Tuesday, July 28, 2009

Denial of truth tends to ... invoke crime

Denial of truth tends to ... invoke crime

"[I]t should be remembered that, in response to the attacks of 9/11, we, as a nation, were the ones who declared "war," made it a near eternal struggle (the Global War on Terror), and did so much to turn parts of the world into our own private hell. Geopolitics, energy politics, vanity, greed, fear, a misreading of the nature of power in the world, delusions of military and technological omnipotence and omniscience, and so much more drove us along the way."
~ Tom Engelhardt

"Perhaps the greatest fantasy of the present moment is that there is a choice here. We can look forward or backward, turn the page on history or not. Don't believe it. History matters."
~ Tom Engelhardt

"The avoidance of justice and the denial of truth tend to perpetuate sin, invoke crime, jeopardize self-control, and mock divine mercy."
~ Mary Baker Eddy (ca. 1865)

The ramifications of gravitational acceleration (freefall) in any of the WTC buildings (and admitted in NIST's final report on WTC-7) suggests that the circle of 9/11 conspirators was much larger and included insiders who provided an additional energy source (e.g., explosives) "to make it [the complete and utter destruction of the building(s)] happen."

Those same insiders slowed and distracted our response to known threats, delayed our investigation, compromised the investigation, feverishly worked to covered it up, and, based on GuitarBill's participation in this thread, continue to distract, disinform, and cover it up.

++++++++++++

GuitarBill chides others not so nicely for "quote-mining" by -- ironically -- copying-and-pasting a section from NIST's final report on WTC-7 that discusses the three stages of that building's collapse. (He posts this three times in one discussion thread.)

Of course, GuitarBill's three years of college physics seems to have left him unprepared to recognize that this very passage, in particular the description of Stage 2, is an admission of "gravitational acceleration" (freefall) in WTC-7, which is 100% in agreement with the 9/11 Truth Movement. NIST lists it as an undisputed fact, but fails to explain how it could be that 8 stories of columns, supports, and materials could suddenly offer "negligible support" (as in, zero resistance) so as to allow freefall over 32 meters.

Caught off-guard, GuitarBill posts in response (three times) "WTC 7 explained". Of course, GuitarBill's advanced degree in mathematics blinds him from recognizing that this copy-and-paste job does not refute NIST's three stages of collapse; it supports it and even quotes from Shyam Sunder, lead investigator for NIST. GuitarBill's "WTC 7 explained" puts things in layman's terms with a personalized time-line, but the gory technical details remain in the NIST Final Report. GuitarBill's copy-and-paste job concludes with a link to Dr Keith Seffen's Progressive Collapse of the World Trade Centre: a Simple Analysis, which ironically doesn't even relate to WTC-7.

How does the quote go: "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, overwhelm them with bullshit."

Inconsistency is a trait of a Disinformationalist.

Monday, July 27, 2009

Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist

      Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist
      by H. Michael Sweeney

      copyright (c) 1997, 2000 All rights reserved

      Permission to reprint/distribute hereby granted for any non commercial use provided information reproduced in its entirety and with author information in tact. For more Intel/Shadow government related info, visit the Author's Web site: http://www.proparanoid.NET

1) Avoidance. They never actually discuss issues head-on or provide constructive input, generally avoiding citation of references or credentials. Rather, they merely imply this, that, and the other. Virtually everything about their presentation implies their authority and expert knowledge in the matter without any further justification for credibility.

2) Selectivity. They tend to pick and choose opponents carefully, either applying the hit-and-run approach against mere commentators supportive of opponents, or focusing heavier attacks on key opponents who are known to directly address issues. Should a commentator become argumentative with any success, the focus will shift to include the commentator as well.

3) Coincidental. They tend to surface suddenly and somewhat coincidentally with a new controversial topic with no clear prior record of participation in general discussions in the particular public arena involved. They likewise tend to vanish once the topic is no longer of general concern. They were likely directed or elected to be there for a reason, and vanish with the reason.

4) Teamwork. They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams. Of course, this can happen naturally in any public forum, but there will likely be an ongoing pattern of frequent exchanges of this sort where professionals are involved. Sometimes one of the players will infiltrate the opponent camp to become a source for straw man or other tactics designed to dilute opponent presentation strength.

5) Anti-conspiratorial. They almost always have disdain for 'conspiracy theorists' and, usually, for those who in any way believe JFK was not killed by LHO. Ask yourself why, if they hold such disdain for conspiracy theorists, do they focus on defending a single topic discussed in a NG focusing on conspiracies? One might think they would either be trying to make fools of everyone on every topic, or simply ignore the group they hold in such disdain. Or, one might more rightly conclude they have an ulterior motive for their actions in going out of their way to focus as they do.

6) Artificial Emotions. An odd kind of 'artificial' emotionalism and an unusually thick skin -- an ability to persevere and persist even in the face of overwhelming criticism and unacceptance. This likely stems from intelligence community training that, no matter how condemning the evidence, deny everything, and never become emotionally involved or reactive. The net result for a disinfo artist is that emotions can seem artificial. Most people, if responding in anger, for instance, will express their animosity throughout their rebuttal. But disinfo types usually have trouble maintaining the 'image' and are hot and cold with respect to pretended emotions and their usually more calm or unemotional communications style. It's just a job, and they often seem unable to 'act their role in character' as well in a communications medium as they might be able in a real face-to-face conversation/confrontation. You might have outright rage and indignation one moment, ho-hum the next, and more anger later -- an emotional yo-yo. With respect to being thick-skinned, no amount of criticism will deter them from doing their job, and they will generally continue their old disinfo patterns without any adjustments to criticisms of how obvious it is that they play that game -- where a more rational individual who truly cares what others think might seek to improve their communications style, substance, and so forth, or simply give up.

7) Inconsistent. There is also a tendency to make mistakes which betray their true self/motives. This may stem from not really knowing their topic, or it may be somewhat 'freudian', so to speak, in that perhaps they really root for the side of truth deep within. I have noted that often, they will simply cite contradictory information which neutralizes itself and the author. For instance, one such player claimed to be a Navy pilot, but blamed his poor communicating skills (spelling, grammar, incoherent style) on having only a grade-school education. I'm not aware of too many Navy pilots who don't have a college degree. Another claimed no knowledge of a particular topic/situation but later claimed first-hand knowledge of it.

8) BONUS TRAIT: Time Constant. Recently discovered, with respect to News Groups, is the response time factor. There are three ways this can be seen to work, especially when the government or other empowered player is involved in a cover up operation: 1) ANY NG posting by a targeted proponent for truth can result in an IMMEDIATE response. The government and other empowered players can afford to pay people to sit there and watch for an opportunity to do some damage. SINCE DISINFO IN A NG ONLY WORKS IF THE READER SEES IT - FAST RESPONSE IS CALLED FOR, or the visitor may be swayed towards truth. 2) When dealing in more direct ways with a disinformationalist, such as email, DELAY IS CALLED FOR - there will usually be a minimum of a 48-72 hour delay. This allows a sit-down team discussion on response strategy for best effect, and even enough time to 'get permission' or instruction from a formal chain of command. 3) In the NG example 1) above, it will often ALSO be seen that bigger guns are drawn and fired after the same 48-72 hours delay - the team approach in play. This is especially true when the targeted truth seeker or their comments are considered more important with respect to potential to reveal truth. Thus, a serious truth sayer will be attacked twice for the same sin.

I close with the first paragraph of the introduction to my unpublished book, Fatal Rebirth:

Truth cannot live on a diet of secrets, withering within entangled lies. Freedom cannot live on a diet of lies, surrendering to the veil of oppression. The human spirit cannot live on a diet of oppression, becoming subservient in the end to the will of evil. God, as truth incarnate, will not long let stand a world devoted to such evil. Therefore, let us have the truth and freedom our spirits require... or let us die seeking these things, for without them, we shall surely and justly perish in an evil world.

History matters. So does 9/11 and high school physics

"Perhaps the greatest fantasy of the present moment is that there is a choice here. We can look forward or backward, turn the page on history or not. Don't believe it. History matters.
~ Tom Engelhardt

Hear, hear!

We've already got the Bush apologists working double-time in this forum telling us how Bush kept us safe during his administration. True, if you ignore (a) 9/11, (b) anthrax, (c) the death and casualty toll both to US citizens and foreigners in Afghanistan and Iraq, and (d) the bursting bubbles, bank failures, and collapsing economy.

Several people in this thread have already mentioned words to the effect: "9/11 is a root element [of what Tom Engelhardt laments in his article]; 9/11 needs to be re-investigated."

Of course, they've already been met with GuitarBill and his several postings of 9/11 smear videos. (Not his best arguments.)

GuitarBill, being endowed with six semesters of college physics and an advanced math degree, taunted the 9/11 Truth Movement in the discussion to another article with:

"Let's see your pseudo-"physics". I'll rip you apart in less than 10 minutes. Bring it on, genius."

In NIST's final report on WTC-7, it half-buries that WTC-7 had a significant period of time in its collapse that was freefall. Therefore coming from NIST and being more or less in agreement with what the 9/11 Truth Movement has been saying all along, we don't need to argue about this truth or its mathematical calculation.

Here are two questions that the likes of GuitarBill should answer.

(1) What are the ramifications of building freefall?

(2) What are the ramifications of building freefall both in the observed event of 9/11 and the larger political context?

In preparation:

"Though error hides behind a lie and excuses guilt, error cannot forever be concealed. Truth, through her eternal laws, unveils error. Truth causes sin to betray itself, and sets upon error the mark of the beast. Even the disposition to excuse guilt or to conceal it is punished. The avoidance of justice and the denial of truth tend to perpetuate sin, invoke crime, jeopardize self-control, and mock divine mercy."
~ Mary Baker Eddy (ca. 1865)

"Whatever the Obama administration may want to do, or think should be done, if we don't face the record we created, if we only look forward, if we only round up the usual suspects, if we try to turn that page in history and put a paperweight atop it, we will be haunted by the Bush years until hell freezes over."
~ Tom Engelhardt

Thursday, July 23, 2009

Why 9/11 discussion is valid

Why does 9/11 keep coming back as a topic in all sorts of discussion threads on all sorts of forums, despite the efforts of others to derail and bury it by any means possible?

Legions of individual 9/11 conspiracy theories can be thrown out without disproving the validity of the case that 9/11 was an inside job. All it takes is one. Evidence is what turns theory into probability.

The laws of mathematics are divine truths that impartially reveal God. Examples from Architects & Engineers for 9//11 Truth, using simple high school physics, are particularly enlightening. The mathematics and Newtonian physics of the collapses of the ~THREE~ buildings on 9/11 are the smoking gun, the DNA, the eternal Truth, the still small voice. Listen.

NIST officially reports -- begrudgingly and half-buried -- that WTC-7 had a significant period of time in its collapse that was freefall, which is what the 9/11 Truth Movement has been saying all along. Therefore, we don't need to argue about this truth or its mathematical calculation.

+++ IMPORTANT +++

What are the ramifications of building freefall both in the observed event and the larger political context?

"Belief produces the results of belief, and the penalties it affixes last so long as the belief and are inseparable from it. The remedy consists in probing the trouble to the bottom."
~ Mary Baker Eddy (discoverer and founder of Christian Science)

This is the reason the 9/11 topic keeps coming back. The (erroneous) belief that 9/11 was perpetrated soley by 19 hijackers has affixed us with penalties: wars, war profiteering, war crimes, deaths, maimings, injuries, Constitution shredding, rendition, torture, ... 9/11 was even participant in the looting of global wealth with stock bubbles, housing bubbles, banking bailouts, etc.

As long as we believe the lie of 9/11, we can be sucked into continual war and bad public policy. Probing the trouble to the bottom requires seeing the 9/11 dot in the clear pattern of lies, disception, and crimes foisted on us by the US Government and the Bush Administration in particular.

To ignore 9/11 truth is to shred everything we individually and collectively stand for as Americans, as patriots, and adherents of some religious faith (like Christianity, Islam).

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
~ Edmund Burke

"It is the greatest of all mistakes to do nothing because you can only do a little."
~ Sydney Smith

"The greatest obstacle to seeing the truth - that 9/11 was an inside job - is not the lack of evidence but what can be called "nationalist faith" - the belief that America is the "exceptional nation," whose leaders never deliberately do anything truly evil, at least to their own citizens."
~ David Ray Griffin

There is only one force in the nation that can be depended upon to keep the government pure and the governors honest, and that is the people themselves. They alone, if well informed, are capable of preventing the corruption of power, and of restoring the nation to its rightful course if it should go astray."
~ Thomas Jefferson

"Though error hides behind a lie and excuses guilt, error cannot forever be concealed. Truth, through her eternal laws, unveils error. Truth causes sin to betray itself, and sets upon error the mark of the beast. Even the disposition to excuse guilt or to conceal it is punished. The avoidance of justice and the denial of truth tend to perpetuate sin, invoke crime, jeopardize self-control, and mock divine mercy."
~ Mary Baker Eddy

Thursday, July 2, 2009

RE: The truth of 9/11-Achilles heel of corporate deception (revisited)

Maybe I shouldn't have thrown that comments about States Rights out there. My Bad.

I was trying to think of why the official 9/11 story would have so many vocal supporters on this forum even in the face on undeniable -- even Divine -- evidence in the form of adherence to the laws of physics. The government's coincidence theory does not, at least, not without cheating and artificially limiting the scope of their investigation and analysis.

The initial answer I came up with -- complete, bare-ass speculation -- was fear and that the 9/11 coincidence theorists (of which I believe you count yourself) might be afraid that our republic will sink into turmoil and chaos, were we as a nation to open our eyes to what we were duped into. We might then give some serious consideration and fresh walk-the-talk to the words of one of our founding documents {emphasis added}:

Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends [life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness] it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government...
~ Thomas Jefferson (The Declaration of Independence)

A little rebellion now and then...is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government.
~ Thomas Jefferson (1743 - 1826), Letter to James Madison, 1787

I mean, if the government's 9/11 version can't be defended on its merits, can't be defended by the laws of physics, and can't be defended with evidence (much of which they purposely destroyed), then can it really be defended? Should it be defended?

And by extension, should we be defending the resulting policies and what they duped us into turning into: war profiteers, war criminals, torturers?

So why are people defending 9/11 (and its ugly spawns)?

Why are you defending it?

And what do you think would happen if we as a nation can acknowledge the whole truth about what our government (and their corporate enablers) foisted upon us and the world?

At the close of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia on September 18, 1787, a Mrs. Powel anxiously awaited the results and as Benjamin Franklin emerged from the long task now finished asked him directly, `Well, Doctor, what have we got? A republic or a monarchy?' `A republic, if you can keep it,' responded Franklin.

P.S. I apologize for lumping you with EncinoM and GuitarBill and the listed offenses they perpetrate in this forum, mostly to derail rational 9/11 discussion.

So, SquareHead, you encouraged me to "PLEASE read the stuff", and on States Rights, I admit to need to reading more. On 9/11, though, it is you who must follow your own advice. Watch the videos I linked. Then we can talk about how far down the 9/11 rabbit hole goes.

The truth of 9/11-Achilles heel of corporate deception (revisited)

[Tweaked from the original for emphasis...]

The real power to persuade and dominate a public remains with corporations and the government through control of the airwaves and domination of most publications by corporate advertisings, while news is restricted to reporting facts, to "objectivity and balance." The public is bombarded with carefully crafted images meant to confuse propaganda with ideology and knowledge with how we feel.

This indeed has been an issue with 9/11.

Every time a government spokesman or agency wanted to speak to 9/11, they could pretty much present their full argument in the corporate media with nary a dissenting or questioning commentator to offer a comprehensive opposing point of view. On the rare occasions when someone from 9/11 Truth was given air time, observe how they were treated:

  • They were often marginalized by the "objective" host as early as their introduction, and certainly in loaded adjectives used in the questions and descriptions (e.g., nutty, loony, kooky).
  • They rarely appeared alone, but always with someone representing the government's view. Because the host in many cases was not impartial, they were outnumbered.
  • The discussions were steered into truly fringe areas of the movement, and the attention-deficit host jumped from one topic to another.
  • After the small talk, commercial breaks (lead-out, lead-in), other side rebuttals, fast topic-hops, and detours away from the most solid arguments, the total airtime to present a case dissenting with the official 9/11 view was tiny.

Treatment of the 9/11 Truth Movement in the printed media may have been worst of all. Has Time Magazine, the Wall Street Journal, or the New York Times ever devoted a special issue to this topic from the 9/11 Truth Movement's point-of-view? Have they even ever published an in-depth article (or series of articles) presenting faithfully the 9/11 Truth Movement's case without undermining it in the very same article, not to mention accompanying ones?

Whereas hometown newspapers retained their names, consolidation turned them into mini-McGannetts always drawing on the same pool of articles. The first hurdle is whether local editors would even run the story. The second hurdle is how much hacking they'd do prior to publication. The third hurdle is where they'd run it (e.g., bury it) and split it to make it more difficult for a reader to find and follow.

The public is bombarded with carefully crafted images meant to confuse propaganda with ideology and knowledge with how we feel.

Government spokespeople (and its agencies) wanted the public to "charge forward" into Afghanistan and Iraq [and into neo-con policies provided by PNAC] on the basis of how the United States was attacked 9/11. You were un-patriotic, un-American, and even treasonous if you didn't want pre-emptive war to protect the homeland... and if you didn't want fewer taxes on the wealthy, privatized social security, bail-outs...

Yet whenever someone said, "Okay, let's look at 9/11 in detail" so that we can be sure we're hunting the right witches, those same government spokespeople and agencies said, "Move along, sheople. Nothing to see here."

Whenever 9/11 is discussed in this forum, the unofficial (?) government spokespeople [like GuitarBill, EncinoM, SquareHead] are talented at kicking sand into our eyes with pseudo-science, quasi-definitive official reports, rehashed debunked claims, straw man discussions, and outright lies, and at distracting us into flame wars with their insults.

We have many examples of cover-ups in how government commissions and (scientific) agencies were manipulated to limit the scope and conclusions of their investigations. Adequate and overwhelming evidence has been provided to caste doubt on the government's 9/11 version, such as these three, which are solidly based on the laws of physics:

* WTC7 in Freefall--No Longer Controversial

* Downward Acceleration of the North Tower

* WTC7: Nist Finally Admits Freefall (Part III)

The above should really shut-up all defenders and trolls of the governments 9/11 version and turn them into true believers of 9/11 Truth. But it won't. Why?

Fear.

They are afraid of what it will mean to our republic. They're afraid that it will mean massive civil unrest, total chaos, and the attempt at destructive overthrow of all institutions of power. Because those in power will use all in their power to remain in power, they fear the loss of power and stature, if not the oppressive response of government on its people.

I believe that this argument is just more fear-mongering and Kool-Aid for the weak-minded to manipulate patriots and Christians.

The real unspoken fear is the massive reduction in power of the federal government transferred, if not to the states, than to the regional countries that banded together to succeed from the old union in the hopes of forming a more perfect (smaller) union.

States Rights and gaining some autonomy from the (proven misguided) Federal Government and corrupt corporate influence can't be achieved today. So we are left with flag-waving in support of illegal wars, failed drug wars, and other draconically federal policies.

Just like mammoth corporations often require divisions to be spun off into their own businesses, lest the aims of the corporation and of the division become at odds with one another, the United States of America as we know it is also in need of having various regions (one or more neighboring states) with shared cultural values spun off into their own nations.

Thomas "Tip" O'Neill once declared, "All Politics is local." Politics needs to be brought more local. Although such spin-off regional nations sound radical, it would really be pretty much business as usual for you and I and for the governments of our community, town, county, and state.