, I had to put the book down to refocus in light of the explanations Ruppert offers for previously inexplicable mysteries, such as why 7 WTC collapsed.

Because "Crossing the Rubicon" relies heavily on original documentation, and because it was written in at least two installments, there are times when different information and explanations are given for the same thing.

For example, considering the time fighter jets were scrambled to intercept the 9/11 hijackers, and the time the jets arrived at their destinations, too late to stop the attacks, Ruppert writes they must have been crawling at well below their top speeds. Later, he explains the pilots heading out hadn't been told why they were scrambled or where they were to go, so they started off east over the Atlantic, as per their generic training missions, to stop incoming missiles.

Now, according to Cheney, we can expect wars which won't end in our lifetimes. (And Ruppert claims Cheney played a central role on the critical morning of 9/11.) However, even while acknowledging the natural cycle of growth, decline and death applies to the human-made capitalist system as well as to humanity, Ruppert remains hopeful. If we can realize what is really happening, we can come up with a solution. As Austin Fitts quips: if we can face it, God can fix it. This amazing book puts forth the evidence Ruppert believes incriminates those who would save the future only for themselves. While the rest of us still retain some political power and material resources, Ruppert pleads, let's wake up and take responsibility.

This may well be our last chance.
***

http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/17/2004/791
 

Whoa, hold on SpamMeister Jane.

The first book anyone should read prior to venturing into Ruppert's Fantasyland is Brzezinski's book upon which he heavily relies:

http://sandiego.indymedia.org/media/2006/10/119973.pdf

It should be noted that long bodies of quoted text are considered spam and are not allowed here at the JREF. You only need to link to Ruppert's book which I assumed you wanted to do.

Both Ruppert (and now Hecht on this thread) have quote mined Brzezinski and created an illusion to suit their own nefarious purposes. Neither of them, nor JihadJane, appear to realise that Brzezinski was a strident critic of US foreign policy in the Middle East and Central Asia for most of the duration of the Bush Administration.

----

By the way, JihadJane, Caustic Logic is probably talking about the book you recommended in the OP. Have you read it yet?
 
Last edited:
By the way, JihadJane, Caustic Logic is probably talking about the book you recommended in the OP. Have you read it yet?

Yes, I meant to say something, but it hardly seemed worth it. Not much economics/energy policy stuff in this thread. Some pink stuff with a layer of jelly on top...

Both Ruppert (and now Hecht on this thread) have quote mined Brzezinski and created an illusion to suit their own nefarious purposes. Neither of them, nor JihadJane, appear to realise that Brzezinski was a strident critic of US foreign policy in the Middle East and Central Asia for most of the duration of the Bush Administration.

----

I'm sure that false implications have been drawn, but when I read Rubicon and various other things, I never got a sinister impression of Brzezinski as some plotter of 9/11. I guess the implication I do recall is that other (Cheney et al) were inspired by his geostrategic thinking and talk of "external threats" enabling "imperial mobilization." Either way these are worth mentioning in the context of 9/11 and the WoT - if not as directly connected than illustrative. Zbig's realistic mind pre-conceived the conditions we soon faced, his words summed it up with almost eerie precision. How can you pass up a quote mine mother lode like the Grand Chessboard? It's all in how you read it.

As far as being a Bush critic, this changes nothing of my view of Brzezinski. The Bush team were behaving so far off the usual 'script' criticizing them was like differing with Nixon. For some variable time after 9/11 everyone had to be with Bush but at a certain point it's a no-brainer that you cast your lot with whoever's next. I'd guess Zbig, reflective realist he is, was a ways ahead of the curve on that.
 
Zbig's criticises Bush-clan foreign policy in the Middle East and Central Asia because he doesn't think it's the best way to achieve US domination of the region. His criticism represents factional disputes within the US ruling classes, not disagreement with their profoundly destructive, imperialist aims.
 
Ruppert's track record

The Sept 19th blog of "Peak Oil Debunked" contains an analysis of Ruppert's past predictive performance, as an assist to those trying to determine how much weight to give the information contained in "Collapse"...

As an interesting aside, and with no shred of conspiracist intent, F.T.W. is an interesting choice of acronym. FTW is a commonly used acronym among outlaw motorbike enthusiasts....:boxedin:
 
:D

("Peak Oil Debunked", the blog that doesn't debunk Peak Oil.)
 
Last edited:
Potentially very large finds in Sierra Leone to add to the Ghana stuff amongst others. Nice looking prospects for that area.

Schmeak Oil ---------------
 
Astonishingly acute foresight... LOL. Ruppert is a complete wingnut "truther" with a long history of BS predictions, extreme paranoia and mental health issues.

And a liking for padeophile conmen as primary sources.
 
A Presidential Energy Policy.

Twenty-five Points Addressing the Siamese Twins of Energy and Money.


by Michael C. Ruppert

http://rubiconworks.com/

“Michael Ruppert does not mince his words writing a stirring and uncompromising book on a vital issue. He addresses some simple but widely ignored concepts relating to the critical role of oil and gas in the modern world. First, they are finite resources, formed in the geological past, being therefore subject to depletion. Second, they have to be found before they can be produced, such that the peak of discovery, which is long past, must deliver a corresponding peak of production.

He then goes on to address the wider implications recognising that there is a finite Oil Age. The First Half started only 150 years ago and saw the rapid expansion of just about everything, fuelled by this cheap source energy, flowing from the ground, but now we face the dawn of the Second Half, when production and all that depends upon it declines. The economic and political consequences of this Turning Point for Mankind are clearly colossal, demanding far reaching political responses, as the book discusses. Many claims have been made that new technology will counter the natural decline, but there is an irony: the better the technology, the faster the depletion.

Having explained the underlying facts, the book turns to related subjects, including foreign policy and the invasion of Iraq, the hopes for renewable energy substitutes, the impact on farming and population, and the nature of Money. The impact on the economy is a central theme of the book. It gives emphasis to the US situation but also covers the wider World, ending with twenty-five sensible recommendations by which the US Government could react to the unfolding situation.

It is a perceptive, stimulating and very readable book covering a subject of critical importance. It deserves a place on the bookshelves of everyone from the school teacher to the chief executive; from the bishop to the politician and world leader.”

Colin Campbell, Ph.D.

“America's most courageous and fearless investigative reporter exposes the root causes of the financial meltdown. Our new President should read A Presidential Energy Policy for his next intelligence briefing.”

Mark Robinowitz


http://rubiconworks.com/

Almost no employees of Micheal Ruppert were sexually assaulted in the making of this rubbish.
 
You're seriously still discussing this guy?

Mike C. said:
While I had serious doubts about America’s ability to recover from Katrina, I am certain that – barring divine intervention – the United States is finished; not only as a superpower, but possibly even as a single, unified nation with the arrival of Hurricane Rita.
- http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/092105_rita_storm.shtml

Mike C. said:
Now, with the swine flu outbreak just developing, it is clear that the dieoff has begun and the energy-confidence bubble is about to explode.
- http://mikeruppert.blogspot.com/2009/04/saudi-cat-is-out-of-bag-al-naimi-says.html

Mike C. said:
It's not only greenhouse gas emissions: Washington's new world order weapons
have the ability to trigger climate change.


...

In the US, the technology is being perfected under the High-frequency Active Aural Research Program (HAARP) as part of the ("Star Wars") Strategic Defence Initiative (SDI). Recent scientific evidence suggests that HAARP is fully operational and has the ability of potentially triggering floods, droughts, hurricanes and earthquakes.
- http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/pandora/haarp.html

The guy's a fruit cake.
 
Trailer for Chris Smith's (American Movie, The Yes Men) critically acclaimed new film COLLAPSE, featuring Michael Ruppert:

http://www.apple.com/trailers/independent/collapse/



In “Collapse,” Smith stylistically departs from his past films by interviewing Ruppert in a format that recalls the work of Errol Morris and Spalding Gray. Sitting in a room that looks like a bunker, Ruppert recounts his career as a radical thinker and spells out the crises he sees ahead.

He draws upon the same news reports and data available to any Internet user, but he applies a unique interpretation.

He is especially passionate over the issue of “peak oil,” the concern raised by scientists since the 1970s that the world will eventually run out of fossil fuel. While other experts debate this issue in measured tones, Ruppert doesn’t hold back at sounding an alarm.

He portrays a future that resembles apocalyptic science fiction.

Listening to his rapid flow of opinions, the viewer is likely to question some of the rhetoric as paranoid or deluded; and to sway back and forth on what to make of the extremism.

Smith lets viewers form their own judgments.



http://www.apple.com/trailers/independent/collapse/
 
Last edited:
Trailer for Chris Smith's (American Movie, The Yes Men) critically acclaimed new film COLLAPSE, featuring Michael Ruppert:

http://www.apple.com/trailers/independent/collapse/



In “Collapse,” Smith stylistically departs from his past films by interviewing Ruppert in a format that recalls the work of Errol Morris and Spalding Gray. Sitting in a room that looks like a bunker, Ruppert recounts his career as a radical thinker and spells out the crises he sees ahead.

He draws upon the same news reports and data available to any Internet user, but he applies a unique interpretation.

He is especially passionate over the issue of “peak oil,” the concern raised by scientists since the 1970s that the world will eventually run out of fossil fuel. While other experts debate this issue in measured tones, Ruppert doesn’t hold back at sounding an alarm.

He portrays a future that resembles apocalyptic science fiction.

Listening to his rapid flow of opinions, the viewer is likely to question some of the rhetoric as paranoid or deluded; and to sway back and forth on what to make of the extremism.

Smith lets viewers form their own judgments.



http://www.apple.com/trailers/independent/collapse/

Do they mention the sex pesting and the paedophile conman source?

Ruppert is a clueless conman.
 

Back
Top Bottom