September Clues

[Paul Rigby]

September Clues:

http://blip.tv/file/1272900/

[Paul Rigby]

In the Pantheon of the Gods: Max Konrardy & Simon Hytten

http://stevenwarran.blogspot.com/2010/04...simon.html

For the historical record--providing individuation and proving truth to the commenter who once suggested that Simon Shack and 'hoi poloi' were one and the same person.

I remember the moment depicted in the image as if it were yesterday. Hearing all the different languages and accents surrounding me induced a kind of hallucinatory vertigo that gave me the sensation I was spinning at the universal axis mundi as I turned around and around in that circular building. Surely this was just a precursor impression of similar vortexes imaginable for the temple mount in December, 2012?

Once, I implied that I found no evidence that Simon Shack actually created the September Clues series of videos. I wasn't knowledgeable at the time about the history of internet message board participation that preceded the release of his work in June of 2007. Someone who is knowledgeable, informed me that the fundamental insights into the principles of video fakery and no-plane theory were a public group effort. That primary record of an organic interpersonal rising awareness was part of the work "lost" when the 911movement.org message board disappeared, suddenly and without a trace, about the time "The Vicsim Report" was issued in October, 2009.

If there is a fault to "September Clues," it would be that the work fails to give credit to the half-dozen to a dozen pseudonymous men and women who participated in the unraveling of this basic cognitive knot in the perceptible tapestry of 9/11.

Recently, in a related board exchange, someone named 'Fred' expressed his revulsion at my work, saying he was not impressed by any legitimate research that came out from an 'insider' to the plot---the 'honey' in the 'pot' whose issuance entices the unwary into letting down their guard.

I know exactly how he feels. When I began researching the Pentagon attack in early 2006, the field was dominated by Aldo Marquis and Craig Ranke, the pair behind the badly named 'Citizen Investigation Team.' I can still recollect the mixture of gall and gratitude with which I greeted many of their contributions, still dripping with the exudate of some official file cabinet.

I don't worry that, upon reflection, 'Fred' will realize the difference between what I have contributed, and the work of people who came before me---say, Russell Pickering and Jim Hoffman. The 271 blogs I have published here since March 13, 2006 are, if nothing else, a record of a slow and painful awakening. If ever I was used as the conduit for an 'official' release, I was unwitting to the act. But to the Gods I owe everything.

And the question I once posed about Simon I must ask about his partner, Max Konrardy, the young man who posts under the name "hoi poloi.' Konrardy is the author of The Vicsim Report, the theoretical work that posits the victims of 9/11 were---for the most part, now---computer generated fictions. This finely edited 80-page thesis came upon the scene fully formed and sui genesis---or perhaps again, it is only I who lacks the knowledge of its beginnings. I think it fair to ask its author for a history of how he came to his understanding of the matter.

For me, my personal great awakening can be timestamped January 4, 2007, when I first published insights about the false nature of the narrative as it concerned a fake burn victim, in Brian Birdwell: How to Serve Man---although the actual insight was so shocking and uncomfortable that it came several months before I could begin to speak about it publicly. I would be curious for Max Konrardy to tell us the story of how he came to his analysis of the computer code underlying the CNN memorial web site.

For what goes up in this world, must come down, sooner or later.

There followed an exchange between Welch and "Shack" which is worth the reading. The passage in bold sums up my own estimation of September Clues and those behind it: A "covert game" it is, but played out in public with strict, if unstated rules. And with some important truths revealed in the process.

Simon---A gentleman's agreement is just that---it is neither an oath, a vow or inviolate promise. It is a common understanding based upon the information at hand at the time it is made. In my opinion, you changed that understanding when you abused your power by banning me from your board the first time. I no longer saw you as an independent researcher, but rather as someone aligned, as a pawn or a rook, in a larger game of power.

My behavior this second go around on your board was a test to see where I stood in this context. I would have settled down, indeed I had already gotten on a track, until your punk friend Hoi inserted himself into the dialogue to tell me that as long as I didn't address him directly I was potentially safe from banishment---this as he was gratuitously and in an unnecessary fashion addressing me!

You might not want to wipe the boards clean so quickly the next time you encounter examples of behavior judged to be bad. I am sentient enough, if not gentlemanly enough, to see where I have gone wrong upon reflection.

You do understand how easy it would be for me to cause harm to you or Max, by how I might choose to frame an issue, beyond the mere decision to post an "unflattering" image of you, don't you? It is also clear to you---isn't it?---that I have no desire to cause you any harm.

That this has always been the great power of the press, a power which you only magnify by your continued insistence on maintaining your anonymity online.

My decision to "out" you isn't a reaction to insert myself into affairs which really have nothing to do with me. You are so steeped in an esoteric culture where everybody is known to you that you can't see how ridiculous you sound when you say I "irreverently call" someone "Fred." Well what the hell else am I supposed to call him? Have you ever met someone like me before, someone who has never once had a "sock puppet?"

Are you suggesting that it is humility which keeps "Fred" from claiming his share of credit in authoring one of the epochal achievements in understanding the seminal event of our lifetimes? Don't you think that both of you might have more credibility in the "truth movement" if you started by sharing the truth of your lives and backgrounds---like where exactly you are coming from?

This dynamic is best expressed in the saga between the PTB behind "Killtown's Secret Archive," and Killtown and Ozzy bin Oswald. Ozzy's and KT's great crime has been to out players like Val McClatchey and Mark Humphrey as the real people they are who are playing the false roles they do in the 9/11 drama. But then even KSA won't out KT in return, the rules of this covert game are so strict!

All of you denizens on the various boards and factions have only painted yourselves into your various corners, and there you'll sit until you realize that truth begins at home.

I am playing the role I set out for myself on the first day I entered the 9/11 fray, and I provide some sort of contrast to the rest of you, whatever the heck that is.

And please don't try and claim the high ground of dignity and honor when all you've done is played a second-rate Pearl Mesta of 9/11 in a family mansion you do little or nothing to support. So sorry to have left you feeling "sad" my dear friend, but work on authenticity next time Simon.

Tuesday, April 20, 2010 10:21:00 PM

Hoi. polloi (Max Konrardy) started the thread "Was J.F.K. murdered?, What really happened?" in the Public Message Board section of the September Clues website: http://www.septemberclues.info/

Posted: Dec 1 2009, 05:29 PM

The Zapruder film is not only a known fake - it is a proven fake. True, it was released far after people were clamoring for information, but this is an argument for a few different things that may be going on.

1) JFK was murdered and the nature of the murder was disguised by all involved
2) JFK exited the political sphere on purpose and needed a safe way out
or could it be
3) JFK was the most deceptive leader we've had, and he helped - through the Catholic church connections which finally achieved the executive branch - to invoke some of the first major media deceptions in the history of television:
a - his own death
b - the coordination, with the CIA, Air Force and NASA, of the Moon Hoaxes

What is the likelihood that the influential Kennedy family has allowed so many of its members to be removed from the "power game" without taking part in popular lying technology as it developed in such high social circles?

Half a year on, Konrardy added the following pearls of wisdom to the thread he created:

My question is ... how does this discovery apply to JFK and can we hear more about the whole assassination being a simulation to cover up what really happened? (JFK's real death? Something else? His escape? Distraction from the Moon Hoaxes?) I find the idea absolutely fascinating!

This post has been edited by hoi.polloi on Jun 15 2010, 01:08 AM

Just under a month on, this:

Posted: Jul 1 2010, 11:11 AM
My guess is that his death was faked and he himself was a part of the act.

All this - and much in the same theme elsewhere in the same thread, not least from Shack himself - is simply the National Enquirer circa-1975 updated. And we all know who really ran the NE.