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

[DC]

Good grief, Mr Cheney, he hires "editors" for each book he "writes". Entire chapters are contributed by people other than the "author". And his site is "managed" during his frequent absences. Try looking up Jamey Hecht and Michael Kane to start with. It's crazy that I always have to do the work for you conspiracists.



Very few economists believe in perpetual growth. Perpetuality implies predictability and an infinite series.

little missunderstanding on my side, i thought you claimed he would hire people to post on fora like here on JREF.

 

[stilicho]

little missunderstanding on my side, i thought you claimed he would hire people to post on fora like here on JREF.

It was my not-so-sly intention to blur that line, DC.

Besides, JihadJane promised me months ago that she would read Brzezinski's book from which Ruppert lifts a lot of his 'proof' in Crossing The Rubicon:

Originally Posted by JihadJane
II'll let you know when I've read it but the political analysis you have offered so far does not give me confidence that your review is accurate. You veer wildly between apparently sober academic contemplation and crude, fact-free, smearing.

Tell you what. To avoid further derailing Parky's thread, once you've finished the book, start a thread detailing how Brzezinski's book supports the thesis that 9/11 was an inside job and I will take the opposite stance.

That's from this thread: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=129639&highlight=brzezinski.

Now we find JihadJane hawking a fresh Ruppert product without having understood the other wrong-headed one.

 

[JihadJane]

Oh, let's not forget Ruppert's affectionate relationship with convicted paedophiles.

Evidence?

It's kind of sad to observe your familiar descent into the gutter.

 

[The_Animus]

Very few economists believe in perpetual growth. Perpetuality implies predictability and an infinite series.

Perpetual growth implies that a continually larger and larger output is necessary to continue economic function and stability. This is indeed the case.

 

[stilicho]

Evidence?

It's kind of sad to observe your familiar descent into the gutter.

I know. It's awful. I must apologise to you, JihadJane, for making the connection between Michael C Ruppert, your hero, and Delmart "Mike" Vreeland, a convicted fraud artist and paedophile, to which the aforementioned Ruppert devoted two full chapters of his partially ghost-written book that you nominated as required reading on the Politics forum, and making it seem worse than it was.

For all we know, Ruppert is just a bad judge of character. Must have been his LAPD training.

 

[stilicho]

Perpetual growth implies that a continually larger and larger output is necessary to continue economic function and stability. This is indeed the case.

What? Huh?

Provide an historical example of this arcane myth you've woven for yourself.

 

[DC]

What? Huh?

Provide an historical example of this arcane myth you've woven for yourself.

It is indeed the case. Andsomehow it is indeed even correct, as the world population keeps growing so should actually also the economy grow atleast at the same rate.

If a country anounces it econonmic growth, it is only good if it is growing, if it stays how t is, its not good.

 

[JihadJane]

I know. It's awful. I must apologise to you, JihadJane, for making the connection between Michael C Ruppert, your hero, and Delmart "Mike" Vreeland, a convicted fraud artist and paedophile, to which the aforementioned Ruppert devoted two full chapters of his partially ghost-written book that you nominated as required reading on the Politics forum, and making it seem worse than it was.

For all we know, Ruppert is just a bad judge of character. Must have been his LAPD training.

If you have evidence about Ruppert's "affectionate relationship with convicted paedophiles" please provide it.

 

[JihadJane]

Peak Oil is not just the end of globalization.

Interview with Michael C. Ruppert, Published May 22 2009:

Extract:

"Lars Schall: Mr Ruppert, you’re about to publish a new book. What is the title of this book and what is it all about?

"Michael C. Ruppert: A Presidential Energy Policy: Twenty-five Points Addressing the Siamese Twins of Energy and Money is a book addressing what an American President should be doing and saying about energy issues free from ideological, political, or other mental restraints. It is a simple and stark analysis of the world's current energy picture written for those with only a High School education that quickly and clearly cuts through the nonsense we have been sold about energy, money and growth. It also has wide appeal for planners and leaders (especially local) in all countries. Energy behaves the same way everywhere. German foresight on energy issues -- in particular its aggressive implementation of Feed-in-Tariffs -- has offered some very positive innovations that I have recommended be adopted by President Obama here in the U.S.

...

"Lars Schall: Years have gone by since [2001]. Even though major newspapers like the New York Times admit these days that the end of cheap oil is near, they rather avoid to discuss the underlying consequences of Peak Oil. How would you explain those consequences? Isn’t Peak Oil somehow the end of globalization?

"Michael C. Ruppert: Peak Oil is not just the end of globalization. I was saying clearly that globalization was dead five years ago. It was obvious. But Peak Oil is potentially the end of the human race and that outcome is perhaps just a few years away unless the human race essentially throws every ideological sacred cow out the window and starts with a fresh piece of paper. There are around five billion people alive today that were not sustainable before oil came along. There is no combination of alternative energies (nor will there ever be) that can possibly sustain the edifice built by oil. In the industrialized world there are ten calories of hydrocarbon energy involved in the production of every calorie of food. Our soils have been little more than infertile sponges onto which we throw massive amounts of chemicals derived from oil and natural gas."

'The sinking Titanic: interview with Michael C. Ruppert'

by Lars Schall


http://www.energybulletin.net/node/48990

 

[Jamey Hecht]

Clean Up After Yourself

Some people have a habit of dropping trash out on the street, whence it either blows into the ocean, or is removed by some conscientious stranger who loses thereby the chance to do otherwise with that fleeting parcel of his time.

So, disinformation litterbug, I will now clean up your mess. You wrote that Michael Ruppert:

"...hires 'editors' for each book he 'writes'. Entire chapters are contributed by people other than the "author". And his site is 'managed' during his frequent absences. Try looking up Jamey Hecht and Michael Kane to start with." [sic]

I have accurately reproduced your presumably sarcastic quotation marks around the terms editor, write, and manage. What are they for? I edited Crossing the Rubicon, Mr. Ruppert's book from 2004. In what respect do you regard that labor as somehow spurious? In close consultation with the author I did write several pages of that book: maybe two percent of the eventual text, probably less. I edited every page, every footnote. Editing books generally involves persuading the writer to cut more than he otherwise would; this book was typical in that regard.

We chose to include Michael Kane's chapter on the NORAD hearings because MICHAEL KANE GOT HIMSELF TO WASHINGTON DC, ATTENDED THE NORAD HEARINGS, and STUCK A MICROPHONE IN THE FACE OF THE CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF OF THE UNITED STATES and ASKED HIM ABOUT THE WARGAMES which are the heart of the book's argument about how the 9/11 attacks were conducted -- multiple simultaneous wargame drills paralyzed NORAD by dispersing its aircraft and polluting its air traffic control screens with a mix of real-world data and wargame-related data. Mr. Kane's actions took more balls than anything I've ever done. How about you?

As for Ms. Orkin's management of the blog, mikeruppert.blogspot.com, it's been exemplary and much appreciated. What exactly is wrong with having another person help run a blog?

Then there's your little mess about Vreeland. This was all resolved long ago:
see my review of Rubicon on amazon dot com, which invariably appears either first or second when you search for the book at amazon, and bears the name Jamey Hecht.

Your word choice is disingenuous: the author you dislike "devotes" two chapters to Vreeland, and Vreeland is allegedly an XYZ and a PDQ, therefore Mike Ruppert is an XYZ and a PDQ. Nope, that's hogwash. You are playing on the ambiguity in the word "devote," which has one meaning that includes endearment and another meaning that does not; this is supposed to imply that Mr. Ruppert approves of Mr. Vreeland. If you actually READ the two chapters in question you will find them very cold indeed about Mr. Vreeland, and remarkably focused instead on the sole question of a particular document's authenticity or lack thereof. The rigors of analysis demanded that Delmart Vreeland's lack of personal integrity be taken as a given from the outset.

You speak of "Brzezinski's book from which Ruppert lifts a lot of his 'proof' in Crossing The Rubicon." Either you did not do the reading or you're out to mislead people who haven't. The great lone hulking reason why Ruppert quotes Brzezinski's 1997 book is to show that Brzezinski, a major power player in geopolitical analysis and policymaking, was already in 1997 saying that Americans would not fight the necessary wars for oil & natural gas unless there were a major attack on US soil, like a new Pearl Harbor -- the same notion the Project for a New American Century repeated in their chillingly hawkish expansionist manifesto of 2000, the PNAC Report. You write as if Ruppert the whistleblowing muckracker was stealing the ideas of Brzezinski the Neoliberal billionaire, when the point is that the policy rationale for 9/11 was an openly published part of the rightist think-tank culture in the years preceding the attacks. You silly person! you must have such terrible trouble at the movies.

Hacks feel clever when they choose derogatory verbs like "hawking" and "peddling" to describe the professional activities of authors with whom they disagree -- as though anyone whose work contradicts your prejudices ought to have to give his books away for nothing and live on tips and debt.

Stop making a mess and be quiet. You need a nap.

Sincerely,
Jamey Hecht, PhD

My yoo are ell is my own first & last name dot com.

 

[JihadJane]

Jamey Hecht, thanks for stopping by to put stilicho's trash in the trash can.

 

[Dr Adequate]

‘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 ...

Widely ignored indeed. I for one was completely unaware that there was not an infinite amount of oil. I had always supposed that since the volume of the Earth is infinite, so is the volume of oil that it contains. And your point about having to find the stuff before pumping it out of the ground ... well that just blew my mind. Is there some technical reason why the oil companies don't use their time-machines to obviate this problem?

Of course, I have spent my entire life living in a cave on the Moon, so this may explain why I am not au courant with the latest thinking on the subject of oil. Lately, I've been hearing a disquieting rumor to the effect that the stuff is dangerously flammable. Has this been confirmed by Mr Ruppert's cutting-edge research?

 

[Chaos]

Widely ignored indeed. I for one was completely unaware that there was not an infinite amount of oil. I had always supposed that since the volume of the Earth is infinite, so is the volume of oil that it contains. And your point about having to find the stuff before pumping it out of the ground ... well that just blew my mind. Is there some technical reason why the oil companies don't use their time-machines to obviate this problem?

Of course, I have spent my entire life living in a cave on the Moon, so this may explain why I am not au courant with the latest thinking on the subject of oil. Lately, I've been hearing a disquieting rumor to the effect that the stuff is dangerously flammable. Has this been confirmed by Mr Ruppert's cutting-edge research?

Not just that. Rumor has is his next book is going to be about how the stuff is black, gooey and is sold by the barrel.

 

[Gangularis]

Widely ignored indeed. I for one was completely unaware that there was not an infinite amount of oil. I had always supposed that since the volume of the Earth is infinite, so is the volume of oil that it contains. And your point about having to find the stuff before pumping it out of the ground ... well that just blew my mind. Is there some technical reason why the oil companies don't use their time-machines to obviate this problem?

Of course, I have spent my entire life living in a cave on the Moon, so this may explain why I am not au courant with the latest thinking on the subject of oil. Lately, I've been hearing a disquieting rumor to the effect that the stuff is dangerously flammable. Has this been confirmed by Mr Ruppert's cutting-edge research?

She said "ignored". You're mistaking uninformed with ignoring. It's one thing to understand that oil is finite.. it's another to disregard that fact, and use the stuff like there ain't no tomorrow.

 

[mhaze]

‘A Presidential Energy Policy.

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

by Michael C. Ruppert....

This is a really, really weird thread. Notably, all confess to not reading the book, including the OP poster, and away we go!!!

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

But Peak Oil is potentially the end of the human race and that outcome is perhaps just a few years away...

 

[stilicho]

I have accurately reproduced your presumably sarcastic quotation marks around the terms editor, write, and manage. What are they for? I edited Crossing the Rubicon, Mr. Ruppert's book from 2004. In what respect do you regard that labor as somehow spurious?

So I was correct. You did write some of his book. Glad you cleared that up.

The rigors of analysis demanded that Delmart Vreeland's lack of personal integrity be taken as a given from the outset.

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.

The great lone hulking reason why Ruppert quotes Brzezinski's 1997 book is to show that Brzezinski, a major power player in geopolitical analysis and policymaking, was already in 1997 saying that Americans would not fight the necessary wars for oil & natural gas unless there were a major attack on US soil, like a new Pearl Harbor -- the same notion the Project for a New American Century repeated in their chillingly hawkish expansionist manifesto of 2000, the PNAC Report.

This is the grossest misreading of Brzezinski since JihadJane's tracts. Nowhere is such a thesis set forward in his book. He states quite literally that the opportunity exists (at the time he was writing) to ensure that no large Eurasian power makes a power grab for what he calls the Eurasian Balkans. There's nothing in there about "necessary wars for oil & natural gas". You're just making that up as you go along.

There is certainly nothing in there about the emergence of Muslim fanatics willing to crash airplanes into the World Trade Center (or even anything remotely similar). There's nothing in there to suggest Muslim extremists could even influence the nations in the Eurasian Balkans one way or another.

Where he does discuss the resources of that area, his focus is primarily on Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan. He deliberates on the reasons for ensuring that Turkey and Iran possess stable (if not dependable) governments. Not at all the stuff of dark conspiracy.

Stop making a mess and be quiet. You need a nap.

Sincerely,
Jamey Hecht, PhD

My yoo are ell is my own first & last name dot com.

Thanks for dropping by.

 

[Jamey Hecht]

"...whatever point the author was trying to make...." Yeah.

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.

2. When I wrote: "The great lone hulking reason why Ruppert quotes Brzezinski's 1997 book is to show that Brzezinski, a major power player in geopolitical analysis and policymaking, was already in 1997 saying that Americans would not fight the necessary wars for oil & natural gas unless there were a major attack on US soil, like a new Pearl Harbor -- the same notion the Project for a New American Century repeated in their chillingly hawkish expansionist manifesto of 2000, the PNAC Report."

...you responded: "This is the grossest misreading of Brzezinski since JihadJane's tracts. Nowhere is such a thesis set forward in his book. He states quite literally that the opportunity exists (at the time he was writing) to ensure that no large Eurasian power makes a power grab for what he calls the Eurasian Balkans. There's nothing in there about "necessary wars for oil & natural gas". You're just making that up as you go along.

There is certainly nothing in there about the emergence of Muslim fanatics willing to crash airplanes into the World Trade Center (or even anything remotely similar). There's nothing in there to suggest Muslim extremists could even influence the nations in the Eurasian Balkans one way or another.

Where he does discuss the resources of that area, his focus is primarily on Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan. He deliberates on the reasons for ensuring that Turkey and Iran possess stable (if not dependable) governments. Not at all the stuff of dark conspiracy.

That last sentence really stinks. You have a bad habit here. You think "conspiracy" is "dark" and magical and fake and spooky. 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.

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?

The article that makes Mike Ruppert's case regarding The Grand Chessboard is called: "A War in the Planning for Four Years: Zbigniew Brzezinski and the CFR Put War Plans In a 1997 Book - It Is "A Blueprint for World Dictatorship," Says a Former German Defense and NATO Official Who Warned of Global Domination in 1984, in an Exclusive Interview With FTW
by Michael C. Ruppert [2001]." Since forums.randi does not permit relatively new users to post URLs, I can only advise you to go to the FTW website and search for it; it'll pop right up. It's loaded with quotations which refute your remarks.

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."

Tell me, what motivated you to type this sentence? "There is certainly nothing in there [i.e., in Zbig's book] about the emergence of Muslim fanatics willing to crash airplanes into the World Trade Center." Who ever said the contrary? It sure looks as if you are trying to imply that Ruppert made this absurd claim and now you're rescuing the naive reader from the risk of being deceived. But Ruppert never claimed that any such thing could be found in Zbig's book.

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.

Fun! Now I've vaguely suggested that you are deceiving people about your origins and employment. You are not, but if I were your type of writer, I could simply post an ambiguous sentence like that one, and let people's assumptions save me my labor. That's not right. I don't do it. You should stop.

What you're doing is the same procedure used by Gerald Posner and his ilk: say anything that suits you, then rest assured that no more than 5% of your readers will bother to do the reading necessary to vet your claims. It usually works fairly well. The most successful aspect in this case seems to be that you are taking up my time -- but I enjoy this sometimes, and when I don't enjoy it, I don't do it. I need a break from other activities for a few minutes once in a while. Besides, that barrel is so small, and those fish are so big.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

What you're doing is the same procedure used by Gerald Posner and his ilk: say anything that suits you, then rest assured that no more than 5% of your readers will bother to do the reading necessary to vet your claims. It usually works fairly well. The most successful aspect in this case seems to be that you are taking up my time -- but I enjoy this sometimes, and when I don't enjoy it, I don't do it. I need a break from other activities for a few minutes once in a while. Besides, that barrel is so small, and those fish are so big.

Just out of curiosity, who killed JFK?

 

[JihadJane]

The article that makes Mike Ruppert's case regarding The Grand Chessboard is called: "A War in the Planning for Four Years: Zbigniew Brzezinski and the CFR Put War Plans In a 1997 Book - It Is "A Blueprint for World Dictatorship," Says a Former German Defense and NATO Official Who Warned of Global Domination in 1984, in an Exclusive Interview With FTW
by Michael C. Ruppert [2001]."

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?'