Tuesday, March 20, 2007

It's the Real Thing



He drank Coca-Cola, he was eating Wonder Bread,
Ate Burger Kings - he was well fed - Bob Dylan


I really want to leave this subject alone, and you probably wish I would, too, but unfortunately I have a few more things to winge about before moving on.

You may have seen this by now: the trailer for The Ultimate Con ("the 9/11 Documentary you can't debunk"). It's creator is "Lucus," about whom all I know is that he says "Dave Vonkleist, Jack Blood, and Alex Jones are going to help me promote it," which almost says enough for me right there. It's ten minutes of mostly "I heard explosions" footage shot during the attacks, though to its credit there are some clips I hadn't seen before, such as real-time reports of an alleged bomb-laden van in the WTC garage and rumours of suspected "devices."

I don't mean to open up another can of thermate here, so I won't comment on the merit of the quadruple redundancy of car bombs, planted explosives in the basement, cutting charges and demolition squibs, except to say I wish some of those who defend the accuracy of eyewitness testimony with respect to the World Trade Center would apply the same standard to the Pentagon crash. (Consider, for instance, these 87 accounts of having seen a passenger jet, and not a cruise missile or a fighter aircraft, overfly DC and strike the building.)

Instead, let's do like the Jimmy Castor Bunch. What we're going to do right here is go back. Waaay back; back into time. When 9/11 Truth could look like the 2004 9/11 Citizens' Commission.

Go ahead, and watch The Ultimate Con. But then watch anti-fascist researcher John Judge deconstruct the official Commission report, beginning with the simple question, "Who wrote it?" Authorship is unascribed, but it's written in a "lucid, almost novelistic" fashion, with a single voice. Judge mentions the Warren Commission Report also had a single, anonymous author, brought over from the Pentagon's Army Historical Division. Otto Winnacker's previous employer had been Adolph Hitler, as one of 26 official historians of Nazi Germany.

Watch Michael Springmann, former State Department diplomat, testify that the CIA were running the Jeddah consulate, instructing officials to issue visas to terrorists for reasons of "national security." Fifteen of the 9/11 hijackers received their visas through Jeddah.

Watch Indira Singh describe her discovery of PTech's deep black links to both US security infrastructure and global narco-terror ("When I ran into the drugs I was told that if I mentioned the money to the drugs around 9/11 that would be the end of me," says Singh), the sheltering of al qaeda financier Yassin al-Qadi (he "talked very highly of his relationship" with Dick Cheney, claims PTech's CEO Oussama Ziade), and the two years PTech spent with Mitre in the "FAA's basement" prior to 911.

Watch Paul Thompson rattle off ignored intelligence, the Randy Glass story (which some may find of particular interest since Glass claims he was told by Pakistani intelligence prior to 9/11 that "those towers are coming down"), and the triangulation of the ISI, the CIA and al Qaeda. Then there are the wargames, the reconstruction of Cheney's command and control, Sibel Edmonds.....

Any wagers on how often controlled demolition is mentioned?

It's a bit wistful and over the shoulder, viewing these now: this Truth Movement moment seems much longer ago than a mere three years. Is this the same 9/11 I hear about today? Because I hear none of these things anymore. Is this the same "Truth Movement"? Because today's sounds nothing like this. Is this even the same truth?

A tough question. It's like asking Coke drinkers in the mid-80s, What is this shit?

Had Truth Classic's market share plateaued? Was its flavour too complex to break out of a niche market, or were there other reasons for finessing its formula? Because New Truth certainly goes down differently. "Smoother, rounder, yet bolder," in the stammering nonsense of Coca Cola CEO Roberto Goizueta. And in my experience it comes back up just the same.

Can you taste the difference, and can you tell what's missing? New Truth is now 100% Jihadist free.

Something less than 100% would be true enough, and would have served as a corrective to the official comic book which informs Americans that their enemy has dark skin and strange beliefs. But entirely erasing bin Laden and al Qaeda from the 9/11 equation makes no more sense - not even polemical sense - than trying to talk sensibly about the JFK assassination without mention of the Mafia or the anti-Castro Cubans. And was it any less an "inside job" for their involvement and manifold reasons for wanting him dead?

But it's impossible not to ascribe some such sentiments to racism, and sometimes something more. (For instance, neo-Nazi Curt Maynard writes, "there is considerably more tangible evidence to suggest that the United States government and Israel carried out the crime, not 19 troglodytes, i.e. cave dwellers from the Middle East.") And then there's the executive producer of Loose Change and Afghanistan war vet, Korey Rowe, who told CNN "I met my enemy and the people who supposedly pulled off this attack, and these people are not strong enough and they're not, uh, advanced enough." However, I think there is also something else happening here.

Some of the most damning evidence presented by Classic Truth is that which ties state power to supra-state terror and criminality. Peter Dale Scott's definition of Deep Politics is "the constant, everyday interaction between the constitutionally elected government and forces of violence, forces of crime, which appear to be the enemies of that government." Al Qaeda, a creature of intelligence agencies, is one such node of contemporary deep politics. As recently as the mid-90s its Mujahadeen were NATO's unambiguous partner in Bosnia, helping to secure and profit by the Balkan trade route of Afghan heroin into Europe. The CIA were demanding visas for al Qaeda operatives in the consulate of bin Laden's hometown, and an al Qaeda financier was also hardwired into Washington's security apparatus. 9/11 cells were hosted by FBI informants and their flight schools were up to their altimeters in Iran-Contra-like narco-dollars. Al Qaeda's structure was penetrated up to the senior operational level, possibly including assets of ambiguous loyalty who helped plan and fund the attacks. (For instance Fort Bragg instructor and FBI informant Ali Mohammed, who trained those involved in the 1993 WTC bombing, oversaw al Qaeda's relocation to Afghanistan and taught hijackers how to smuggle box cutters onto aircraft.)

New Truth hamstrings itself - and perhaps on the part of some, that's the entire point of New Truth - by clearing the table of everything pertaining to al Qaeda and defining "inside job" as merely "inside the Beltway." Because it is by their parapolitical linkages to, and patronage of, the very forces of violence which appear to be their enemy, that governments most condemn themselves.

Doing away with all that does away with much of the High Crime, which a few might think a good thing. Watch the 2004 videos. How does the health and rigor and scope of New Truth compare? Which do you think the High Criminals prefer?

Someone told me recently that "common sense shows that CD is the 'back and to the left' of 9/11." That's the problem. It is. Look at where 40 years of "back and to the left" has got John Kennedy.

204 Comments:

Blogger ImpeccableLiberalCredentials said...

Omar Nasiri's book seems to be pretty good in highlighting the many small ways in which the individual members of pre-cursor groups to al-Qaeda and the national security states of Europe tolerated working with each other.

Belief and spiritual preparation for jihad are huge parts of that story, as are dreams, intuition, flashes of the future.

George Crile's "Charlie Wilson's War" is good for understanding just how much U.S. taxpayer money was thrown into Afghanistan and Pakistan, even after the Soviets withdrew.

Strong belief in magic, prayer, a sense of righteousness in a conflict between good and evil are at play there too.

I had dreams about 9-11 before it happened, dreams about visiting places near Peshawar, etc. before it happened. I had a dream about the tsunami before it happened, too.

Does it matter?

We need to envision a U.S. government recaptured by an involved citizenry. As long as people who believe incorrect conspiracy theories about 9/11 show up and caucus or vote in primaries in the Spring of 2008 for candidates that are most likely to represent the people's own interests, vs. oil companies and weird un-Amaerican plots, I don't really care what they believe, as long as they are determined to not let professional politicians capture the mantle of continuing legitimate rule easily by cultivating mass apathy and a sense that the outcome is pre-determined.

We have choice, freewill, and discrete moments of legal power as citizens. Wield it.

3/20/2007 05:50:00 AM  
Blogger Nate Cull said...

Excellent comments as always. I keep pointing to Rambo III as an example of how the 'who are our friends and who are our enemies' script used to be even in the late 80s.

3/20/2007 05:55:00 AM  
Blogger Judas Disney said...

Go get 'em, Jeff. Paul Thompson, Sibel Edmonds & the like should be the leaders of the real 9/11 Truth that we're working for, not Dave Von Kliest or the others who offer high drama & novelty.

If it ain't circumspect and if it's too histrionic, then I just won't be paying attention to it.

3/20/2007 06:50:00 AM  
Blogger ericswan said...

I consider myself a consumer of news. I try to be discerning and one thing I've known for a very long time is that the system is rigged. I'm sure there are a few of us out there that through the VHS into the recorder at the first hint of "something" is up on Sept. 11, 2001. I know I did. I channel surfed and taped for a few hours that morning. I was a bit late getting to the show as I had to work the graveyard but got in just in time for Act 11. The curious thing is that my tapes are still in the vault. I'm still waiting to hear that I've missed something. Some little nuance which will justify revisiting the tape. Brokaw had it figured out and USAma bin Laden and his famous turned infamous portrait was up on the screen by noon. Apparently, they had it all figured out.

It's called a news cycle. It's been playing now for six years. Never shakened.. Never stirred.

3/20/2007 08:07:00 AM  
Blogger Sounder said...

Via; http://curiousityshop.blogspot.com/

Again the Owl spoke. "If you would live in the first world, you have only to continue as you are. The prophesied times are upon you, and you have chosen to dream this lesson into your world... But, if you would live in the second world, you have only to rechoose your dream. Once chosen, it will change the path of the prophecies, and your intent in every action will create the new illusion..."

ilc said;

"I had dreams about 9-11 before it happened, dreams about visiting places near Peshawar, etc. before it happened. I had a dream about the tsunami before it happened, too."

Does it matter?

Ah, --yes. For ideas on finding new dreams to dream, check out guerrillaontology, blogspot.com

Jump off the ideological hamster wheel.

3/20/2007 08:21:00 AM  
Blogger Qlipoth said...

"I really want to leave this subject alone, and you probably wish I would, too, but unfortunately I have a few more things to winge about before moving on."

No; this is a brilliant, timely and necessary post, and there's no need for the apologetic introduction. The things you say here are going to need saying again, and again, and again, and yet again.

Those who are obsessed with the Big Bangs and the Tell-Tale Pixels would do well to note what's happened to that notorious "Fat Osama" videotape: it now turns out that Fat Osama wasn't so fat after all. There were two incompatible video-formats, that's all; and the result was distorted images. So now a lot of excitable people have egg on their faces -- and the "debunkers" can sigh and shake their heads, yet again, at the gullibility of the "conspiracy nuts".

But here's a funny thing: while I've seen OBL's alleged obesity presented a thousand times over as allegedly incontrovertible evidence that the Whole Damn Thing is a fake, I've rarely seen a single mention of this:

"Mistranslated Osama bin Laden Video - the German Press Investigates"

http://www.inblogs.net/qlipoth/2006/01/inventing-osama-lies-damned-lies-and.html

Now, unless three named, reputable, independent Arabists are lying, this amounts to a sensation: proof positive that the White House has been forging evidence to justify its oxymoronic War on Terror. And there must be any number of fluent native Arabic-speakers in the US who would be willing to repeat that simple experiment and pass judgment on the Pentagon's translation. That kind of fakery is in fact demonstrable. But it ain't sexy, so no one's interested.

[Pre-]Historical Note: That German TV programme was broadcast in December 2001.

3/20/2007 08:26:00 AM  
Blogger Shrubageddon said...

Or, better yet, Matt, consider 911 Debate a poisoned well and use your efforts to figure a way to render poisoned wells archaic and irrlevant.

3/20/2007 10:09:00 AM  
Blogger Shrubageddon said...

Or, better yet, Matt, consider 911 Debate a poisoned well and use your efforts to figure a way to render poisoned wells archaic and irrlevant.

3/20/2007 10:19:00 AM  
Blogger Jeff said...

The Fat Osama story is a very interesting example.

Just as the video conversion issue was breaking, this story appeared on infowars: "Expert Goes On Record: Bin Laden 9/11 Confession Is Bogus." The expert is a theologian, not a linguist or a bin Laden scholar, and he had only had doubts, as had many of us, until recently. What changed? Here you go:

"Last Friday Lawrence, citing informants in the US intelligence apparatus’s Bin Laden units, told Kevin Barrett that everyone knows the tape is fake."

So, just as the video conversion "error" comes to light, US intel informants step up and whisper in Lawrence's ear that "everyone knows the tape is fake."

On the tape bin Laden - or, whoever - mentions his astonishment at the lack of air defenses on 9/11. It was too easy. It almost sounds like he's a conspiracy theorist, and that he suspects he got played - that forces within US intel knew what was coming and took steps to ensure it happened by their rules.

Curious, isn't it, why US intelligence might want to cast doubt on this tape, by preserving a distorted image of bin Laden, and then, when the conversion issue arises, whisper "everyone knows" it's a fake?

Maybe not so curious.

Of course, those who have totally erased bin Laden from 9/11 desperately need it to be a fake, so they'll cling to "Fat Osama" whatever comes.

3/20/2007 10:25:00 AM  
Blogger Shrubageddon said...

What I find interesting is why the Pentagon felt compelled to mistranslate the Osamma video to use as proof of his complicity. I mean, hell, as EricSwan mentioned, they had been building Osamma as the fall guy for years prior to 911....so much so that when that second plane hit the second tower.....we all thought of Osamma....some of us thought of Osamma when the first plane hit. We were already conditioned to pass judgment.....there was no need to mistranslate....hell, there was no need for a video, faked, or not. The convincing had already occurred through many years of repetitious conditioning....so why the compulsion to mistranslate when you've already sealed the deal...unless, of course, one hand of the Deep Politics Apparatus doesn't always know what the other Hands of the same Apparatus are doing....in otherwords, "they" are not Monolithic.

To reinforce my point, I put this in Word’s spellcheck prior to posting. It suggested I change Osamma to Osama. Holy Fucking Shit!! Bin Laden is ubiquitous…as he was prior to 911. I’m keeping it as Osamma out of defiance.

3/20/2007 10:34:00 AM  
Blogger Erosoplier said...

Well I think what the world needs is an idiot's guide to 9/11 coincidence theories, because when you move away from the basics (the highly unlikely success of the 9/11 terrorist plot, and the buildings that went "oops"), whether you're on wheels or on water, you're leading people towards the marshes.

It will be easy to get bogged down in a million details - as people obviously already have. So I guess it's put up, or shut up. No one is stopping anybody from doing their own thing. But having said that, a lot more co-operating needs to be going on - in order to defend against active disinfo agents as well as the actual work of finding stuff out, weighing its importance, and telling others about it in straightforward language.

I repeat, no one is stopping anyone from focusing on the really important stuff.

3/20/2007 10:40:00 AM  
Blogger Shrubageddon said...

On the tape bin Laden - or, whoever - mentions his astonishment at the lack of air defenses on 9/11. It was too easy. It almost sounds like he's a conspiracy theorist, and that he suspects he got played - that forces within US intel knew what was coming and took steps to ensure it happened by their rules.

I surmise one reason for this, if it is a fake or merely proclaimed by Osamma himself in cooperation with our producers, is to conflate those who also assert this here in the states (see Ruppert) with the treasonous Osamma. I believe he also talks about how easy the Towers fell...thus hinting at CD. They are so damned clever, aren't they? It's completely logical and consistent that they would have developed containment plans for the Doubting Thomas Crowd.

Remember, I am estranged from my own family...and their parting words were "go back to your cave, Osamma."

3/20/2007 10:43:00 AM  
Blogger Sounder said...

nate cull, I checked out Life in the Cultlane; nice blog.

I find it interesting that so many people think about life in terms of dreams. Might be something there.

3/20/2007 10:57:00 AM  
Blogger Matt said...

Everyone believes what they can understand. I feel that to believe, you need to identify with, or at least, identify the subject. I work in building maintenance / engineering, so when I hear stories of maintenance guys running out of basement levels of the towers with skin hanging off their arms, I tend to believe their version of reality that day. Whatever one believes, it certainly doesn't help to dismiss anybody's theories, unless you have concrete evidence for your own pet theories. I've read these 9-11 truth-lies type websites for a solid 4 yrs. and I do see a transformation of the "main focus", but I finally gave up after reading Joe Gannon's "Cannonfire". He had a stint where he went back and forth with people who he dismissed, in an obvious arrogant , self-righteous indignant tone. Don't let anyone steer your beliefs. Nobody has all the answers. Let's pick a subject we can all agree on, like following the money trail, or whatever. The thought of some pale, plump Rove-esque figure rubbing his hands together chuckling to himself how easy it is mislead and confuse the general public is truly sickening.

3/20/2007 10:59:00 AM  
Blogger Shrubageddon said...

For an exmaple fo my special powers, take a look at how I addressed Matt's response before he responded.

David Blaine ain't got shit on me.

3/20/2007 11:08:00 AM  
Blogger iridescent cuttlefish said...

...it is by their parapolitical linkages to, and patronage of, the very forces of violence which appear to be their enemy, that governments most condemn themselves.

This is where the rigor comes in, folks. Lots of smart people have been carping at Jeff for not swearing an oath on the cd of CD, when all along he's been doing what brought us to his moth-flame: connecting "disparate" "opposing" forces. Tom Tomorrow drew a cartoon of Bush & Cheney having illegal sexual relations with Usama and the boys back in 2001 (I can't seem to find it...), and the outrage was palpable. From those who wanted to keep the story "straight."

Thanks, Jeff.

3/20/2007 11:08:00 AM  
Blogger Sounder said...

Good call IC, --and short too.

3/20/2007 11:37:00 AM  
Blogger Monkey said...

Why is CD and what Jeff is talking about as what's really important mutually exclusive?

You need a cover story. That's where the hijackers come in.

But you also need to guarantee results. When JFK was assassinated, they didn't rely on the cover story to do the job. Planes crashing into WTC towers does not lead to War on Terror. WTC towers collapsing does.

3/20/2007 11:43:00 AM  
Blogger Jeff said...

"Why is CD and what Jeff is talking about as what's really important mutually exclusive?"

They're not. I don't think CD-as-theory is really the issue. The more I look at this, the more I think the real problem is the powering-down of the parapolitics. Osama and al Qaeda have been made to disappear, which in turn removes the damning linkages to official power structures. "Inside Job" becomes a dumbed-down cartoon, and other causes need to be constructed post facto to account for 9/11's effects.

I mentioned Randy Glass's testimony that an ISI contact told him "those towers are coming down." I think Glass is important, and those words should be significant to someone trying to make a case for CD. But they don't appear to be. Is that because the ISI is not "inside" enough for New Truth's shallow definition of "Inside Job"?

3/20/2007 12:05:00 PM  
Blogger Shrubageddon said...

I will say this....I'm not at all interested in the Attorney's Being Fired issue. I turn NPR off when they cover it.

3/20/2007 12:31:00 PM  
Blogger Matt said...

Jeff, tell Shrubbageddon to stop teasing me! I can, and will, tell.

3/20/2007 12:41:00 PM  
Blogger sunny said...

But entirely erasing bin Laden and al Qaeda from the 9/11 equation makes no more sense - not even polemical sense - than trying to talk sensibly about the JFK assassination without mention of the Mafia or the anti-Castro Cubans.

Were the "jihadists" real or fake, that is the question.

Why would real jihadists participate in a spectacular operation they had to know would result in the US "invade(ing) their countries, kill(ing) their children, and (attempts to) convert(ing) them to xtianity"?

Did the mafia really have the balls to kill the beloved brother of the man who had the power, the courage, and the fiercely vengeful hatred to rain down unholy hell upon them? If you thought he hated them and pursued them with unprecedented zeal before, just imagine if he really believed the mafia did it.

Some are fond of arguing that Kennedy was planning to kill (mongoose) Castro and/or invade Cuba. At the same time, they argue anti-Castro Cuban exiles killled Kennedy. What? Kill the man who was about to fulfill their wildest dreams? Either Kennedy was/is being slandered vis a vie Mongoose, or AG RFK was a coward or too stupid to go to a judge and have "Operation Mongoose" suppressed on NS grounds so he would be free to prosecute his brother's murderers whithout being exposed. Were the CIA plotters going to contradict such a decision?

IOW, Mafia and Cuban exiles are a red herrings.

Were they fake jihadists? Coke-sniffing, whore-hopping, gambling boat patrons of the (obviously and mostly)Saudi persuasion? I can live with that. But why not pretend to be real jihadists, just to keep the cover plausible? Of course the controllers knew they could cover-up such shenanigans, but why would such prodigious partakers of drugs and whores get on planes and knowingly and willingly commit suicide? Were they patsies? Were they knowing agents? Well sure, both are more than possible. But in either case, they certainly were not jihadists, or devout Muslims participating in a holy war.

So we are left with the impression that Atta and Co. were the worst sort of depraved Muslim traitors, willing to participate in actions which resulted in horrific death and destruction against their own people. To believe that is racism. *Those goddamned Muslims. They plot against their own people. They incite wars against themselves so they can recruit more jihadists who will plot even more wars against themselves. War is good for them. They like it. And they are too stupid or sneaky to make it obvious what they are doing by invading somebody. Look how they work with their enemies to make sure their own women and children are bombed to kingdom come.Why didn't those stupid Muslims just pretend to be "somebody else" and bomb something over there and blame it on the US or Israel? Wouldn't that cause Iran or somebody to start the war they so desperately want? Why are Muslims so stupid they don't know how to shift blame by committing false flag terror attacks?*

3/20/2007 12:50:00 PM  
Blogger Highlander said...

I must the the only person in the world who actually enjoyed New Coke.

My temptation at this point is to think that if we get any kind of alternative 9/11 narrative into the mainstream, ANYthing that puts responsibility onto Bush, Cheney, et al, then, certainly, it's progress. You'll never convince the bottom of the barrel dead enders of anything, but if we can enlighten a majority of folks as to who let the crime go down so they could reap the benefits, well, that would be a huge breakthrough... wouldn't it?

In the end, I'd like to see Bush and Cheney in jail. I don't much care which of the plethora of crimes they've committed they go to jail for.

But, as I say... I liked New Coke.

3/20/2007 01:17:00 PM  
Blogger Mark said...

Sorry. Your 87 eyewitnesses is shit.
Too much of this: 'Marine Corps officer Mike Dobbs was standing on one of the upper levels of the outer ring of the Pentagon looking out the window when he saw an American Airlines 737 twin-engine airliner strike the building. "It seemed to be almost coming in slow motion," he said later Tuesday. "I didn't actually feel it hit, but I saw it and then we all started running."'
Notice what is NOT in quotes?

Too much "Gawrsh! I saw an AA logo!"
No way! Why, they would never think to put a logo on a mock-up! Actually, a logo is the FIRST thing they would put on a mock-up.

Gimme a break. You are playing this so disingenuously: I will not believe your eyewitnesses on the video you offer, but here, look at my eyewitnesses! Doesn't that even bother you, to be so apparent to say shit like "I can't believe your eyewitnesses. But you must believe mine." ???

Physics trumps eyewitnesses.
Sorry.

Do the visualization in my post you ignored, and tell me what happened to the fucking wings.

"Classic Truth" depends on "Classic Research".
Physics.
Statistical Probability.
What is the statistical probability some flight school flunkee could make the maneuver to skim mere feet off the ground, as he had to first make a quickly-descending turn to line up with the Pentagon to hit it dead on?
I will admit it is possible with the help of Allah, or an Invisible Cloud Being.
Did eyewitnesses see flying craft with the AA logo? Hell yes they did. So??
Do I know what went into the Pentagon. Just Like you, I do NOT know what went into the Pentagon. But since planes and missiles are what we have at our disposal, I will use the term "a missile" since physics, NOT EYEWITNESSES, prove there were no wings. I'm open to calling it whatever it is that went into the Pentagon. I just won't be calling it a "winged passenger jet" at least not till you can show me proof. I'm not going to be willingly dense to facts, just because of embellished eyewitness accounts. Even your pitting the one set of eyewitnesses against another, is dishonest. One is eyewitnesses recorded on a video in their own words. To counter that you give us that link with embellishments to the actual quotes filled in: "he saw an American Airlines 737 twin-engine airliner strike the building".
The actual quote said nothing of that. Who embellished?
But who cares, right Jeff? Irrelevant, right? Just like proof of wings is irrelevant.

I am an eyewitness to your dishonesty.
I am not just going to "Have a Coke and a Smile".
What you offer is at best Diet Coke, and unfortunately for you, there are too many of us with the the Mentos of Facts to blow your toxic shit clean out of the can, without drinking one drop of it.
Marketing BS is all you have. "Classic Truth"??
There is no 9/11 Truth, only facts.
It is when certain facts can't be dealt with that the stubborn and the disinfo artists and the blind and the deaf will proclaim "Truth".

3/20/2007 01:45:00 PM  
Blogger Tsoldrin said...

Well done Jeff. You've nailed this post to the door of the church of controlled demolition in a way that would make Martin Luther proud. Can't wait to see the angry backlash from the slumberous sheep partaking of the salt lick which is Alex Jones' balls on this one.

With pods discredited, controlled demoltion looking more and more unlikely and the fake Bin-Laden video in question, that doesn't leave much of a leg to stand on for Loose Change I'm afraid hmmmm? Why do I feel this new, undebunkable, flick will be even more of a distraction, leading further from the path? Hm.


On Bin-Laden though, I'm less than certain. My experience with PAL/NTSC mixups from the old Amiga days has been that it's far more blatantly obvious than is seen in the fat Bin-Laden video. i.e. it doesn't just add a few pounds, it squashes everything and there is no mistaking it. I'm no expert though so I'm not leaning either way on this yet, just making an observation.

The whole Bin-Laden question is for me one of the most puzzling. Why would he disavow the attacks knowing full well that other tapes contradicting that were in the wild? Why would he disavow them at all? Perhaps this mistranslation lead will shed more light... Thanks for that Shrub!


Random Bits...

Hijackers bringing down the wrath of the West upon their own people. None of the countries the alleged hijackers were from have been on the receiving end of the wrath, some indeed have actually benefited handsomely.

Good muslims coke and whores. If I remember correctly a while back, watching a documentary on human trafficking, it painted a rather debaucherized picture of Saudi Arabia. That may be neither here nor there, but I wouldn't use coke and whores as a yardstick to measure jihadism any more than I would use meth and gay prostitutes to measure the delusional religious fervor of christians.

3/20/2007 02:55:00 PM  
Blogger Dr. Bombay said...

Jeff...
Do you really believe that
the politicos in D.C. are going to rat each other out? The reason that
some people cling to the
physical evidence, like CD and
missile's, and I include myself
in that group,is because it CANNOT
be explained by any other means
than complicity by the PTB.
I make it a habit to call at
least one Senator and Congressman
every day to ask when will someone
like Sibel Edmonds be allowed
to testify under oath before
congress. The office help is always
polite when they take my calls,
but they always seem to wrap up
with "Well, we have bigger problems
to deal with in this country right
now". I want to ask them what the
fuck is bigger than finding out
who was really behind 9/11?!?
But that would be the end of their
taking my calls. Its this level
of frustration that is the driving
force behind docs like Loose
Change. People have lost faith
that the government can be changed
from within so its better to make
your stand outside of the system
itself. If there isn't any decency
or dignity left in our politicians,
at least we can feel we have
something of that left in
ourselves.

3/20/2007 02:57:00 PM  
Blogger Shrubageddon said...

I wouldn't use coke and whores as a yardstick to measure jihadism any more than I would use meth and gay prostitutes to measure the delusional religious fervor of christians.

Another great one for the frig...if you keep it up, I'm not going to have any room left on the frig.

3/20/2007 03:10:00 PM  
Blogger iridescent cuttlefish said...

On the other hand, and in defense of cartoons (and the power of the vid) there's this "pod" from Current TV's Who is Banksy? Have we forgotten, then, the not-so-lonely freewayblogger? His eye-bites reach many more sockets than our windy, rhetorical pixellations--and that's also probably why you, Mr. Jeff, have learned the fine art of Photo-shopping, n'est pas?

On the lighter side of another stone-serious issue, we have another podling from VC2, a concept which, if it catches on, could usher in a weird sort of pluralistsic videodrome. Lilly and Leary always talked about taking control of our own neuroprogramming--this could be part of that...path, that Ðëòxÿríßøñµçlëìç HÿÞêrdïmèñsîøñ. (Caution: strange items on that menu--why else would the comment verification code have started with "LSD" when I posted this? I mean, what are the odds?.)

3/20/2007 03:17:00 PM  
Blogger sunny said...

Good muslims coke and whores. If I remember correctly a while back, watching a documentary on human trafficking, it painted a rather debaucherized picture of Saudi Arabia. That may be neither here nor there, but I wouldn't use coke and whores as a yardstick to measure jihadism any more than I would use meth and gay prostitutes to measure the delusional religious fervor of christians.

Saudi Arabian or not, they were either good Muslims or not. If not, they did not commit suicide for a faith they had little interest in.

So, did Saudi Arabia cause a conflagration in it's own back yard? Or not? I suppose it's possible they wanted to disrupt the peaceful flow of oil.

As for meth and gay prostitutes in the xtian milieu, I would argue that these were not devout Christians, but rather hucksters intent on making a buck. Seems rather obvious to me. There are clean living devout Christians out there, believe it or not.

(To be or *not* to be, that is the question. ;~)

3/20/2007 03:22:00 PM  
Blogger ericswan said...

It looks like I get my wish. I wanted a reason, a smoking gun; something to justify pulling out my tape.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUl9kyH7cgA

3/20/2007 04:09:00 PM  
Blogger ericswan said...

cosmolothrentas said...
Sorry. Your 87 eyewitnesses is shit.


Dear Mr. Richards:

I would appreciate it if you would watch your tone here on the blog. Maybe you should think about the fact that people will be debating these blogs for centuries into the future and foul language may get us "censored".

3/20/2007 04:18:00 PM  
Blogger TonyForesta said...

Searing post Jeff.

We swim in an ocean of lies.


The entire Bush government 9/11 narative is fiction, a political parable conjured by the disinformation warriors, fanaticus religious zealots, and the fascist operating within the government and providing the unholy foundation fo all that has happened to America and humanity since that world changing morning.

Whatever terrible truths or facts may someday be unearthed regarding the specifics of that horrible day and the rippling reprecussions resonating through the ensuing weeks, months, and years, - the exact who's, how's, and why's of the Pearl Harbor like event, or Riechstadt fire of 9/11 are today a dark and mysterious unknown unknown.

Only fanaticus partisans, ignorant sheeple, or the actual perpetrators of the ghoulish spectacle of 9/11 pretend to hold any claim, or legitimacy, or credibiltiy to the gospel according to Bush parable of 9/11.

The Bush government 9/11 narative is a partisan lie.

Sibel Edmonds, Indira Singh, Hopsicker, and countless other witness and insiders are all gagged and dismissed as conspiratorialists - while the fascist warmongers and profiteers in the Bush government continue bruting a festering litany of deceptions, disinformation, propaganda, partisan slime, exaggerations, distortions, misrepresentations, scurrilous slander, and PATENT LIES as though it were the word of god, or the gospel truth.

What should send chills down every human spine is how pathologically detached to the relentless cacaphony and roaring tsunami of LIES human beings, and particularly Americans have grown. Lies conjured, bruted, sold, ruthlessly pimped, challenged, debunked, recanted, and - everyone accepts the lie, and the lair with some strange and macbre sense of status quo, as though our leaders lying to us repeatedly and insistanty is just another aspect of American politics and out weird and wild at heart lives.


We feed off a ocean of lies.

Collective humanity, and obviously Americans no longer cares about, or are capable of decerning the lies, or the liars.

We are focused singularly on the entertainment. The raw spectacle itself is our unholy focus, and the actual truth, or trivial things like facts are merely condiments decorating the platter of wreaking, festering, roiling LIES that define our lives.

If the truth will set us free, - the moment of ripping separation will be tectonic in magnitude, because now, America, and all humanity swims in and feeds off an ocean of LIES.

"Deliver us from evil"!

3/20/2007 04:38:00 PM  
Blogger et in Arcadia ego Eve said...

Jeff,

Please - you are so caught up in the silly minutia! If Bobby Eberle says it happened 'that way' then by gosch it must be true!

Thank goodness he had the top down in his convertable so as to facilitate the eye witness account of the terrorist attack on the Pentagon...as a pilot, seeing that jet airliner so low sent a shiver down Bobby's spine....

Lions and tigers and bears oh my!

http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/bobby/2001/bobby_0912.shtml

3/20/2007 05:09:00 PM  
Blogger George Hayduke said...

I was in a way in the room when the so-called TM decided to work CD into its top three most-pushed "smoking guns."

And perhaps its time someone defended this decision.

Remember the media we are referring to. The TV set is not exactly the best means of hammering home a deep and complex political conspiracy. I for one think books are much better for this because if they are any good they have indexes and a Table of Contents and the reader can move forward and back and start and stop as desired.

With TV and with the way the brain reacts to motion pictures as opposed to text, better to focus on the spectacular. Nobody is going to remember the names of the folks mentioned the first time they are mentioned but that doesn't matter if you are just tying together a steady stream of eyewitnesses describing the CD in between shots of a buildingtop being blown to kingdom come.

Plus, it is easy to digest. Even the simple-minded can grasp CD. Whereas half of literate America would be troubled to tell you much at all about the CIA, much less NRO, NSA and other secret official organizations.

Also, it's a fairly strong argument. The experts on behalf of the establishment couldn't agree, but the independent researchers can. Most definitely 10,000 gallons of flaming kerosene didn't bring down a 110 storie steel-framed skyscraper.

Always bear in mind that when you are making a movie you are creating a product for a TV audience, who probably has a short attention span and who is going to feel lost pretty quick because of the seemingly radical nature of what you are telling them.

I thoroughly enjoyed WKJO. I thought it was a great movie. I had to use the pause button more in that movie than in any other movie I have ever seen.

I agree that the new TM is lacking some substance. What worries me more is all the in-fighting. The in-fighting indicates something other than researchers competing vis a vis one another to hone their arguments. This combined with a lack of leadership aside from professors on the state's tit and former military and government officials does not bode well for the TM. To sum, without organization, a constitution, independent leaders and with all the suspicious bickering I think it is safe to say that the TM isn't a movement at all, but an underground study in alternative history.

-GH

http://georgehaydukelives@blogspot.com

3/20/2007 05:29:00 PM  
Blogger heath said...

9/11 conjecture is about to receive a lot more of the spotlight.

Rosie O'Donnell, whatever you may think of her, is attempting to throw what appears to be a very considered perspective into the mix. You can't really get more recognizable (or polarizing) than Rosie.

Her original post from March 15 at her blog www.rosie.com doesn't say anything about pods or the like, and she has a 'questions and answers' section where she has been responding in what seem to be competently considered strokes.

Not to put too much importance on Rosie's character, but this could be huge. She very well could instigate a watershed of other considered, prominent opinions on 9/11. Or she could do more harm than good. I'm hoping for the former.

3/20/2007 05:42:00 PM  
Blogger Tsoldrin said...

Did anyone just catch Bush's speech regarding the US attorney firings? I was only half listening but it seemed he referred to himself in the third person, as "the president" an inordinate number of times. Odd.

3/20/2007 07:05:00 PM  
Blogger just_another_dick said...

All right Mr. Wells, can you please knock it off?

If you keep publishing posts I wholeheartedly agree with I will be in serious danger of losing my imaginary CIA status, with the corresponding loss of imaginary income that pays for my imaginary Lexus, my imaginary Blackberries & the imaginary plasma screen tvs that festoon my imaginary home in Palm Beach.

Sheesh!

Nicely hit curve ball.

Whap! & it's over the center field fence.

Too bad no one's actually watching this game.

& to this
"What should send chills down every human spine is how pathologically detached to the relentless cacaphony and roaring tsunami of LIES human beings, and particularly Americans have grown. Lies conjured, bruted, sold, ruthlessly pimped, challenged, debunked, recanted, and - everyone accepts the lie, and the lair with some strange and macbre sense of status quo, as though our leaders lying to us repeatedly and insistanty is just another aspect of American politics and out weird and wild at heart lives.


We feed off a ocean of lies."

While nicely written, I'd say you're giving Americans waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more fucking credit than they deserve.

Watch this video(I apologize that it's not a direct link but I'm pretty much computer dyslexic & i can't figure out how to turn black into blue):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJuNgBkloFE&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Ethismodernworld%2Ecom%2F

Some highlights of these man/woman in the street interviews for those pressed for time:

Interviewer: Name a country that begins with U.

American Idiot: Yugoslavia

I: What's the religion of Isreal?

A.I.: Muslim

I: What religion are Buddhist monks?

A.I.: Islamic? I don't know.

I: Who won the Vietnam War?

A.I.: We did. (off camera to friend): Wait, were we even in the Vietnam War?

I: How many sides does a triangle have?

A.I.: There's no sides.....One?

I: What is the currency used in the United Kingdom?

A.I.: What is the United Kingdom? I don't know.


While I'd like to ramble on endlessly about how depressing it is that a country as butt stupid as the US appears to be has so many fucking nukes, I won't.

I will say that after 44 years of America in my system, each new taste of this redneck utopia makes full on heroin use seem, more & more, like a viable alternative.

3/20/2007 08:09:00 PM  
Blogger Wilko said...

I like George Hayduke's take on this.

I watched the towers fall live on TV in an office full of UK journalists and instinctively/intuitively we all spoke what our eyes saw.

"It looked like one of those controlled demolitions."

Of course the narrative quickly moved on but here we are, five years later, fighting a battle for hearts and minds and that striking imagery of those rather fast, largely asymetrical collapses is what I personally have found works best when trying to bring the agnostics onside.

Alice can follow the white rabbit along a thousand paths littered with droppings when it comes to 911 but surely what we all want to see is a critical mass of people who actively challenge the official narrative and in doing so stand defiant against the ruling political/corporate/media elite.

In the telling of myths (and this is a mythical fight we're engaged in) you use those narratives which work the best and the towers collapsing they way they did that day is the wake-up daddy.

It even draws in the James Randi style arch rationalists who scratch their heads wondering how the steel could behave so peculiarly.

I like to throw in that a fireman on the 78th floor (where one of the planes hit the building) radioed in that he needed "two lines" to put out the fire - the same fire that the official narrative says was so huge and intense it caused the latticed steel structure to spectacularly and simultaneously give way.

Yep, controlled demolition isn't a red herring it's the master key and will become very relevant during the next presidential election now Gulliani's thrown in his hat. All empires are ruined by arrogance and hubris.

Then, when I have the spectre of state duplicity looming large in people's minds, I move on to how the world's most defended building can get over an hour's advance warning of a possible attack yet Johnny Foreigner flys in on his airplane/missle (does it really matter which?) and hits the bullseye without so much as pea shooter going off in defence.

That does make them shake their heads and wonder.

Call me a spin doctor, a propogandist, a teller of tales, a wooly intellect lacking in rigour, I don't really care.

I like to think of myself as an old style bard who hasn't got time to pick up the lute and compose a song, it's rattle the pots and pans time - we need as many in the resistance as possible.

All successful revolutions have crystalised around the simple awareness "we are many - they are few."

That's the only equation that matters to me - we are many and, because we've got a better story that simply "smells" more honest, our numbers are growing every day.

Viva la Revolucion!

3/20/2007 08:42:00 PM  
Blogger #1 Sniffer said...

“I really want to leave this subject alone…” Oh really!

Even his first sentence is dishonest! (his pattern of writings suggest disinfo on 911 is his very purpose. Don’t worry, he’ll be back on this topic).

But there’s a new tone, his gloves are off now, which is good because he exposes himself even more. The cards he’s got to play with just don’t make for a good hand no matter how well you turn them.

He pretends to be our friend by recommending we refocus on Al Qaeda more!

“Can you taste the difference, and can you tell what's missing? New Truth is now 100% Jihadist free… But entirely erasing bin Laden and al Qaeda from the 9/11 equation makes no more sense - not even polemical sense - than trying to talk sensibly about the JFK assassination without mention of the Mafia or the anti-Castro Cubans..”

Excuse me I need to vomit. Gee, thanks for the tip Jeff but I think the government has made that point about Al Qaeda quite thoroughly, though I’m sure they’ll appreciate your latest assistance (you just earned one more “attaboy”).

If you don’t mind I’ll just focus my limited resources on masterminds not stooges.

He tells us to focus on this, focus on that, and each of those areas is a dead end for 911!

Notice his little digs at 911 truth movement by calling it “New Truth,” “Classic Truth” etc.? Truth doesn’t change but by implying 911 truth does, well he just shows us his cards again.

“New Truth hamstrings itself - and perhaps on the part of some, that's the entire point of New Truth.” Talking about yourself Jeff?

Those who do work to expose 911 he predictably derides and attacks (while those that attack the 911 truth movement seem to fare better). Maybe he just wants to set higher standards for us? Sarcasm off.

Here in one small example, he smears or lumps together 911 truthtellers, not with facts, but innuendo. Quoting someone else "…Dave Vonkleist, Jack Blood, and Alex Jones are going to help me promote it," Jeff comments “which almost says enough for me right there.” I know it's just a small detail but it is instructive.

Jeff you can do better than this! Can you just cite one good example where Alex Jones lacks so much credibility that you would speak of him this way? If I’ve missed the boat on him/them I sure would appreciate you straightening me out.

Wells can’t support his 911 position objectively so like a trained propagandist makes his case with red herrings. He says “Consider, for instance, these 87 accounts of having seen a passenger jet, and not a cruise missile or a fighter aircraft, overfly DC and strike the building…”

OK, we have considered it Jeff, and see they're obviously plants. But how about considering the physical evidence Jeff?

As to witnesses I’m open to that, but one of the most cited of those 87 is Bobby Eberle, you know, that CIA dude running a fake news publication CIA front who was Jeff Gannon’s boss during Gannongate, remember that? A plant.

That’s the type of witness (evidence) you consistently give credence to over physics, and you know it!

There's also documented witnesses that say it was not an airliner. The Wa Post printed a detailed interview of one right after 911 (the guy refuted airliners).

But funny how you're selective over which witnesses you mention and which you don't. But you know this.

And the fact you know it, and pretend to not know it, makes you dishonest, and dishonest about the crime of the century!

In the last thread many said you were dishonest and supported it and you didn't address those voices, apparently pretending to put yourself “above” all that.

Then you just wrote another article with more of the same. I don’t think you’re fooling too many with such antics.

You are exposed, it is so obvious.

3/20/2007 09:34:00 PM  
Blogger ericswan said...

It's a bit early to be calling 911 the crime of the century. It looks like they can't get George off the stage fast enough but when you think about it, he really has been the teflon don of all presidents. We are certainly no further ahead regardless of what evidence is discovered. The times they are a changin' just not for the better.

3/20/2007 11:19:00 PM  
Blogger Sweejak said...

I agree with everyone.

Speaking in JFK terms that means we can investigate everything from the magic bullet trajectories to Nosenko to Marguerite Oswald's still classified W2 forms.

You never know which angle will break do you? For some it was the the magic bullet, right. Physical evidence from the crime scene brought out by conspiracists like Garrison. For others it's a judgement taken from a variety of evidence that answers "who benefits".

The real damage to the "truth" movement is the factionalism that occurs because of the general presumption that these things are mutually exclusive and that there is no room for an honest difference of opinion. On the one hand saying that one believes the towers were brought down by CD immediately corners you as fringe... as if you can't also believe that the Osama tape is indeed Osama.

In spite of Jeff's contention that this is not so, It is seen when he lumps together radio hosts as if there were no distinction, to say nothing of their respective audiences ability to discern on their own.

The fact is that most of these factions are walking in the same direction. I'll part ways when we're further down the road.

All the wells are poisoned (no pun) don't you think?

3/20/2007 11:29:00 PM  
Blogger eml said...

I'm finding that most people being newly awakened to the 911 scam are most easily first impressed with the footage of WTC7 falling in a neat heap especially if the footage is compared to similar demolitions side by side. The complexities for which you guys are advocating will put most newbies and innocent to sleep instantly, but a building falling down is speaking the language of most modern thrill seekers and airheads, so I always start there. EML

3/21/2007 01:03:00 AM  
Blogger metalious said...

Funny how so many of the "New Truth" leaders, diverting and distracting with the most outlandish claims, are former military and/or intelligence operatives.

The Madsen's and the Fetzers and the Loose Changers, all with a flare for absurd and factually challenged, all with security backgrounds.

Then we have Morgan Reynolds, straight from the horses mouth.

We'll probably never know who, if any, are legitimately stupid, but they have certainly succeeded in taking a lot of people's eyes off the ball.

But then there's '9/11: Press for Truth.' Slowly developing a buzz. A little beacon of light in the sea of confusion.

3/21/2007 04:51:00 AM  
Blogger thing said...

Roger Wilko, very well said. Yes, we need everyone to get behind this any way they can.

3/21/2007 04:53:00 AM  
Blogger galactivision said...

"It even draws in the James Randi style arch rationalists who scratch their heads wondering how the steel could behave so peculiarly."

Oh really? Like the JR-style arch rationalists Penn & Teller?

Guess not: P&T : Conspiracy Theorists

P&T certainly let me down on this topic; I generally feel they are bang-on on most of the stuff they declare Bullshit on.

I often experience this same disconnect with other smart folks whose political philosophies call for less government interactions/regulations (war on drugs, manditory seat-belt laws, personal freedoms, etc), and who can spot mind control (organized religions, NLP or magic masquerading as New Age stuff), yet have a very high regard for the people in power.

Put another way: I can't ever seem to close the remaining gap to convince them that it is this same government/warmachine/bigbiz's wish to endure, grow and replicate (like all good memes) that could possibly create such environments that could then foster such unbelievable (to them) activities and atrocities.

Apologies for the previous hard-to-parseness, it is late here in cali^H^H^H^HUzbekistan.

3/21/2007 06:03:00 AM  
Blogger Sounder said...

galactavision, Thanks for that You-tube link to the Darren Brown bit.(Via clicking on your name.)

Embedding the subliminals, -indeed.

3/21/2007 07:02:00 AM  
Blogger Jeff said...

"But then there's '9/11: Press for Truth.' Slowly developing a buzz. A little beacon of light in the sea of confusion."

Thanks for mentioning that. For those who haven't seen it, you can watch it here.

3/21/2007 07:45:00 AM  
Blogger AWG said...

I had a dream a couple of months ago where Rudy Giuliani appeared to me and said, "Crime doesn't pay ... yet."

I wonder what that means, in light of his clear involvement in the 9/11 cover up and his current run for president.

3/21/2007 10:14:00 AM  
Blogger George Hayduke said...

"Can you just cite one good example where Alex Jones lacks so much credibility that you would speak of him this way? If I’ve missed the boat on him/them I sure would appreciate you straightening me out."

I'm not going to fight anybody's battles for them, but one thing I found in Jones's "TerrorSorm" is how he says "Operation Northwoods" went "operational" when the Israeli's tried to sink the U.S.S. Liberty.

To date I've not found anybody or a shred of evidence to back this assertion. Maybe I've been myopic in my research on the subject. If so set me straight.

Anyway, the problem is is when the professional skeptics and debunkers move in to take on Jones, it's statements like that that are going to sink him and his movies.

Yet strangely it would seem the professional skeptics and debunkers have avoided Jones despite his apparent weaknesses. Why?

Throw in the fact that his staff of reporters are entirely British and are probably registered British agents living here and the water gets muddy quick.

My view of Jones is he's a Texas national with rich Texas national supporters. That said, I thoroughly enjoy his work. He does a few things incredibly well and some of his research is spot-on. I'd hate to see him go. He's an asset to the free-thinkers of the world no matter what his affiliation or agenda is.

Beyond all this, it should be apparent to everybody by now that the Anglo/American banking establishment oft-referred to as the NWO wants to see American sovereignty dissolved. Further, we know they've had in the works for quite some time plans to divide America up into regions to be ruled via open martial law. The military has been staging exercises in preparation for exactly this.

Question is, for all of you supposed free-thinkers, is what role will 9/11 truth play in the dissolving of American sovereignty, the dividing of America up into regions, and the implementation of open martial law here. Does, at its heart of hearts, 9/11 Truth have the potential to be the impetus for a civil war here that will serve the desires of the NWO?

3/21/2007 10:36:00 AM  
Blogger ericswan said...

George..there are two instances that come to mind. I was listening to a radio broadcast with Alex. He had an ex-military man that had invesigated the Murrah building and concluded that McVeigh and his German handler were part of a CIA black op. This conversation went along well with good science involved when Alex cut him off to go to commercial. When they returned, Alex pressed him about WTC and 911. The guest said he hadn't invesigated this particular issue where upon Alex cut the guy off and bad mouthed him for a couple of minutes claiming that this guy must be a plant. If I could have been within striking distance...Alex is a pompous ass.

Second..more than just a few people have tried to bring to Alex's attention that the Jews are not the ones pulling the strings toward a NWO and that there is good evidence that Jesuits through the black pope have been the prime movers and have been doing so for centuries. Alex refuses to hear any of this and particularily on his program. Suspicions here suggesting that "he" is part of the coverup of the real perpetrators.

fliegende scheiben

3/21/2007 11:05:00 AM  
Blogger George Hayduke said...

The Rothschild's are Jewish and that's about where the Jewish conspiracy ends in my book.

The Protocols of the Elders of Zion were written by the Illuminati, which were Bavarian, German and Austrian. The Protocols were taken by agents of a Russian Czar and then modified and then used to create the illusion of a Jewish conspiracy. This introduced anti-semitisim and xeonophobia and thus internal division and thus relieved pressure on the Czar to remedy some of the problems at home by shifting the public's focus outward.

So the Protocals of Zion are a hoax in that they were actually written by Anglo/Aryan secret society members but pegged on the Jews.

Who knows why Jones doesn't investigate the Mossad and AIPAC connections to 9/11? Maybe he just doesn't want to open that can of worms.

More than likely he's told not to by his Texas National handlers.

Remember, Texas is the Iraq of America. When they divide up America into a handful of statelets to be ruled by martial law and that will probably fight wars against each other that are profitable to the elite Anglo/American bankers in the NWO, Texas will be the most "valuable" statelet because it has oil.

Many powerful players here will want to be king of that statelet. Question you should ponder is what role does Jones play in establishing one king or another in charge of the soon-to-be Texas statelet?

3/21/2007 11:21:00 AM  
Blogger Shrubageddon said...

Richard,

Great post...you really know how to bitch slap the idealists back into reality. Why bother to impose Martial Law on the idiots that are the majority of America, when you can get them to believe that Australia is Iran, or Iraq, or North Koreas on a map.....or get them to line right up for their Merck HPV vaccine without nary a blink, or bat of the eye...why go through the trouble of rounding them up? Hell, they're already rounded up....they'll do whatever you tell them to do whenever you tell them to do it.

Sorry, folks, we're fucked...it's that simple. We're going down, one way or another. Might as well enjoy what you have (family and friends) while you can...because there's no stopping the Crazy Train now.

Hey, at least in the Statelet of Texas a young lass won't contract Cervical Cancer when she's raped repeatedly in the brave new world that's coming soon......however, AIDS is an entirely different matter...no vaccine for that....or Herpes...or....

3/21/2007 11:39:00 AM  
Blogger et in Arcadia ego Eve said...

eric swan - you are correct about the Jesuits...big problem, long time.

3/21/2007 11:43:00 AM  
Blogger surrender said...

“That which was before consciousness began, is eternal; that which humanity thinks is changeable and inconstant; that which was, before consciousness began, is Truth; that which humanity thinks is truth, is truth to them. When the Law of Truth comes to consciousness, it will erase all that humanity has ever thought erroneously.
“As the centuries roll on and push back the material veil by the process of evolution, thoughts come through the mind of humanity that revert back to Truth or, as we call it, the original cosmic fact; and these thoughts that fill the memory of the past, faced with the facts of the present and overshadowed by prophecies of the future, stand out definitely upon the path of the whole evolving race consciousness. Thus the race is called back again and again to the original existing principle. By this return and repetition, humanity is shown that Creation is eternal, the same with all mankind; but mankind’s creatures are always changing and they are under a manifestation of Law called action and reaction. When human beings have gone far enough in their creation of creatures, the Great absolute Law of Truth takes a hand in bringing them face to face with the original plan. Thus we see that cosmic law never allows life to run too far in a tangent. This law is always polarized in equalization, balance, and harmony.
“In spite of idols or creeds it will crowd mankind on into complete union with Absolute Realities. All things that are not in perfect accord and union with actual, existing cosmic fact, must erase themselves when the Absolute Law of Truth holds sway in the human consciousness. The thoughts of humanity are always so formed as to release their imperfect creations, that are only born of half-truths, when Truth arrives.
“Cosmic Absolute Law must be fully satisfied. Thinking, speaking, or acting the Law of Reality is bound eventually to lead humanity into Law or Reality itself. The ancients tell us that every tree that the Heavenly Father has not planted within you, will be uprooted. ‘Let them alone, blind leaders of the blind. If the blind always lead the blind, shall they not fall into the same ditch?’
“The cycle is fast closing in which the blind of the whole race have led the blind into a welter of ignorance, superstition, and delusion created by those who believe as human beings think, rather than that which is true and real. The civilization that has risen on the delusions and superstitions of the closing centuries is submerging itself in the welter. Through the pain and tragedy of their misappropriated creations, a new race consciousness has been conceived and is fast evolving. In fact, the door is opening wide for its new birth.
“There is no other course than to go on from one plane of consciousness to a higher and more advanced step in the actual cosmic path. The only condition forbidden in the vibration of the great cosmos is that quality of thought which allows the human race to become so solidly fixed in what it believes that, if it clings desperately to its old delusions and will not let go, it can in no way come into the greater expanse of universal thought. Those thus absorbed in personal consciousness must go on through natural exhaustion of beliefs and experiences until they fail to go forward; then, of its own accord, Absolute Law wields a progressive hand through disease, pain, and loss, until the human is satisfied and turns to find the curse of a false idea within the idea itself.
“If a race or nation refuses to let go of things created by a portion of human thought instead of that which really exists, the Law takes a hand in its progress by allowing the accumulated vibrations sent out by such a condition to reflect back upon itself through the light ray. Then with war, strife, discord, and death on every hand, that race or nation is wiped out, in order that it may be placed again in a new up-lift of creation. Thus it can begin over again in a new contact with that which was before the beginning of human consciousness. Civilization today is fast approaching a great reconstructive moment. All things that seem so stable and well-founded now will soon be immersed in a state of inversion. Every tree that has not been planted by Truth will be uprooted. There is approaching a complete cosmic overthrow of the present social, political, financial, and religious institutions that will make room for the placing of the new era in order that humanity may come in closer touch with that which is and was established before the present human consciousness submerged and set it aside. Truth waits on with attentive, loving, and radiant beneficence until man will see that he can embrace and become the consciousness of that which has always existed.

3/21/2007 11:49:00 AM  
Blogger Shrubageddon said...

That was very sweet, Mojo, but Truth has no meaning or relevancy outside of our consciousness of the concept. The meteor that will one day extinct our species, if we don't do so ourselves prior to, doesn't measure its existence, or the existence of the Universe by barometers such as Truth or Untruth. It's all one and the same...one needs the other and its very meaning is predicated by the other.

3/21/2007 11:59:00 AM  
Blogger surrender said...

Shrub,

Is it not possible that your truth or what is true for you, what your mind makes up about what is true, is there a distinction between your truth and the Absolute Law of Truth?? The Truth exists, whether you are conscious of it or not. Perception of what is true is not always the Truth as Jeff so brilliantly expresses.

3/21/2007 12:38:00 PM  
Blogger CuriosityShop said...

http://www.prouty.org/brussell/

About Women...
(from Playgirl Magazine, August 1974)

At a time when many writers and thinkers are seriously questioning the official accounts of the political assassinations, kidnappings, and "dirty tricks," a housewife-turned-social-theorist offers her own frightening, but well-researched, explanation.

BY STEPHANIE CARUANA

Mae Brussell is a researcher who has spent ten years studying political assassinations and conspiracies in the United States. On July 11, 1972 she wrote the first article to give a reasonable explanation for the break-in and arrest at the Watergate -- three weeks after the event. The article, "Why Was Martha Mitchell Kidnapped?" was published in The Realist.

Meanwhile, the establishment press was sweeping the Watergate story under the rug, to the accompaniment of the "Third-rate Burglary Chorus." But the story -- and Mae Brussell -- wouldn't go away. In December, 1972, she published a second long article in The Realist. But Watergate was still, in the words of President Nixon's tape transcript, "an unpricked boil," and this story, too, was left to the alternative press.

For three years, Mae Brussell's weekly hour-long live radio news analysis show, Dialogue Conspiracy, has been broadcast over KLRB-FM, in Carmel, California. The show is also currently heard in Sacramento, Boston, Syracuse, and San Francisco. She also teaches the first accredited university course entitled "Conspiracies and Assassinations" at Monterey Peninsula College.

In April, 1974, I asked her: "Who or what is the S.L.A., and why did they kidnap Patricia Hearst?" Her answer, "Is S.L.A.'s Cinque the First Black Lee Harvey Oswald?" appeared in the Berkeley Barb. Her theory is that the S.L.A. is a conspiracy involving top intelligence agencies. Mae Brussell believes she knows who is manipulating the course of American history by means of "bullets and blackmail" -- and why. She believes that plans for the military takeover of the United States and the imposition of martial law sit on governmental desks like time bombs, waiting to go off when the time is right -- and that only immediate public awareness can avert a national disaster with echoes of Nazi Germany, Greece, and the Philippines.

Of course -- she could be wrong. In spite of her painstaking analysis of hundreds of books and thousands of articles, letters, and other documents; in spite of her staggering perception of a Gestalt, a pattern, in which puzzling, wearying daily news stories emerge as expected details to be slipped into the overall framework -- she could be wrong. She could be simply a modern Sherlock Holmes, exercising a brilliant capacity for deductive logic on events which in reality have no interconnection. Even so how happy I would be to sit at her feet like a modern Dr. Watson, with no pipe to chew on to hide my comic consternation at having missed the point again. Sometimes I become so involved with the exhilaration of the chase the mental process of tracking down the game that I almost forget this is real life we are talking about. Real people are being murdered, while other real people are being framed and railroaded into real prisons. The "arch enemy" in this game isn't Professor Moriarty, "the most fiendish criminal mind the world has ever known," but, after all, a fictional character safely on the wrong side of society's pale; it is the intelligence agency complex of the United States.

Study Offers New U.S. Constitution
By Fred P. Graham
New York Times - Sept. 8, 1970, front page

In Santa Barbara, California, the Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions has drafted a better U.S. Constitution. The current one is outdated.

*Rex Tugwell, former member of Roosevelt's "brain trust."

*Robert M. Hutchins, chairman.

*Harry S. Ashmore, senior Fellow of the center.

*Warren Burger (opposed to trial by jury).

This new version:

*20 or less "republics" instead of 50 states.

*a stronger Presidency & federal powers, instead of individual sovereign states.

*6 branches instead of 3.

- the regulatory branch would share its authority with private industry, could join multi-company groups to set standards.

*No more Supreme Court, weaker judicial powers.

*President serves 1 nine year term only.

*Senators

- not elected but chosen by other branches of government. They would consist of former Presidents & other former high officials.

*2 Vice Presidents instead of 1.

- 1 for general affairs.

- 1 for internal affairs.

*No more Bill of Rights, but many of the same fundamental safeguards.

- no right to a trial by jury.

- no right to bear arms.

*Instead of 2/3 vote of Congress to amend the Constitution, amendments would be proposed by a council of judges approved by the President & Senate, and ratified by a majority in a national election.

*After 5 presidential terms, the entire Constitution may be rewritten and submitted & ratified by a majority in a national election.


I highly recommend reading Mae’s article on the Nazi connection to the JFK assassination.

And what game is Hollywood playing in all of this? And who is Hollywood now? Leftists, Facists, Scientologists? Or just more propaganda tools?

Why all these sly, strange little clues or nuggets they dump out there in the global consciousness.

Like this –

Ocean’s Eleven (2001) remake of the original Rat Pack movie that links directly to the players around JFK. I seem to have a problem with wiki links, I paste them and then when I click, they give the dreaded no such link found. So go to wiki check out Ocean’s Eleven. Take a look at the poster for the movie release
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean%27s_Eleven_%282001_film%29 (link but may not work)

A giant eleven (made to look like the twin towers) with nine men in black walking across it. All in the red and black, nazi colors (blood and soil).

And the clever release date has Nine Eleven hidden (in plain site) 12-07-01. And within the new movie they use something called a “pinch”
In the movie, a pinch is stolen, and used to disrupt power in Las Vegas. Real life pinches wouldn't produce the required EMF - the scriptwriter may have been thinking of an Explosively pumped flux compression generator.

An explosively pumped flux compression generator is a pulsed power supply that magnetically derives its energy from an explosion.

An EPFCG is a one-off pulsed power supply; it can only be used once as the device is destroyed in operation. An EPFCG package that could be easily carried by a person can produce pulses in the millions of amperes — tens of terawatts, exceeding the power of a lightning strike by orders of magnitude.

They require a starting current pulse to operate, which is usually supplied from a capacitor bank which has in turn been charged from batteries or the power supply of the vehicle carrying the weapon.

Cons Described
In the beginning of the movie, when they begin to work on the plan for the casino heist, Rusty (Pitt) says to Danny (Clooney),

"Off the top of my head, I'd say you're looking at a Boesky, a Jim Brown, a Miss Daisy, two Jethros and a Leon Spinks, not to mention the biggest Ella Fitzgerald ever!"
This list of cons was created by director Steven Soderburgh and a screenwriter that described the type of people and cons needed to knock over the three casinos.

Boesky - a reference to Ivan Boesky, a big-time trader on Wall Street who got caught committing securities fraud. The con is about a wealthy bankroller who has insider information. Saul Bloom.
Jim Brown - the confrontation between Frank Catton and Linus Caldwell, staged to distract Terry Benedict so that Linus can lift the security codes to the vault. Named for the famous American football player Jim Brown.
Miss Daisy - the SWAT vehicle used as the getaway car. From the movie title Driving Miss Daisy.
Two Jethros - the Malloy brothers. "Hillbilly gear-head types" hired to take care of Miss Daisy, distraction purposes, and for general two-man work.
Leon Spinks - the disruption of the boxing match. This refers to the surprise victory of Leon Spinks over Muhammad Ali.
Ella Fitzgerald - the looped tape of the robbery that is played over Benedict's security system. A reference to a 1970s commercial for Memorex, in which a recording of Ella Fitzgerald's voice breaks a glass and the question is posed to the viewer: "Is it live or is it Memorex?"


Now why plant these little mind farts I call them, cause it’s cool, it’s hip or an ulterior motive, and what would that motive be?

3/21/2007 12:54:00 PM  
Blogger Shrubageddon said...

Surrender,

I can't assuredly say there is truth outside of our perception of such because all we know is our perception....and nothing outside of it. Considering that, isn't it irrelevant whether there is truth, or untruth, outside of our perception of it?

In regards to our perception of truth, well, it's highly relative and subjective, regardless of the rationalizations that it's otherwise. We each have our own version of the truth, and if we were to Venn Diagram our individual versions there would be both overlaps and distinctions, but ultimately a contradictory scatter plot.

The truth is elusive, perhaps, because it is not a static proposition, but rather a convenient concept for maintaining order in Social Systems, specifically Civilization as we know it.

A great deal of what was proffered as truth during my education has turned out to be entirely false...at least as far as I perceive it, whereas, others who shared my same education, or similar, may perceive that it is as they were taught. Which one's right? Even if I am, it's a small consolation if the one who's not holds my economic survival in his/her hands.

3/21/2007 01:10:00 PM  
Blogger Sounder said...

Somehow the dream of falsity being exposed seems to contain greater appeal than does the dream of total annihilation for mankind. I will stick with the first, thank..-you very much.

Schrub, as to your sentiment that; "Truth has no meaning or relevancy outside of our consciousness of the concept."

This is charmingly anthropocentric and it then may also be said; Outside of Truth you (or I) have no meaning or relevance; (and yet we do.)

3/21/2007 01:45:00 PM  
Blogger just_another_dick said...

Having spent the weekend at work where the tv never shuts off, I had the pleasure of seeing a commercial for a car that parallel parks itself, a few car ads where the vehicle in question has a GPS feature that talks to you as it leads you by the fucking nose to your destination, & a news story on the XBox & the Wii-Wii where some balloon head stood in his room with an electronic tennis racket playing an imaginary game of tennis.


Now I know parallel parking is insurmountable & map reading is akin to deciphering the Voynich Manuscript & actually buying a tennis racket & a tube of balls at 1/100th the cost of an electronic tinker toy & actually running around a court is physically painful , but I just can't escape the conclusion that the ultimate goal of human evolution as filtered through 20th/21st century consumer culture is the attainment of the lofty state of complete immobility where we have to do absolutely nothing for ourselves.

Now, as much as I loathe Matrix analogies, I just can't resist this one....sorry.

Ask anyone who has seen that film, & I guarantee they'll identify with either Neo or Morpheus. Hell, search through any MySpace bullshitterry & you'll find thousands of similar styled "truth-seekers," with equally idiotic fantasy names.

But, in my opinion, I think we're really a nation of Cyphers.

Lazy cheese-headed dipshits who would beat the living shit out of anyone who would even suggest that they take the red pill & remove themselves from their comfy little pods.

All this "truth-seeker" bullshit is just that...bullshit.

The days of rugged individualists who would prefer death to bondage are long effing dead.
Just witness folk when you deny them cellphone usage or remove them from the computer or the tv...they fucking freak.

I think it was Bob Dylan who said something like "We're living in the days of science fiction." The operative word being "fiction," I think.
People ache for the damn fiction, it's the truth they have no use for.

But, much luck on the hamster wheel of 911 truth. While y'all will no doubt run furiously in your search for "justice," I'd be willing to bet the farm that y'all will never ever get anywhere at all. &, in the end, the guilty will still be peeing in our collective Wheaties & we, as a nation, will still be wolfing down the noxious concoction with typical American gusto.

Good day.

3/21/2007 01:57:00 PM  
Blogger iridescent cuttlefish said...

#1 Sniffer,

9/11 truth doesn’t change?

We pretty much all believe it was an inside job, a pretext for the next, widely advertised step on the program. However, there has been a steadily rotating rotisserie of theories which explain how the job was accomplished (remote-control, pods, missiles, holographs, CD, etc,) and a dwindling interest in the connections between the sponsors of terror (“ours” and “theirs”) and a near total lack of interest in what to do about scrapping the system which gave rise to this whole mode of existence, beyond a vague “When more and more of us begin to realize…” and the simple, but unenlightening “Re-open 9/11!”.

Jeff’s refusal to take your oath and, more importantly, his focus on the telling connections between the provacateurs in the operatic clash of civilizations is where the insight lies. Take the case of the false flag "left-wing terrorism" in postwar Europe. In Jeff's brilliant Yellow Cake and Black Shirts, he doesn't "prove" his case by examining the forensics & explosives reports that show how the trains were blown up, etc.; he shows us how "the Left" was really "the Right". If the picture isn't big enough to allow us to see all the entrances to the stage, shifting through the props isn't going to tell us anything.

Alex Jones is a Mexican-bashing America-Firster in bold, NWO-fighter drag. How many of your Truthers have come out and said that fair trade & free markets are a dangerous illusion (a practical impossibility, an oxymoronic proposition), or that we need to invest our efforts & energy in social, environmental, architectural & sustainable economic revolutions if we hope to make any political revolution succeed? You make such a point of hurling the “Disinfo artist!” accusation at Jeff for the approach he takes, when your boy Alex is the poster boy of disinformation, the specially-modified limited hang out specialist. Not that he’s alone. Another prominent warrior against the New World Order who operates in much the same manner is Daniel Pouzzner. He, too, has a splashy Beware The NWO! website that conceals its true purpose (affirming the staus quo) by…attacking the status quo. Or, appearing to, anyway.

Pouzzner, Jones, and Rense all play the same shtick. They tell us they’re red-blooded, patriotic Americans who want to turn the clock back to a time when liberty & democracy, upheld by principled defenders of truth (like themselves, naturally) selflessly fought for the rights of the common man. The first problem is that never was such a time. America has never been about those things it so proudly proclaims, starting with our glorious, now mythical founding fathers. Take George the Very First. Do our fairy-tale history books tell us that he was, in addition to being a paragon of virtue who couldn’t tell a lie, the richest man in America, or the author of the plan to exterminate the “previous occupants” of the Land of Opportunity? Deceit was his middle name. We’re told, incessantly, that he selflessly rejected the offer to make him king of the new empire. Are we ever told why?

The answer is as obvious as it is relevant to today’s crises—it’s far easier to advance the cause of the tiny minority of elitist Machiavellis if you clothe their true intent in the language of their antithesis: egalitarianism. It is no accident that the most noble and inspirational memes of the New Republic are all egalitarian. All men are created equal…life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness…freedom and justice for all, etc. etc.. But where, in the entire sordid history of this most cynically hypocritical country, have these things ever informed policy decisions, social norms, or economic institutions? The Age of the Robber Barons did not begin with the malevolent avarice of John D. Rockefeller—it began with the plundering, pillaging and carefully-laid plans of the genocidal maniacs to whom Alex and his band of self-righteous patriots reverently pledge their undying fealty.

So go ask Alex why we shouldn’t give Mexico back the richest half of the their country, the one we stole with a flurry of freedom-loving Alamo-isms. Or, if he doesn’t take that bait, ask him why we’re more entitled to the earth’s bounty than they are. Because they were too weak and undemocratic to defend themselves? Because we earned our windfall fair & square? Because our stick-to-it-ive-ness and American know-how have allowed us to prosper in God’s own free market system? Perhaps you could appeal to Mr. Jones’ religious sensibilities—he is quite the self-proclaimed follower of the one true God, you know. Maybe he’ll give you the true meaning of the Sermon on the Mount. I’m sure Jesus wasn’t really serious about all that sharing & loving your neighbor stuff. Now that we have the door to genetic engineering open, we probably can fit the fat ass of the rich man and his goddamned camel through the eye of that needle.

Even more revealing, check out Pouzzner’s latest effort, Returning to Eden. Here you’ll find, among an incredible mountain of true-sounding lies, the slickest trick in the history of marketing campaigns. Wall Street Journal-connected Mr. Pouzzner gives you graphic testimony of how egalitarianism leads to human misery. As long as you buy the assumption that Stalin and Hitler’s empires were truly egalitarian, of course, and not even more ruthlessly controlled by elites who shat lies about their concern for “the people” even more prodigiously than our own shitters of Truth, Justice and the American Way. Aside from his unshakable faith in the vehicle for human progress that is the free market, Pouzzner very, very cleverly turns the world on its head by equating elitism—the opposite of egalitarianism—with the only source of hope for the suffering masses of humanity. Don’t worry your pretty little, lice-infested heads, you useless feeders, Daddy Warbucks is gonna take care of you all, cradle to the grave.

The current George squatting on the throne is quite right about one thing in all this, when he says we just can’t go back to pre-9/11 thinking. The reason we can’t go back is because there’s no fookin’ difference—we never went anywhere. And this is where the truthers make the very biggest of their many mistakes. By obsessing over the mechanics of how this one particular Day in the Empire went down, fractiously calling each other agents of disinformation while looking back to some imaginary time of innocence, they completely ignore the only real question facing us. Do we continue to acquiesce to the premise of the Empire, that the age-old economy of scarcity, with its built-in mechanisms of manipulation & control, is the only possible organization upon which societies can be built, or do we say, “No, economies of abundance based upon responsible stewardship of the earth’s resources and a reverence for all living things (and the equal worth of every human being) is the model we choose”?

No, no; we don’t hear much about that. Instead, we hear about bringing squibs into the courts, where blind justice will surely and swifly impart her reproach upon the malefactors (like She always does), so that we can get back to the business of America, which is very much concerned with producing reliable, consumer-tested crimes of the century.”

3/21/2007 02:55:00 PM  
Blogger George Washington said...

Thank you for your very thoughtful essay. As someone who has been writing for years both about the "let it happen on purpose" and physical evidence for years -- at George Washington's Blog -- I take what you say seriously, and will have to give it serious consideration.

If people stress controlled demolition and stop constantly educating people about the government whitewash, links between Al-Qaeda and intelligence services, about the war games and stand down, and other related issues, we will have lost.

Thanks again.

3/21/2007 04:00:00 PM  
Blogger George Washington said...

Below are a list of my 9/11 essays. I am posting this because I agree with Jeff's call to not abandon the truth as uncovered by Paul Thomspon, Sibel Edmonds etc. in favor solely of controlled demolition. Do you think I've had a balanced approach? Or do you think I've written too much about controlled demolition?

Disrespectful To The Victims

Leading Conservatives: 9/11 Cover-Up

9/11 and The Left

Why 9/11 Is Important

911 for Very Busy People

Crooked Cops and 9-11

Introduction to 9/11 for Those Who Still Believe the Official Story

Intelligence Failures

Scapegoating Norad

Mineta's Testimony CONFIRMED

Incompetence

5 Reasons to Question the Official 9/11 Story

20 Reasons to Question the Official 9/11 Story

Government Knew Attacks could be WITHIN the U.S.

They Knew

The 9/11 Cover Up

The War Games of September 11th

If Its Broken, Why Haven't They Fixed It?

Hanjour "Could Not Fly at All"

Where's the Remote Control?

Destruction of the Twin Towers

Why was there Molten Metal Under Ground Zero for Months after 9/11?

Professor Jones is Right: Government Refused to Examine Trade Center Collapses

More Proof 911 Inside Job - Witnesses To WTC Explosives

Bombs in the Towers - Why?

How Could They Plant Bombs in the World Trade Center?
Bombs Heard in the Twin Towers

Thermal Images and Molten Metal Indicate that High-Explosives Brought Down the World Trade Center

Can't Have Your Cake and Eat It Too

What's With the Mid-Air Dust Clouds?

Another 9/11 Smoking Gun?

How Did They Know?

Interview with Scott Forbes

A Mighty Wind

Heavy Metal

A Hundred Firecrackers

Below The Belt

Great Danes

Too Hot

3/21/2007 05:05:00 PM  
Blogger Shrubageddon said...

IC,

That was great stuff....from the heart and soul of your being. The intensity and passion was palpable...yet you were able to temper it effectively with lucid, cogent articulation.

Well done, sir.

3/21/2007 05:23:00 PM  
Blogger Tsoldrin said...

IC,

Don't take this as a jab... I actually agree with a lot of what you said there, but I think you may be viewing certain things with overzealous communist eyes.

Why demonize our first president? By todays 'me-me!' standards, the guy seems practically saintly. Considering his charisma as well as his military and political talents, he certainly could have been far worse - as so many in history who share those traits have been. I was unaware he was the richest man in america at one point and actually under the impression he did poorly in his personal finances... perhaps I'm thinking of someone else though?

As far as mexico... I don't know what you meant by giving back the 'richest half'. Would that be Texas? Texas broke off from Mexico and became it's own country for a decade before becoming part of the U.S. of A. (if it ever actually did?). Anyway, with gobs of oil, gold, silver, copper and natural gas, Mexico is still one of the richest countries in the world in natural resources... it's just that none of that gets to the people - In that respect, it's probably the model for how the elite want the entire planet to be eventually.

Also, there seems to be a misconception regarding Mexico and Mexicans regarding who they are, what they had and how long they had it (at least imo). The way I see it, Mexico was colonized by Spain and won their independence in similar fashion to how the U.S. was colonized by England and won it's own independence. Therefore, giving anything back to Mexico because 'they were here first' would be akin to Canada giving British Columbia back to the Native Americans by making it part of Alaska and thereby the United States.
Anyway, that's my take on it.
---
George Washington (the oher one), I've read your blog for a while now, you have a directness in your analysis which I find quite refreshing. Keep up the good work.

3/21/2007 05:37:00 PM  
Blogger iridescent cuttlefish said...

Thanks, Shrub. And, I might add, I very much appreciated your plug for the carbohydrate economy on the last thread (not sure if you saw my response, it was right near the end...)


Tsoldrin,

Well, the whole historical accuracy thing is a very complex undertaking at times, especially when you're trying to consider periods at great remove from our own, for which you truly need different eyes, but most of my rant can be substantiated in one form or another.

Washington was indeed the richest man in the Colonies, due to his "talent" for land speculation, and he did in fact propose the original plan for killing off the Indians en masse and stealing their land in the process (see that founding fathers link, and then follow the slimy trail of our mythical First Leader...)

As far as Mexico goes, I was referring to points west of the new Republic of Texas, particularly California, which is still arguably the richest state in this morbid union. You are right, however, when one steps back a bit and asks who was really "here first," in which case the newly independent Mexico had no more moral claim over the present-day Southwest than we or the French did over the lands gobbled up in the Louisiana Purchase.

On the other hand, the sort of lame-ass, Davy Crockett jingoism that covered the naked imperial aggression behind the Mexican-American War of 1848 wasn't really fooling anyone then either (at least if one were to look at what Thoreau was writing about the "conflict".) The brutality of the American campaign seems to have been a bit of a warming up for our subsequent global bullying. I've got a great Mark Twain link around here somewhere on the period that follows this timeframe--it doesn't really seem to matter whether we're slaughtering Mexicans or Filipinos or Iraqis. It's all the same shit.

Btw, I'm not exactly a card-carrying commie, you know (although it is a great line at parties.) I think the traditional Native American concept of land ownership is probably closer to my view than old dialectically-challenged Karl's.

Cheers!

3/21/2007 06:34:00 PM  
Blogger George Washington said...

Oops, I forgot this group of essays:

Strategy/Big Picture
Do Justice

The Heart of the Matter

Truth Ministry

The Godfather of 9/11

Truth and Reconciliation

Osama Bin Distractin

Israel and 9/11: Thou Does Protest Too Much

Parallels Between Pearl Harbor and 9/11

9/11 Lies: Another Basis for Impeachment

Open Letter to World Leaders

Eyes on the Prize

Clowns to the Left of Me, Jokers to the Right

Israel and 9/11: Thou Does Protest Too Much

Welcome to the Truth

9/11: a 7-Man Job

Why the Road to 9/11 Truth Passes Through London

The Ends and the Means

What Would It Take?

Interview with April Gallop

No Planes Theory: R.I.P.

Strange Times at the Pentagon

What Do We Want?

Prominent Christians Endorse 9/11 Truth

Burden of Proof

Dear Government Employee

9/11 Addiction

Nutty Conspiracy Theory

Who Are The Heroes?

Investigate This!

Guilt

Supporting The President

Social Proof

Ink Blots

Oops

Tucker Carlson Just Told Me To Stop Paying Taxes!

Able Danger is a Red Herring

Bush's Bad Science

They Wouldn't Do That

All Roads Lead to Dick Cheney

Activist Tips (these are largely focused on 9/11, but would work for any activist cause)

Money

Podcast the Truth

Sound Bite

3/21/2007 07:04:00 PM  
Blogger George Washington said...

Thanks, Tsoldrin. You write clearly also.

3/21/2007 07:12:00 PM  
Blogger boyhero said...

Following that Oceans 11 link, came across this on wiki:

The password that Matt Damon's character enters on the elevator is 1138, a reference to THX 1138 by George Lucas.
THX 1138 (from wiki)
THX 1138 is a 1971 science fiction film written and directed by George Lucas. It depicts an Orwellian future, featuring three residents of a dystopia in which a high level of control is exerted upon the populace through ever-present faceless, android police-officers and mandatory, regulated use of special drugs to suppress emotion, including sexual desire.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/THX_1138

3/21/2007 07:19:00 PM  
Blogger boyhero said...

One of the hotels featured in the movie; The Mirage.

3,044 room hotel

(4+4+3 = 11)

It was reported that the resort would have to bring in a million dollars a day to pay off a 7-year construction loan (7)

But in fact The Mirage did so well, the loan was paid off in just 18 months. (8+1 = 9)

Oh! here we go again, down the rabbit hole, once more...

3/21/2007 07:27:00 PM  
Blogger surrender said...

Neocons in Cheney's Office Fund al Qaeda-Tied Groups ... and No One Cares?
By Tom Engelhardt, Tomdispatch.com. Posted March 17, 2007.
Alternet News

"Seymour Hersh's recent report that Iran-Contra veterans working out of Dick Cheney's office are using stolen funds from Iraq to arm al Qaeda-tied groups and foment a larger Sunni-Shia war is a very big deal."........


Now imagine the response: Front-page headlines; editorials nationwide calling for answers, Congressional hearings, or even the appointment of a special prosecutor to look into some of the claims; a raft of op-ed page pieces by the nation's leading columnists asking questions, demanding answers, reminding us of the history of Iran-Contra; bold reporters from a recently freed media standing up in White House and Defense Department press briefings to demand more information on Hersh's various charges; calls in Congress for hearings and investigations into why the people's representatives were left so totally out of this loop.

Uh ...

All I can say is: If any of this happened, I haven't been able to discover it. As far as I can tell, no one in the mainstream even blinked on the Iran-Contra angle or the possibility that a vast, secret Middle Eastern operation is being run, possibly illegally and based on stolen funds and Saudi money, out of the Vice President's office. You can certainly find a few pieces on, or reports about, "The Redirection" -- all focused only on the possible build-up to a war with Iran -- and the odd wire-service mention of it; but nothing major, nothing Earth-shaking or eye-popping; not, in fact, a single obvious editorial or op-ed piece in the mainstream; no journalistic questions publicly asked of the administration; no Congressional cries of horror; no calls anywhere for investigations or hearings on any of Hersh's revelations, not even an expression of fear somewhere that we might be seeing Iran-Contra, the sequel, in our own moment.

This, it seems to me, adds up to a remarkable non-response to claims that, if true, should gravely concern Congress, the media, and the nation.

In "The Coming Wars" in January of 2005, Hersh first reported that the Bush administration, like the Israelis, had been "conducting secret reconnaissance missions inside Iran at least since" the summer of 2004. In April of 2006 in "The Iran Plans," he reported that the Bush administration was eager to put the "nuclear option" on the table in any future air assault on Iranian nuclear facilities (and that some in the Pentagon, fiercely opposed, had at least temporarily thwarted planning for the possible use of nuclear bunker-busters in Iran). He also reported that American combat units were "on the ground" in Iran, marking targets for any future air attack, and quoted an unnamed source as claiming that they were also "working with minority groups in Iran, including the Azeris, in the north, the Baluchis, in the southeast, and the Kurds, in the northeast. The troops are studying the terrain, and giving away walking-around money to ethnic tribes, and recruiting scouts from local tribes and shepherds,' the consultant said. One goal is to get eyes on the ground' ... The broader aim, the consultant said, is to ëencourage ethnic tensions' and undermine the regime."

Congress in the Dark: Hersh claims that, with the help of Saudi National Security Adviser Prince Bandar bin Sultan (buddy to the Bushes and Dick Cheney's close comrade-in-arms), the people running the black-ops programs out of Cheney's office have managed to run circles around any possibility of Congressional oversight, leaving the institution completely "in the dark," which is undoubtedly exactly where Congress wanted to be for the last six years. Is this still true? The non-reaction to the Hersh piece isn't exactly encouraging.

To summarize, if Hersh is to be believed -- and as a major journalistic figure for the last near-40 years he certainly deserves to be taken seriously -- the Bush administration seems to be repeating the worst mistakes of the Reagan administration and of the anti-Soviet war in Afghanistan, which led inexorably to the greatest acts of blowback in our history. Given what we already know about the Bush administration, Americans should be up nights worrying about what all this means now as well as down the line. For Congress, the media, and Americans in general, this report should have been not just a wake-up call, but a shout for an all-nighter with NoDoz.

In my childhood, one of the Philadelphia papers regularly ran cartoon ads for itself in which some poor soul in a perilous situation -- say, clinging to the ledge of a tall building -- would be screaming for help, while passersby were so engrossed in the paper that they didn't even look up. Now, we have the opposite situation. A journalist essentially writing bloody murder in a giant media and governmental crowd. In this case, no one in the mainstream evidently cares -- not yet anyway -- to pay the slightest attention. It seems that there's a crime going on and no one gives a damn. Think Kitty Genovese on a giant scale."

3/21/2007 08:40:00 PM  
Blogger #1 Sniffer said...

IC, thanks for sticking up for Jeff. Everyone deserves a defender.

"You make such a point of hurling the “Disinfo artist!” accusation at Jeff for the approach he takes, when your boy Alex is the poster boy of disinformation, the specially-modified limited hang out specialist. "

Well "my poster boy of disinfo" Alex (your term) isn't selective in the evidence on 911, and your boy Jeff is (when it's good which is often he pretends it doesn't exist).

That Alex is about disinfo you frankly based on the fact you disagree with his underlying political views not because you had examples of his looseness with any facts like I had with Jeff (your evidence against Jones was that he was anti illegal immigration and also was an America first guy who believed in our founding fathers. He may be wrong on that but those are political philosophies).

So you went into a historical exposition of truth as you saw it to prove your point how wrong Alex Jones was to support our founding fathers and how the US stole Texas and California from Mexico, etc.

And I agree with of much if not most of your history and 911's place in it, but that doesn't prove that Alex Jones is a disinformationist. Seems to me things he does talk about he provides evidence for and does so with honesty (unlike your boy).

In fact, "my boy" Alex has thousands of more times material and air time out there than your boy Jeff, yet there's a lot more bad facts being found in your boy's output.

Another point is I didn't learn about much of the real history you cite, which you complain "911 truthers" are so obvlivious to, until I saw the truth of 911, that it was an inside job, which made me ask questions and do a lot more research. Ever consider that 911 truth could help people see what you do?

And I didn't call Jeff a "disinfo artist," I believe I've said "disinfo agent." The word "agent" implies it's being done for someone else, for payment, and who could that be? Well who would benefit from disinfo about 911 other than who was behind it? The gobment, that's who.

So for all your thoughtful historical analysis of what our gobment from the time of George Washington has been about it strikes me as strange that you should stick up so passionately for one who seems to run interference for it so well.

"And this is where the truthers make the very biggest of their many mistakes. By obsessing over the mechanics of how this one particular Day in the Empire went down..."

I see, IC, why don't you just come out and say it, you are so close. We make our biggest of our many mistakes by obsessing on the facts.

You continue, we ("911 truthers") are "fractiously calling each other agents of disinformation while looking back to some imaginary time of innocence, they completely ignore the only real question facing us."

What is the real question? After all that buildup, this appears to be the biggest question as you see it:

"Do we continue to acquiesce to the premise of the Empire, that the age-old economy of scarcity, with its built-in mechanisms of manipulation & control, is the only possible organization upon which societies can be built, or do we say, “No, economies of abundance based upon responsible stewardship of the earth’s resources and a reverence for all living things (and the equal worth of every human being) is the model we choose”? No, no; we don’t hear much about that. Instead, we hear about bringing squibs into the courts..."

So that's it. It appears you condemn us for simply seeking 911 truth and justice and not subscribing to your specific political view.

My view is one step at a time. First we get to the bottom of these crimes, remove the criminals, and install safeguards.

Then we determine as a free people what we do. Not have you impose on them your politics or say we're all idiots. If you (or I) did that you'd just be another form of what we have.

What we have is a sophisticated form of slavery. That is what needs to go. What people do when free I can't speak for, but whatever it is it's probably more in their own self-interest than what happens now, and less crimes would happen.

And if you're right about what that is, and maybe you are, there's a better chance your ideas will be adopted, but 911 truth is needed first.

Peace bratha...

3/21/2007 11:12:00 PM  
Blogger iridescent cuttlefish said...

#1 Sniffer,

Well, I think we're still unable to see eye-to-eye on this, even though we appear to have so much in common in our views of the world. I wasn't really defending Jeff so much as expressing myself. Believe it or not, despite the sheer volume & frequency of my expressions here at RI, Jeff has never responded to anything I've written. Nada. Zip. Which is fine; I'm not writing for him, either.

In fact, he and I have somewhat different focuses & backgrounds. He's cautiously curious about the sidereal possibilities of DMT and other entheogens and very suspicious of RAW because of Wilson's "OTO affiliations," while I really like Wilson and have been reading his stuff (oftentimes while very incautiously ingesting fearsome quantities of many flavors of those entheogens of which Jeff has probably never even heard...)

One of the things which Jeff and RAW and I all share is a deep-seated unease with dogma. Now, if you were to say that's ridiculous in light of the dogma I was just spewing regarding the myth of American history, I'd have to respond by saying, no, that's just my take on it.

I'm not really invested in whether or not anyone agrees with my view, since I'd equally appreciate someone widening my horizon and someone finding a level of resonance with what I say.

When you get into this business of labeling different aspects of thought as somehow discrete--this is "history," that part is "politics," etc, my reaction is that the divisions are kind of arbitrary. I know I must sound like some kind of commie agitator to some folks with rants like the one above, but I come to all these conclusions from a very different venue, which I'll try to explain as briefly as I can.

At a relatively young age, before I ever ingested anything alien, I had an experience that can only be talked about in "mystical" terms. One minute I was watching a summer sky fill, right before my startled eyes, with a living wall of cicadas, those 17-year locusts which can sometimes appear to blot out the sun.

Instead of freaking out (they were all over me, in my hair, crawling, scratching) I was suddenly filled with an intense understanding of how those billion bugs were connected with the life in the ground, the life in the air, and then my perspective shifted again and now I saw, in ever greater circles, how all things were connected, intimately, in a constant, rolling sea of creation.

It must have only lasted for a few moments, but the feeling stayed with me for a very long time. I remember hearing someone speak angrily with someone when I was still in this afterglow, and it seemed so...bizarre, pointless. Unnecessary.

Ever since that moment I've been trying to understand why we are so beset by conflict, strife & war, when the truth that we are all the same and have the same basic needs & desires is just so...self-evident. It finally occurred to me at some point that people don't really want conflict & violence but are in fact tricked into it by sick bastards who profit from disharmony, even bloodshed. Soulless, heartless ghouls.

The rest was easy. I mean, you see some red-faced lunatic seething with hatred for some Other, some group or person whom he finds somehow different from himself, and then you find out he's supposed to be a "man of God," well, that's just twisted, eh? And there's so many of them! Sometimes it seems like America is just full of Devils For Jesus or something. And what if their big story were true and the Divine Hippie really did come back? What would all these hate-filled, war-mongering sons-of-bitches do? Hide?

So then you read something like George Kennan's Policy Planning Study 23, with the passage I always quote:

...we have about 50% of the world's wealth but only 6.3% of its population. This disparity is particularly great as between ourselves and the peoples of Asia. In this situation, we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity without positive detriment to our national security. To do so, we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and day-dreaming; and our attention will have to be concentrated everywhere on our immediate national objectives. We need not deceive ourselves that we can afford today the luxury of altruism and world-benefaction.

and it's pretty easy to see what motivates & informs public policy & politics in the US. When you look back, you realize it was always this way, not because there wasn't enough to go around, but because the soulless, heartless ghouls profit from scarcity, misery and discord.


So, from my perspective, 9/11 doesn't really stand out at all. Uncounted millions have suffered and died that the Empire might stand, that the few who get off on watching the horror of what they've brought to pass can "dominate" the lesser humans, as if there were something "eternal" about their time here. What hubris, like owning land or "airspace." Fools.

I suppose it's possible that someone who really grew up believing The Lie--that nature is savage & chaotic, that life is a sea of conflict, that some men are better than others--might have their eyes opened by seeing 9/11 for what it is, but I just don't understand how anyone could have looked at it and thought anything else.

Don't you suppose there are easier ways to teach people about love & harmony than by exposing the dirty tricks of the soulless ones?

3/22/2007 01:53:00 AM  
Blogger illumgotti said...

Turner: Do we have plans to invade the Middle East?
Higgins: Are you crazy?
Turner: Am I?
Higgins: Look, Turner…
Turner: Do we have plans?
Higgins: No. Absolutely not. We have games. That's all. We play games. What if? How many men? What would it take? Is there a cheaper way to destabilize a regime? That's what we're paid to do.
Turner: So Atwood just took the games too seriously. He was really going to do it, wasn't he?
Higgins: A renegade operation. Atwood knew 54/12 would never authorize it, not with the heat on the company.
Turner: What if there hadn't been any heat? Suppose I hadn't stumbled on their plan?
Higgins: Different ballgame. Fact is, there was nothing wrong with the plan. Oh, the plan was all right, the plan would've worked.
Turner: Boy, what is it with you people? You think not getting caught in a lie is the same thing as telling the truth?
Higgins: No. It's simple economics. Today it's oil, right? In ten or fifteen years, food. Plutonium. And maybe even sooner. Now, what do you think the people are gonna want us to do then?
Turner: Ask them.
Higgins: Not now — then! Ask 'em when they're running out. Ask 'em when there's no heat in their homes and they're cold. Ask 'em when their engines stop. Ask 'em when people who have never known hunger start going hungry. You wanna know something? They won't want us to ask 'em. They'll just want us to get it for 'em!
Turner: Boy, have you found a home. There were seven people killed, Higgins.
Higgins: The company didn't order it.
Turner: Atwood did. Atwood did. And who the hell is Atwood? He's you. He's all you guys. Seven people killed, and you play fucking games!
Higgins: Right. And the other side does, too. That's why we can't let you stay outside.

[Turner and Higgins stop in front of The New York Times.]
Turner: They've got all of it.
Higgins: What? What did you do?
Turner: I told them a story. I told 'em a story. You play games; I told 'em a story.
Higgins: Oh, you… you poor, dumb son of a bitch. You've done more damage than you know.
Turner: I hope so.
Higgins: You're about to be a very lonely man. It didn't have to end this way.
Turner: Of course it did.
Higgins: Hey Turner! How do you know they'll print it? You can take a walk… but how far if they don't print it?
Turner: They'll print it.
Higgins: How do you know?

[edit]

3/22/2007 03:39:00 AM  
Blogger illumgotti said...

Jumpin Jesus on a Pogo Stick, there's more posts here than what it takes to fill the Albert Hall.

Forgive me and my Pinot Noir induced post, and if I'm retreading covered ground I duly apologize (especially to Shrub--don't want to get in a piss fight with old shrub, not me, no sir), but has anyone out there seen 3 Days of the Condor? Come on kids, Robert Redford knew what was goin on before I was a little Y chromosome in my Daddy's nut sack.

(From 3 Days Of The Condor, 1975)


Turner: Do we have plans to invade the Middle East?
Higgins: Are you crazy?
Turner: Am I?
Higgins: Look, Turner…
Turner: Do we have plans?
Higgins: No. Absolutely not. We have games. That's all. We play games. What if? How many men? What would it take? Is there a cheaper way to destabilize a regime? That's what we're paid to do.
Turner: So Atwood just took the games too seriously. He was really going to do it, wasn't he?
Higgins: A renegade operation. Atwood knew 54/12 would never authorize it, not with the heat on the company.
Turner: What if there hadn't been any heat? Suppose I hadn't stumbled on their plan?
Higgins: Different ballgame. Fact is, there was nothing wrong with the plan. Oh, the plan was all right, the plan would've worked.
Turner: Boy, what is it with you people? You think not getting caught in a lie is the same thing as telling the truth?
Higgins: No. It's simple economics. Today it's oil, right? In ten or fifteen years, food. Plutonium. And maybe even sooner. Now, what do you think the people are gonna want us to do then?
Turner: Ask them.
Higgins: Not now — then! Ask 'em when they're running out. Ask 'em when there's no heat in their homes and they're cold. Ask 'em when their engines stop. Ask 'em when people who have never known hunger start going hungry. You wanna know something? They won't want us to ask 'em. They'll just want us to get it for 'em!
Turner: Boy, have you found a home. There were seven people killed, Higgins.
Higgins: The company didn't order it.
Turner: Atwood did. Atwood did. And who the hell is Atwood? He's you. He's all you guys. Seven people killed, and you play fucking games!
Higgins: Right. And the other side does, too. That's why we can't let you stay outside.

[Turner and Higgins stop in front of The New York Times.]
Turner: They've got all of it.
Higgins: What? What did you do?
Turner: I told them a story. I told 'em a story. You play games; I told 'em a story.
Higgins: Oh, you… you poor, dumb son of a bitch. You've done more damage than you know.
Turner: I hope so.
Higgins: You're about to be a very lonely man. It didn't have to end this way.
Turner: Of course it did.
Higgins: Hey Turner! How do you know they'll print it? You can take a walk… but how far if they don't print it?
Turner: They'll print it.
Higgins: How do you know?

[edit]

And They Live! And Fight Club! And Speed! JFK! (Have you noticed, every week on the news is like a scene from Born on the Fourth of July. Wtf? Am I the only asshole out here with pattern recognition?)

They taught me, and I went to an urban high school!

Viva las Che T-shirts! Homeopathic Revolution!!!!

3/22/2007 03:46:00 AM  
Blogger illumgotti said...

Uh, I meant urban public school. Fuckin wine--pros and cons.

Keep on keepin on, JW!

(does anyone else have problems typing in the fucking word verification when intoxicated? Holy fuck.)

3/22/2007 03:48:00 AM  
Blogger illumgotti said...

Christ. Sorry for the multiple posts.

Bong hits for Jesus!

3/22/2007 03:51:00 AM  
Blogger neomunk said...

Shit Jeff, I always end up reading your site at 3 AM and it invariably scares the shit out of me. BTW, I live in Concord, NC, a town that shares a border with Kannapolis. I used to live in Kannapolis, until I made the cross town move here, so reading posts from a while back really got my gander up tonight. I hadn't heard a thing about men entering churches, but I'm kind of a hermit.

I -WILL- call up some people I know in Kannapolis and see if I can get any good details second or maybe even first hand. I have quite a few friends in that town, but I've not talked to them recently.

3/22/2007 04:07:00 AM  
Blogger Shrubageddon said...

I love Three Days of The Condor. I've seen it at least five times....the first time was about 1976 when I was 12....it rocked my world...even at that age.

3/22/2007 10:38:00 AM  
Blogger ericswan said...

Shrub..They could drop a comet right in the middle of Merry-Go-Round USA and I'm absolutely sure that it wouldn't be noticed. Take chemtrails for a there you go, I told you so. Nadda. No cognitive process going on here.

IC..I suppose no one here has considered the fact or is it a fiction, that the jet that smashed into the ground in Shanksville was 43 minutes late out of the airport. Critical minutes when you consider that it was supposed to be headed for the Capital Building. The poster from 1974 gets it. Martial law was foiled by a late plane.

3/22/2007 11:27:00 AM  
Blogger Silverfox said...

You see what you want to see...
and you believe what you want to believe...
and you are free to do so...
or so "you think"...

But you do not actually know "how" you think at all. You know nothing about any of the processes that facilitate that thinking, nor any of the actual mechanics that control them.

The sequences that are "naturally" followed, like night follows day, or all the "natural" inputs that automatically trigger them, or the outputs and reactions that are just as automatically tripped and triggered by those.

You do not, nor have you ever seen "reality". What you call and mistakenly believe that to be is no more or less than a "picture of reality" your mind "automatically" creates for you by way of those processes.

You have no idea of the myriad of compartments that are fashioned in your mind, nor how they're variously connected and interconnected in order to file those images and ideas away for safe keeping...and sanity's sake. No real idea of how you even access them or put them back either.

You have no idea about the means by which you test, organize and categorize those ideas and images in order to be able to do just that.

No, no idea at all about how any of those processes work, or how fast, or what happens if they're overpowerered or suddenly overloaded in a way they're simply not and never were designed to handle...hmmm?

Face it, you really haven't got a clue. You merely "think" that nothing can get inside your head without your say-so when instead everything simply pours into your head the moment your eyelids go up and it stays in there untill you eventually become aware of it and are forced to deal or with the pictures your mind will make out of it for you.

You use that mind pretty much like you use your car. You simply know how to drive around with it and that generally gets you where you want to go. Think about that a bit.

Now we don't need to be "mechanics" in order to drive. The corollary of that, which is equally true, is a person doesn't need to know how to drive, or how anyone else drives for that matter, to be a mechanic who can "fix somebody's wagon" for them.

All you need is some momentary "access" to it and the know-how to give it the necessary "tweak".

"Roll" that around in that mind of your's that is driving you anywhere but where you want to go on this topic.

Your mental steering is impaired. Out of allignment. Don't kid yourself simply because you didn't do it and you don't know how that could happen or be possible otherwise. It can, and it has been done...to all of us.

So pay no attention to the flickering idiot light on your mental dashboard that says "Incomprehensible" or "Incredible" or "Illogical" or whatever term your mind uses for that particular hazard.

I'm afraid it's been very much shorted out and simply does that when it comes to anything regarding this topic or anything connected to it in any way.

Don't tell yourself that's impossible. It's not. You've been "taken for a ride" in no uncertain terms. Get used to that idea. You need to if you're ever going to get over what has happened, what's really been done... to you.

The mental road you had to follow was known well in advance. They knew exactly what was necesssary to luridly lure you into the frame of mind, they had in mind, and needless to say, forget about anything and everything else while you were in it. It was "dead simple", as they say.

They knew just how irresistably you'd be drawn in and how all your normal barriers and protections would come down in the emotional involvement of it all; the very real, very large scale human drama they presented to suck you in and then spring the trap.

They knew you'd scarcely be able to keep all your emotions in check with all your psychic doors "wide open", so to speak, as your heart went out to everyone in trouble. While you said your silent prayers and stood your vigil so all those caught up in that horrible morning would have at least one from you to see them through.

They knew exactly how long it would take for the stress of that to peak before it would naturally gear down of its own accord as you began to "accept" or "believe" or "resign" yourself to what you were seeing; and so they pushed the plunger as close to that as break point as they possibly could to break you... and they did...and you didn't see it coming...and now you can't see it going either...because you're simply damaged goods. Can't "accept" or "believe" or "resign" yourself to anything about it.

And just for a liitle extra added insurance, or if you'd paused to look away and missed it, they pushed that second plunger.

The third one later on was just a little "wink" that they couldn't resist while you looked on quite stunned "beyond belief"...hmmm?

Like some two year old with "Oh look Mommy...fall down and go boom..." looping in your mind.

A repeated observation now with nothing to attach it to because your connections had been blown by impacts you had no way to to get out of the way of.

Truly a "poor dear", blinded by those headlights that had patiently awaited your pre-arranged arrival in the darkness of that morning...to catch you head on and then run you over.

Your "Incomprehensible" circuit was majorly fried in place to be activated by anything concerning or connected to that event. And everything has, hasn't it? And it's all been undeniably "Incomprehensible" to you too...hmmm?

The gruesome finale, the big "blow-up" finish that indeed brought "the house down" was really small potatoes compared to the lingering "effect" it was arranged to create.

Devastatingly exploded into and in peoples minds. That was the big number. The whole reason and rationale for the whole deal...but you just don't see it. Still can't see it, in fact.

They may have killed a few thousand but they compromised untold millions of minds who as a consequence do not know what to believe about it nor anything else attached to it because of the "effect" it had on them. Why they cannot even bring themselves to believe they've been affected, nor do I suspect can most of you.

How sweet can it really get? Well it gets even sweeter when you consider that all the really decent folks, the ones who really and genuinely care more about others than anyone else, the "do-gooders", those "first responders" in matters of conscience, the ones that tirelessly interfere and meddle to no end with all the fine folks who produced and sponsored this exravaganza, they got hit the very hardest of all. They were the "ground zero" you can't even recognise for being in it yourself.

It'll take them the longest to clean up their mental debris and try and get their act together again, if they ever do. So it's very much clear sailing, as they say.

And "The Truth", as Jack Nicholson fatuously declared, is something you really can't handle at all. Don't want to touch, with a ten foot pole. Get sick to your stomach the minute you entertain even a sideways glance somewhere in that general diection.

Of course it's a perfectly, patently, outrageously, and screamingly obivious truth and you, in your damaged state, simply tell yourself it just can't possibly be... why...why... it's just "too obvious"...isn't it???

Now you really do need to believe what I'm telling you. To stop the effect that is interfering with your reason and messing you up as you fruitlessly try to reason around it.

To protect yourself from the monsters who are right in front of your eyes, holding all the cards, and laughing at you all the way to the bank.

Now a few months before the mysterious "morning in question" the security firm that had no less than the baby brother of the "Dubious Great Decider" himself as one of its Senior Directors, decided that those "buildings in question" they managed under contract, (a contract, incidentally, that was to expire the very day before the buildings themselves expired in the incident), apparently needed an "upgrade in their security".

You ought to be able to see the delightfully perverse irony of that considering the upsy-daisy lingo of our adversary also delights in using.

Accordingly, for a period lasting about two weeks "the buildings in question" were without any security at all, as with its own doors typically wide-open, miles of original wiring and cameras were stripped and carted out and miles of new wiring and some "rad new gear" was taken inside and installed, shall we say, from their tops to to their very bottoms...hmmm?

A little "too obvious" for you, I suspect? As no doubt the fact that the same security firm handled the "two airports in question" as well that had something "Icomprehensible" happen that they can't quite put their finger on either that most strange morning.

Now I've given something to think about in the way that you think about things. The rest is up to you.

3/22/2007 12:22:00 PM  
Blogger Shrubageddon said...

Silverfox,

Who are you addressing when you sau "you?"

3/22/2007 12:44:00 PM  
Blogger iridescent cuttlefish said...

Hey Shrub (and Mark, wherever you've gone...),

I meant to call your attention back to the last thread on more time. I didn't realize you guys had responded again, and when I finally looked there again late last night, I saw that you had both missed something. I know it's very strange that both Black & Honda would have to be so circumspect about this, but considering the forces with whom they're intercoursing, it's not really all that surprising.

Briefly, then, here's the deal. In the next phase of Honda's FCX decentralized energy system, there is no natural gas involved anymore. When Black talks about converting to solar, he's talking about the natural gas. No infrastructure. No petro-politics (well, as soon as the other suppressed science I've been on about forever floats to the surface--"missing formulas" my ass.)

Anyway, go back to that last thread and see what I mean. This time something really is hidden in plain sight.


And lastly, again, are any of you Truthers gonna take me up on my rhetorical proposition--how exactly would Mr. Scalia and the other Hooded Ones process your request for Justice? The same way such a request would have been processed in that other decider-driven country?

3/22/2007 01:16:00 PM  
Blogger #1 Sniffer said...

Silverfox: My hat’s off to you. I am in awe of your facts and analysis though the tone strikes me one of an insider rubbing salt on the wounds of the afflicted, seemingly to further cement the effects of that fateful morning that you describe with such skill even a Jeff might be envious, by saying in effect it’s all worse than we thought (true) and that therefore there is no hope (false).

However your profound insights do not take into account a growing body of sob’s like me who’re figuring this shit out and are ready to band together with ropes in hand to take these motherfuckers on (excuse my French).

3/22/2007 02:51:00 PM  
Blogger ericswan said...

And now for something completely different. THE BIG PICTURE..NOT MY WORK BUT THE AUTHOR WON'T MIND...

they are using the underground mountains in tmt experiments

and yeah, the planet is being reformed, we will be lucky if they dont
totally wipe us out

seen this?

http://neworleans.indymedia.org/news/2006/06/7898.php

notice the line coming from great lakes to madrid fault....very
bad....happening regularly now, i think they are going to create new
rivers across the usa utilizing the mt st helens/yellowstone caldera
happenings....regular tec action around oak ridge and highly unusual
too

-----------------------------------
some past work here:

ENMOD and Earthquakes

GLOBAL WARMING IS JUST ONE PART OF A FARCE WHOSE TRUE PURPOSE IS TO SECRETLY
DEPLOY ENVIRONMENTAL MODIFICATION SCIENCE TO MELT THE ICE CAPS (oil and
mineral wealth galore!) AND TO TERRORIZE ANY COUNTRY WHO WILL NOT GET IN
LINE WITH THE CULT OF DEATH WHICH THE NWO IS.....



Bearden Described The Working of TMTs (Tesla Magnifying Transmitters):

They will go through anything. What you do is set up a standing wave through
the Earth and the molten core of the Earth begins to feed that wave (We are
talking Tesla now). When you have that standing wave, you have set up a
triode. What you've done is that the molten core of the earth is feeding the
energy and its like your signal--that you are putting in--is gating the gate
of a triode....then what you do is that you change the frequency. If you
change the frequency one way (dephase it) you dump the energy up in the
atmosphere beyond the point on the other side of the earth that you focused
upon. You start ionising the air, you can change the weather flow patterns
(Jet streams etc)--you can change all that--if you dump it gradually---real
gradually--you influence the heck out of the weather...its a great weather
machine. If you dump it sharply, you don't get a little ionization like
that...you will get fireballs and flashes (Plasma & Earthquakes) that will
come down on the surface of the earth...you can cause enormous weather
changes over entire regions by playing that thing back and forth....

-------------------

Countdown To 2012 OR Melting the Ice Caps with Nazi
Technology...rendezvous with comets are becoming quite the rage these
days, no?



I have become preoccupied with relativity again, and its corner of the
multiverse; ie. if a ship left here at even a fraction of the
speed-of-light 100,000 years ago, it could conceivably return with the
same crew, or close descendents of the same crew, anytime. To them
only a few centuries might have passed, but to us 100,000 years.

I imagine they are not going to be too happy about the moon. Quite
truthfully, not only is the whole solar system in a shambles, but we
have been out of touch. And as we already know, racially, we are just
lucky to be alive. A total fluke. Whatever took out number 1 planet
(probably a swarm but may have been an inside job) took out the whole
shebang, except for this, the dedicated and optimized AGRICULTURAL
planet.

The GARDEN silly!

Arktos. Oh Yeahhhhhhh....

This Earth/Gaia was macro-engineered then positioned and maintained in
its traverse with a system of scalar interferometers we call pyramids
today. A measure of our devo is that most still think these engines of
vastness were crypts! La Sepultura indeed. They were copied early on
and some were indeed crypts but its very easy to see the difference
between the 4th world work, and the primitives.

This planet circled the sun a perfect 360 degrees with one full
rotation per day. Our deviation of 5.25 days equals about 80-100
thousand years without maintenance, I think. And the moons orbit is so
perturbed it causes TIDES, and thats scary as hell.

Scary as HELL.

Especially considering the moon is not really solid. It was a
planetoid created and dedicated to storing the product of this planet,
again, the Garden, utilizing the near absolute zero of space. There
are pyramids there too. See this link:

http://keithlaney.net/Ahiddenmission/A17HMp1.html

So the moon was storage for our interplanetary empire and perhaps our
interstellar empire as well. Oh we have so much work to do and the
devo leaders are warring for oil and practicing death magick and
voodoo. Somebody give bush and blair a bone for their noses, please.
And Gotts Rottweiler, oh isnt he something? How about that sceptre of
his? It rather says it all, I guess.

I have never been so embarassed in all my lives. It is simply
mortifying, this state of events, and dangerous too.

There is evidence this planet here was hit pretty badly at the same
time as all the others, but was large enough to keep its atmosphere
and water, unlike the red planet, flayed of its skin, ejecting a two
kilometer thick piece of its crust from the opposite side of the
planet where the bolide hit. And taking the atmosphere and water with
it when it went, WHOOSH -- creating the deepest known valley in the
solar system, and bulging the entire opposite side of the planet too,
forming giant cracks where it almost came apart. Bad. Bad. Very bad.
It is inconceivable that an interplanetary race could allow that to
happen. Thats why I think it could have been an inside job.

I mean, just look us now for crying out loud. It does not take
Einstein to see just how badly broken an organism we are as a whole,
when weighed against these revelations. Look around yourselves
children. Wake UP!

Then there is the Periodicity -- yes -- periodicity, of certain
celestial objects, that gain not only astronomers close attention, but
technology hoarders too: guys who make Indiana Jones look like Charlie
The Tuna. Yes there is treasure everywhere, and these types already
know a LOT from things which have not only been retrieved, but are in
fact quite prolific if you look for them. These fishy characters know
that indeed, treasure can even fall right out of the sky, and I am not
referring to conventional meteors either.

Heads Up!

In our present human-racial state of whistling past the graveyard and
totally oblivious, we are the spiritual equivalents of the naked
savage sacrificing coconuts to propitiate the lightening and thunder
gods. Some here have even made idol of an instrument of torture! Hows
THAT for DEVO? Gotts Rottweiler just a case in point.

The best we can hope is that our present state of affairs was not
something OTHER than freak cataclysm, or feudal warfare run amok. Oh
we had best hope that for sure. Think 2012. Think Periodic Comet. Lots
of Comet Rendezvous in the news these days, no? Expect heightened
space activity. If you look up at night you will see it has already
begun.

With satellite EPT (Earth Penetrating Tomography), which is like the
most gigantic metal detector ever, deep caches are being discovered
and there is supposedly an excavation going on now by a military unit
in the middle east -- probably more than one -- for just this reason,
to retrieve technology left over from the world before this one, when
we were interplanetary at least. Some of the bombs developed are to
help excavate.

So.

The hall of records below the sphinx did nothing but whet the
appetites of these Indiana-Tuna types, and, like some other caches
recovered down the last two millennia (plusplus), has created a
Crusade to retrieve and hoard as much as can be gotten in a short
amount of time. These kind of treasure hunts are covered up with wars.

At least most of this ancient technology which has been retrieved in
the last 2000 years is still in one place. Like the huge antennae that
was found inside the great pyramid around 600-700 AD, and pictured
graphically on certain of the Byzantine conage from that era (See my
personal pics).

Trouble is all that technology is not of much use to anybody except
the superstitious and the insane. Just the knowledge though, that
something is possible, is halfway or more to the actuality. Be careful
and as always, Good Luck.


The second part of this great treasure hunt which you are paying for
but do not even know is going on -- the type of treasure hunt covered
up with war I mean -- is this:

The people in charge have made up a funny (hilarious actually) story
about global warming, but the reality is that they WANT global
warming, and they want, in fact, to literally melt the ice caps. Done
deal, to tell the truth. hitler beast wanted to do it, but alas, his
type are so backward and superstitious in their thinking they can
never keep their thievery going very long. For example, hitler beast
adopted the swastika as his super-real and God Given symbol, but the
swastika simply represents a periodic comet, called a pheasant tailed
comet. Which explains why it appears all across the world in many
times and cultures. hitler beast dug up a representation of it on one
of his treasure hunts or in his research, and imbued it with purpose
and importance and yes, horror, poor idiot chimpanzee-in-a-uniform
that he was.

The lines in the sky and all the antennae are not for cell phones, as
some have been told, they are for weather control and behaviour
modification. To melt the ice caps, and to keep people from noticing,
health be hanged. Think Morgellons. Think Mutations. Think Glioma and
other cancers. In Australia 2007, passive smoking will be illegal, but
passive microwave radiation will be mandatory!

So the ice caps are being melted, and there are gold and diamonds
there, and a lot more. A LOT more. If you are interested about what is
actually under the ice in Antarctica, read Graham Hancocks book
FINGERPRINTS OF THE GODS, and also take a good long gander at that
ultimate scrap of a treasure map (which somehow escaped the hoarders)
The Peri Reis Map of 1513. Oh yes, that is enlightening indeed.

3/22/2007 03:05:00 PM  
Blogger just_another_dick said...

"unlike the red planet, flayed of its skin, ejecting a two
kilometer thick piece of its crust from the opposite side of the
planet where the bolide hit. And taking the atmosphere and water with
it when it went"

Or not.


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A spacecraft orbiting Mars has scanned huge deposits of water ice at its south pole so plentiful they would blanket the planet in 36 feet of water if they were liquid, scientists said on Thursday.

As far as the ejected crust invention, I think it's actually the Earth that's missing a bit of crust.

SANTA CRUZ DE TENERIFE, Canary Islands --British scientists have embarked on a mission to study a huge area on the Atlantic seabed where the Earth's crust is mysteriously missing and instead is covered with dark green rock from deep inside the planet.

The 12-member expedition to take an unprecedented peek at Earth's mantle left the Canary Islands on Monday with a new high-tech vessel and a robotic device named Toby that will dig up rock samples at the site and film what it sees.

The main site -- there is at least one other in roughly the same area and a third is suspected -- is about three miles below the surface of the Atlantic and located about 2,000 nautical miles southwest of the Canaries.

It is part of a globe-spanning ridge of undersea volcanos, the kind of structure that forms when Atlantic tectonic plates separate and lava surges upward to fill the gap in the Earth's crust.

But that apparently did not happen this time. Where there should be a four-mile-thick layer of crust, there is instead that much mantle -- the very dense, dark green rock that makes up the deep inner layer of the Earth.

Scientists have seen chunks of mantle that have been spewed up with lava, but never such a large, exposed stretch.

"It is like a window into the interior of the Earth," Bramley Murton, a geophysicist who is taking part in the six-week mission, said Tuesday from the research ship RRS James Cook as it headed to the site, still five days away.

This exposed layer is irregularly shaped, about 30 miles long and perhaps that distance or more at its widest. It was detected about five years ago with sonar from a surface vessel.

3/22/2007 04:12:00 PM  
Blogger Kosan said...

Oh, I see, IC (or is it Icee?), now
the lord of the locusts, a.k.a.
lord of the flies, a.k.a.
lord of the lies.

In the words of Robert de Niro, speaking to
Billy Crystal in Analyze this!

“You’re good, you.”

Well, not really good.... but very very bad.

But, like Bobby said:

“You got a gift, you.”

Yes you do.

The gift of gab.

You wouldn’t by any chance be Irish, would you?

And very, very, very small?

One of the wee ones?

The little people?

Green, not like an environmentalist or a Martian,
but more like a leprechaun?

Or maybe you’re one o’ them, what you call it, a
silver tongued devil.

Not necessarily Eblis, the Great Satan, himself,

but just one of his truth-twisting, false meme spewing minions.

Like Screwtape’s nephew, only more experienced and skillful.

Of course Jeff has never responded to you on the blog.

He doesn’t have to. You sit right next to one another in some
drab grey office building working for a company like this.

You two can share a Coke and a smile any time :)

3/22/2007 04:19:00 PM  
Blogger Shrubageddon said...

Richard,

You have your rope in hand, don't you?

Also, did you notice the key word hijacking employed by these scientists. I mean, some on, how transparent can these Bastards be? Obviously, "Toby" refers to Kunta Kinte in the book, and later made for TV movie, Roots. They are subliminally rubbing salt in our wounds by referring to us as slaves. Also, who authored Roots? That's right, it was Alex Halely, thus implying Hale-Bopp Comet and Heaven's Gate...meaning the Kingdom of Heaven is almost upon us, but it will come from below, rather than above.

3/22/2007 04:25:00 PM  
Blogger Shrubageddon said...

An update on the St. Patty's Day card....it was from our the couple we know there....the male of the heterosexual relationship. He is a bit peculiar.....much like myself...and he is Irish....I had forgotten.

So, I owe a big apology to the spooks. It was wrong of me to falsely accuse you...so please...go back to your business of murder and deceit. God's Speed be with you.

What's the World's record for the duration of Coitus? Is it held by Vizier Fitra? Never underestimate the importance of interlocking skeletal structures in prolonged Coitus...let alone if you have to piss, shit, or pass gas.

3/22/2007 04:35:00 PM  
Blogger Sounder said...

Silverfox, I left a message in your PM box.

3/22/2007 05:06:00 PM  
Blogger #1 Sniffer said...

Speaking of spooks, God bless’em! They who must often wear many hats just for our sakes. They work so hard but underneath it are so human, so like the rest of us, such imperfect shits that their weaknesses, for example their well, uh, arrogance, makes them so blind and error prone, which is why among the professions they get trapped so often. What hope they give us!

3/22/2007 05:50:00 PM  
Blogger Silverfox said...

Well Shrubster...

I do not particularly wish to know how you, or anyone else, reads the "you" of it, be it for themselves personally or perhaps as nothing more than a straightforward message for some other "you" that they can perhaps hopefully see in the same light as I have in writing it for any who come this way. Beyond that they are always free, as are you, to simply disregard it.

There are obviously an extraordinary number of people to which it applies, any one of which may chance to be and see it here. That is the "you" I wrote it for.

The matter of how we autmatically process images and merrily roll along on the wheels of our minds without a care for what has to go on "under the hood", so to speak, is a long overdue entry and relates to more discussions than just this. A seed if you will that also needed planting.

The matters I've stated are as I know and see them. I have enough knowledge and experience of architecture and engineering, not to mention airplanes, to not waste time with suppositions that are pure fabricated nonsense.

A non-starter from every possible angle. The only reason anyone might cling to that idea is to desperately avoid any additional and unmanageable shocks for them over and above what was already too much in seeing the towers utterly destroyed without the further ones that they were intentionally blown up and the even more horrible and shocking implications and revelations that have to be faced the moment they accept that. Either that or they're clearly on the "other side".

I'm entirely sympathetic to those hoping to avoid any more shocks, but they need to see the root of it and the post is directed towards that end.

The WTC were quite remarkable structures. The strongest elements were their massively reinforced cores and the sheer faces of the buildings themselves with the weight of the floors distributed evenly between them. The holes the planes made in those exteriors were insignificant to say the very least.

The one that ploughed in most directly cut through several floors to begin with and even if both engines had actually penetrated the core any holes they might make would have been far too small to have weakened it. The other missed completely hitting the corner.

It's also beyond reason to suggest any explosion outside of those cores could have affected them. Nor fire alone inside or out. You couldn't build better and more fireproof blast bunkers if you tried.

The towers each dissappeared in a massive blast that completely pulverized them. Blew them and everything and anyone in them completely to bits and there is simply no other way around that. None!

Everyone knows this at some level. Truly it's a terrible thing. An awesome thing. A horribly and utterly frightening thing...and of course, it was meant to be just that. Had a motive and a means and an opportunity to being just that that also goes well beyond it.

So too do all the little horrors that have subsequently followed in reinforcing that initial shock.

Fear and ignorance, pretended or otherwise has no use beyond delaying a truth that grows ever more terrible with that delay. It has to faced fairly and squarely.

3/22/2007 05:56:00 PM  
Blogger Sounder said...

Good to see you coming out of your shell, Silverfox.

3/22/2007 06:27:00 PM  
Blogger tazmic said...

"This planet circled the sun a perfect 360 degrees with one full
rotation per day"

Heheh. I love that, very funny.

3/22/2007 06:58:00 PM  
Blogger iridescent cuttlefish said...

Vizier Kabir,

So where did I offend ye, Laddie? Putting 9/11 in its place? Blasting the icons at Rushmore? Or was it maybe my epiphany among the locusts? Of course I'm Irish (isn't everyone?) and Black Irish to boot, but I'm thinking the honeyed speech sticks in your craw for some reason. Since you sound so much like our many-faced Mojo, even unto the sneering disdain of the superior Enlightened One so curiously mixed with the more plebian "drab grey office building," I'll have to proceed on that hunch...so what's your beef, anyway? Was your umbrage kindled by anything in particular I said, or is it just that personal sort of antipathy you've always fely toward me? Tell me brother, that I might learn. (I don't need to remind you of the obligation of the bodisattva again, do I?)

ericswan,

I love that Four Ages of Man stuff. Have you read this little gem that I found following that rainbow of a link you submitted?

Tolkien at the End of Time: Alchemical Secrets of The Lord of the Rings, by Jay Weidner and Sharron Rose.

Our contention is that Tolkien somehow, someway had personal knowledge of the pre-history of our planet and the extraordinary fact that at this point in time, human history is moving irrevocably towards the end of what is known by the mystics from many of the world's great spiritual traditions as the Fourth Age of Humanity, just as The Lord of the Rings relates the story of the end of the Third Age of Middle-earth. In this context you will not only come to understand the fundamental story that is being told to us, the mytho-poeic story and its relevance to our lives, but also why Tolkien time and time again insisted that The Lord of the Rings is not an allegory.

I'm buying it so far...

3/22/2007 08:35:00 PM  
Blogger heath said...

Indeed, Silverfox! I am also in awe of your contribution here.

It all really was that obvious!!

The videos of the second plane hitting say so much. However fast she was going into the tower, the tower stands there and takes it, unflinchingly stoic. I'm sure actually being inside offered a completely different viewpoint, but from a distance, it was clear. Nobody was predicting its failure.

It shouldn't have fallen. Definitely not so neatly, completely.

None of the three towers should have fallen!

The collapses ARE the most damning visceral evidence, which is THE hook. Someone not so interested in 9/11 is not going to be made interested through flight school investigating, or money trails.

Most people are not familiar with WTC7's collapse. Show people the collapse. If you introduce correctly, it can have pretty much the effect Silverfox described so eloquently above, but the reverse impact. Then, with your peer's attention focused, you follow with the hard facts unconnected with the inherently unprovable CD (but who knows, maybe one day).

Watching the towers fall tells us all, they weren't supposed to fall.

3/22/2007 08:39:00 PM  
Blogger heath said...

I like to ask friends if I can 'perform a relatively painless experiment' on them, then I show four videos, and ask them to tell me the difference between the four videos. Three which are undeniably controlled demolitions, and one of WTC7 collapsing.

They almost never guess the difference. Then I Jowenko their asses ;)

Let's at least say that they are all flabbergasted at this point.

That's when I start describing the various money trails, the flight school connections, the stymied investigations (worth noting that most people are not so aware of all the previous warnings received by our government that have come to light since 9/11), the behavior of our government since 9/11 as it correlates, to me, to 9/11.

If we're still bullshitting after all this (some can only take so much for a first dose
), then I tell them that I am most afraid of the police state that evolving technology is affording our 'benevolent' leaders. REAL ID, microwave crowd control, robot soldiers roaming someone's streets within 5 years, be it Iraq or US.

IMPORTANT: Please be completely considerate. Nobody takes it lightly when you challenge their world view. KEEP IT LIGHT (if ever there were an oxymoron!)

3/22/2007 09:16:00 PM  
Blogger Kosan said...

Icee, you are as Irish as Sigmund Freud.

And about as honest.*

Bodhisattva? You mean the kind that's spelt s-a-y-a-n-i-m?

Oh, sorry, didn't mean to tread on your credentials. I forgot that you are a highly trained professional.

**(Read Geoffry M. Masson's The Assault on Truth for further details.)

And baby Shwubbie, you old psychopath you, what's the matter? Does it hurt that they named a movie after you, at your wife's suggestion:

Gone in 60 Seconds

They were probably being quite generous in spotting you about three quarters of a minute, at that.

Wottsamatta U, Stubbie, a.k.a. self-admitted Kelly Popma?

Lost your oh so mighty sense o' humor?

Or was it just an expense of humus?

Does kinda stank like old dirt.

Just slumming witcha.

3/22/2007 10:05:00 PM  
Blogger Shrubageddon said...

Nobody was predicting its failure.

That's simply not true....just as surely as I predicted Mojo wasn't leaving, I predicted the towers were going to collapse....true story...cross my heart and hope to die. The VP of Human Resources for the Bush Connected Company I was employed with at the time kept saying it all didn't matter....that Bush would still be reelected in 2004...and, of course, he was right...but how bizarre...people jumping from the towers and all he can think about, or talk about was how this was not going to affect Bush's chance for a second term.

Another guy kept saying it's 911..like call 911, it's an emergency....he said it at least 25 times and no one would listen to him...or acknowledge him except me. I hadn't thought about it until he mentioned it.

One of the other Directors told his people to get back to work...that they were being unproductive....I kept wondering if he would react the same way if there was a Nuclear War...ignore the Mushroom Cloud outside your window and your colleague's eyeballs melting down his cheeks....we're not being productive...and we need to be productive until we are no longer breathing....notice I didn't say until we are no longer sentient.

3/22/2007 10:13:00 PM  
Blogger Vemrion said...

Wait wait wait.

I'm late to this thread, but can somebody tell me what the hell Jeff is talking about? How does talking about CD take away from the many valid points of inquiry Jeff mentioned, such as al-Qaeda and war games and Sibel Edmonds?

It almost seems as if Jeff is telling us NOT to look into the CD question. I'm used to getting the "nothing to see here, move along" line from the mainstream media... not so much from RigInt.

Look, you have your "favorite" part of 9/11 and I have mine. For those of us who talk to the unititated about this stuff it's good to know about every angle of the operation.

But good luck convincing your dear uncle JimBob about 9/11 using Ptech and some Saudi businessmen's claims about being Dick Cheney's friend (yeah, those Saudi's are so trustworthy), which proves exactly nothing. Meanwhile, Uncle JimBob has seen those towers collapse with his own eyes - it's something he can latch on to. Your third-hand stories of terrorists granted visas will thrill, I'm sure, but they can only help to paint the big picture.

Honestly, are people reading the same post I am? I question every part of the official story, and for this I am labeled a dupe, a disinfo agent, a racist (?) and a moron. What the fuck?!

I'm going to pass this off as Jeff's contrarian nature and him being a little peeved about losing his hipster cachet to a bunch of johnny-come-latelys who only wanna talk about explosions.

But while we're mocking each other for believing things that the authorities promulgate, you might want to check out the only man who successfully predicted the collapse of both towers: Mark Loizeaux, the president of Controlled Demolition Incorporated. If you read his tale, you'll see he blames the collapse on paper fires. That's almost as ridiculous as Jeff's explaination, the one he cribbed from a 3rd grader: planes hit building. buildings go boom.

Yeah, just like when John Kennedy was shot in the head, but his head exploded 40 minutes later. Oh wait, the Kennedy hit was realistic in comparison to 9/11 ... but neither were "The Real Thing".

I'll take 40 years of "back and to the left" over despair and hopelessness, thanks.

3/22/2007 10:15:00 PM  
Blogger Shrubageddon said...

Gone in 60 Seconds

Never heard of it.....it didn't happen to star Jamie Lee Coitus, did it? Please have the Coitusy of letting us know.

Anyhow, apparently Vizier Fitra did (meaning temporarily) hold the record for the longest duration of coitus and the partner with whom he had a perfect skeletal match was none other than his pet toy poodle, Sam Hill. He was disqualified when it was later determined that Sam Hill (bless his heart) passed from this life after the first hour, or so.....it goes. Law Enforcement is still searching for Vizzier Fitra on charges of bestial necrophilia....as of this date Vizier is still on the lamb (haha...still on the lamb...get it...on the lamb...haha).

3/22/2007 10:31:00 PM  
Blogger Kosan said...

Schlub,

If you were anything other than a lame afterthought, I might care....

But you aren't.

And I don't.





Btw, did your mum or dad ever use the word "mistake" when talking about you?

3/22/2007 11:24:00 PM  
Blogger the author said...

Jeff,

You keep pounding away at the issue of the towers and of the people who insist on getting to the bottom of it. What gives? Why do you seem so interested in marginalizing certain lines of inquiry?

Nothing is more central to a crime than the crime scene, the crime weapon, and physical evidence in general. Any homicide detective on a murder case who ignored the crime scene, the body, the murder weapon, the bullets, the casings, the security video of the murder itself, and eyewitness accounts, in favor of mere speculation about motives would be laughed out of town.

Motives, financial and otherwise, are not at odds with evidence such as the building collapses. They are both indispensible. The existence of al Qaeda and their use by persons and factions "inside the beltway" are not mututally exclusive; they're both part of the story, as Alex Jones (one of the guys you have it in for) often points out. The evidence of worldwide links pre-9/11 between U.S. intel and the shadowy netherworld is of course important, but no more so than carefully examinig the events of 9/11 itself.

If the collapses of three skyscrapers, only two of which were hit by planes , were not central to 9/11, what is? The collapses of 1 and 2 were the deadliest incidents of that day. These collapses were totally unprecedented in world history. (Although a bombing of the WTC, with inside involvement from the U.S. government, is precedented -- it happened in 1993.) The official account of how and why the towers collapsed is laughable. The reason why many truthseekers are focusing on the demolitions is because they are the elephant in the middle of the room that everybody, including perhaps yourself, would like to wish away.

I've seen many penetrating insights from you, but you seem to be getting hung up here. Skepticism would be one thing, but what I see coming from you is more closed-mindedness -- a congealing of a certain version of The Truth in your mind, with no sign that you have considered, or intend to carefully consider all the evidence. That's not helping the cause of truth.

-- africkinamerican

3/22/2007 11:40:00 PM  
Blogger the author said...

Everyone in the MSM made a big deal of Tim McVeigh visiting (and being uninvited from) a few militia groups, but no one points out that he started his career in the U.S. Army.

Similarly, the outstanding feature of the "hijackers" and others in the al-Qaeda rogues' gallery are not their jihadist credentals -- those, in fact, seem pretty poor, since jihadists don't snort coke, visit strip clubs, etc. -- but their impeccable credentials as U.S. intelligence assets. Therefore it's not hard to believe that they were Arab Lee Harvey Oswalds. Just like Oswald they were recruited by "us" and set up with elaborate legends, with crude and ineffective weapons which later would be used as evidence that they fired the Magic Bullet that brought down three towers (by only hitting two) and miraculously aimed an airliner straight into the Pentagon, without so much as disturbing the Pentagon lawn.

3/22/2007 11:59:00 PM  
Blogger the author said...

Everyone in the MSM made a big deal of Tim McVeigh visiting (and being uninvited from) a few militia groups, but no one points out that he started his career in the U.S. Army.

Similarly, the outstanding feature of the "hijackers" and others in the al-Qaeda rogues' gallery are not their jihadist credentals -- those, in fact, seem pretty poor, since jihadists don't snort coke, visit strip clubs, etc. -- but their impeccable credentials as U.S. intelligence assets. Therefore it's not hard to believe that they were Arab Lee Harvey Oswalds. Just like Oswald they were recruited by "us" and set up with elaborate legends, with crude and ineffective weapons which later would be used as evidence that they fired the Magic Bullet that brought down three towers (by only hitting two) and miraculously aimed an airliner straight into the Pentagon, without so much as disturbing the Pentagon lawn.

3/23/2007 12:00:00 AM  
Blogger Kosan said...

R.I.P. Tupper Saucy (d. March 16, 2007) age 70, who wrote:

"The world is terribly wicked and deceitful, so the Christian disciple expects grisly deceptions in all social communication, even human sacrifice disguised as acts of terror committed by a mysterious villainy. Perhaps the most ambitious, and most ineptly performed, of this generation's deceptions was the 9-11 2001 "attack" on New York and the Pentagon. You must studiously ignore mountains of hard evidence to the contrary in order to believe the dogma that a gaggle of inept suicidal Muslim fanatics conquered the impenetrable American aeronautical infrastructure long enough to bring down a number of New York skyscrapers and pierce the indomitable Pentagon.

Truth is, without something like 9-11, it would have been impossible for an American president to ask his people to divest themselves of constitutionally secured rights, along with hundreds of billions in purchasing power to expand his bureaucracy at home and, while he's at it, forcefully restructure governments abroad. 9-11 made the impossible happen. And now, four years into the impossible, we're benefitting from the economic system spawned by the deception. Minds that love fiction more than truth have been shaped by a lie that will not be undone, and in this life the real perps will go unpunished. It's biblical: get used to it.

The London bombings of July 2005, which created the largest crime scene in English history, appear to have been designed by the same team. Consider the facts. One day beforehand, the British were against the war on terror, the Ministry of Defense had announced it was drafting plans to pull British armed forces out of Iraq and Afghanistan, while Tony Blair's government enjoyed a less than 15% approval rating. Eight of the world's leading nations had just gathered in a summit meeting in Gleneagles, Scotland. G-8 had been forecast to be confrontational. In the opening session, Blair was seeking common ground between his American allies and the EU nations. Suddenly word came of the blasts and carnage. Blair was rushed to London where he inaugurated, with Churchillian hero-speak, the UK's determination to prevail over terrorism. The bombings simply checkmated all opposition to the war on terror. To be against the war now is to be against England.

The bombings also changed attitudes at G-8. Murdo MacLeod wrote in The Scotsman that "No one could now appear to be the bad guy... [or] allow themselves to be seen to humiliate Blair in his own country in the wake of such a tragedy." The bombings motivated "the so-called sherpas ~ government fixers who pave the way for agreement when their leaders gather ~ into overdrive," wrote MacLeod, "using the myriad rooms of the Gleneagles Hotel to reconstitute disagreements into compromises... A failure to make some sort of agreement would be seen as a victory for terrorism."

The ease with which disaster improved a government's fortunes made me think of Martin Luther King's assassination on April 4, 1968. Weeks earlier, the unpopular and dictatorial Civil Rights Bill of 1968 had lost most of its steam in the House of Representatives. Suddenly, King was shot; six days later the bill swept through the House 249 to 171, and Lyndon Johnson signed it into law on April 11th. The April 19th issue of Time magazine noted, "King's death immediately realigned forces on both sides." Of course, evidence produced over the decades acquits James Earl Ray of the assassination for which he died in prison. This same evidence discloses a plot developed by the rulers of evil, in which Ray was an unaware pawn. I knew James Earl Ray, and edited and published his autobiography, "Tennessee Waltz," which you can purchase at http://www.tuppersaussy.com/html/store/museum%20bookstore.html

We're talking about military operations here, and don't forget the U.S. President is a General whose official title is Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces. Generals go to school on Sun-Tzu, the oriental strategist whose writings were first published in a western language by the Papacy's war-makers, the Jesuits, in 1772. Sun-Tzu said that the wise general must deceive his own soldiers, his own people, sometimes even the sovereign he serves, and expose them to dangers and suffering in order to achieve the greater victory for the kingdom.

Sun-Tzu's most highly prized weapon is the ruse, an action intended to deceive. For the deciphering of ruses, the world has been trained to depend upon media journalism ~ investigative reporting. How would American voters have discovered the Nixon administration's policy of deception if not for Bernstein and Woodward? Once they felt secure that eagle-eyed journalists were tracking corruption in all levels of government, Americans let down their guard.

The legend of fearless journalism persists, even though most journalists today seem to be afraid of their own shadow. Reporters, like the rulers they're believed to be monitoring, must subscribe to the dogma. They must conform to the official line on disasters ~ that Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK by firing three shots at him from the back and one from the front. They must pretend satisfaction that the evidence buried in the government's furtive demolition of the Murrah Building would have produced no evidence that the damage was done by state-of-the-art devices planted strategically throughout the building rather than Tim McVeigh's hokey fertilizer bomb. They must pretend to believe that a Boeing 757 squeezed itself into the Pentagon through a hole smaller than the aircraft's diameter and then vanished ~ engines, aluminum, passengers, crew, hijackers, black box, baggage, everything ~ into thin air.

But let William Rodriguez start talking about his experience on 9-11 and Fearless Journalist is struck blind, deaf, and dumb. If you know Rodriguez' plight, you didn't hear it through VNS. In case you haven't heard, Rodriguez was the WTC janitor on duty in the basement at ground zero the morning of 9-11. Moments before the jetliner crashed into the north tower, Rodriquez heard and felt explosions rock the basement sub-levels. He says walls were cracking around him. Moments before the crash in the sky. Before, get it? Among the many people he rescued was Felipe David, who was severely burned by the basement explosions. Felipe heard and felt the explosions before the upper crash.

Rodriguez was cited for his heroism, but his factual testimony offends government. There cannot have been sub-basement explosions before the jetliner hit the 90th floor. This ruins the government's and fearless journalism's scenario of lone-nut jetliners.

"During the 9-11 hearings," said Rodriguez, "NBC brought a crew out to my house and spent a day taping my story but they never did air a word of it. Since then, some reporters and commentators have subtly warned me to keep quiet, told me my life could be in jeopardy and warned me that I really didn’t understand who I was dealing with."

Note that it was reporters and commentators who warned Rodriguez to keep quiet. So all the more reason for rulers to remind us that fearless journalism is still the American way. Ergo, the jailing of Judith Miller for refusing to reveal her sources, a jerkaround designed to lay to rest any suspicion that journalists may not be risking their lives, liberty, and sacred honor to report the truth undiminished.

Hey, Judith ~ if you don't mind suffering to protect your sources, here's one that guarantees a very big story. Meet my friend William Rodriguez."

3/23/2007 12:32:00 AM  
Blogger Kosan said...

Sorry, that's Tupper Saussy.

3/23/2007 12:34:00 AM  
Blogger galactivision said...

"The WTC were quite remarkable structures. The strongest elements were their massively reinforced cores and the sheer faces of the buildings themselves with the weight of the floors distributed evenly between them. The holes the planes made in those exteriors were insignificant to say the very least."

Not sure if this is ever mentioned as I've not seen it discussed on any CT blogs (or elsewhere, actually).

During a recent interview with Mike Hagan on his radio show, Paul Laffoley had a moment during this massive brain-dump on art, imagination, creativity, time-travel, multi-dimensional klein bottles, living houses, architecture, painting, diagrams, etc. to drop these nuggets from when he (briefly) was involved with the WTC design/construction.

He starts talking about the trade centers around the 36th minute.


[Paul is describing how the project was behind, and how the engineering contractors started cutting certain corners...]

Paul: "...so they started doing things like, instead of welding steel together, they _bolted_ it..."

Mike: "What did you think of that when that happened?"

Paul: "Well, I knew exactly why [the trade towers came down]... people talked about Building 7 coming down at the same time, I knew why. Because, when I was there, there were these engineers from Saudi Arabia, actually part of the Bin Laden construction company, because Yamasaki worked with them and built them up... and they started in Arabia and worked for Yamasaki, and was doing all kinds of things for them, airports, schools, doing very large projects... and he just brought them over. And I saw these guys... these swarthy looking guys wandering around, and some of them were asking me 'where would you put demolition devices?' 'Well, I'm not really an engineer, but I'm curious to know [laughing] why, why would you put things in to demolish it, when it's not even built?' You know? It was so strange to me. And he said, 'well, that's the way things are going now.' So, in a certain sense, the reason they came down, the Bin Laden construction company knew exactly where all the, places were, that they put demolition devices, because New York in the 60s..."

Mike: "So you believe it was demolished, it was brought down?"

Paul: "Well, in the early 60s and 70s in New York, buildings were going up and down, like every six months. You go away, and come back and there's a new building."

Mike: "So they build them with charges built into them."

Paul: "Build it so, so it would come down. So those guys knew the whole story. And so it was very easy for them, to you know, do that. And uh, it actually came down from extreme capitalism. [laughs]"


Paul then talks about how he suggested building walkways between the buildings to help support the structure (since things were bolted). Then then gets fired the next day for suggesting a ugly (yet structurally superior, given the weakened joints) change to Yamasaki's design "pure form".

I believe Paul's statement to be true (as I've heard him on a couple of times after 9/11 state this when speaking) and I certainly do not feel like he is consciously a disinfo agent. Guy has his own future agenda at work to be bothered with government agencies, me thinks. Anyone not familiar with Paul, certainly take the time to fully comprehend the scope of his artistic and creative vision: (www.laffoley.com)

Just another angle I thought needed a bit more light.

And in any case, everyone should listed to the (long, but constantly mind-blowing) interview with Paul - oodles of great topics and next-level brain-food.

3/23/2007 12:50:00 AM  
Blogger galactivision said...

"everyone should listed"

listen, even. :)

3/23/2007 01:10:00 AM  
Blogger galactivision said...

"We have choice, freewill, and discrete moments of legal power as citizens."

oh, and on _that_ subject,

NYTimes - Free Will: Now You Have It, Now You Don’t

;)

3/23/2007 01:21:00 AM  
Blogger iridescent cuttlefish said...

So, here's what I'm seeing, at least on this thread, but that might be a fair reflection of the state of the crowd that definitely isn't buying the official story on 9/11 or anything else: a whole lot of squabbling. Name calling. Questioning motivation, even affiliation, fer chrissakes!

How about this for a suggestion--instead of polarizing shit-slinging, we focus (just for a moment; everyone can pick up their weapons as soon as the thought experiment is over) on what we all agree on? Should be pretty quick, judging from the level of animosity we've got going here.

What are the commonalities at this point? Maybe we start with the most basic stuff. This list is obviously biased, since it's just things that I would think anyone who so doesn't want to buy into any Big Lies might accept in their place.

1. Izzy Stone's "governments lie." (Who could argue with that?)

2. If governments lie, then what they're really up to is hidden, or at the very least not reported.

3. If the media are not reporting what the government's really up to, then they're part of the problem, either through outright falsehood, or through the more nuanced distortion & lies of omission.

4. If the media is involved, then the corporations which own the media are also involved.

5. If the corporations are involved, then their interests are not our interests ("what's good for GM is good for America" is right out the window).

Everyone still with me here? Good--that was the easy part. Now we come to the first fork in the road. For directions, I'm going to suggest we turn now to Uncle Frank, who said, speaking of the media, corporations, and the government:

I am gross and perverted
I'm obsessed 'n deranged
I have existed for years
But very little had changed
I am the tool of the government
And industry too
For I am destined to rule
And regulate you


Now, if we're trying to figure out who's running the show and what they're up to, and we listen to Mr. Zappa's advice, it becomes pretty clear that the media are simply a tool of the government and industry, but that still leaves the question of which of those other entities runs which...Except that it seems rather obvious that the government itself is more of a tool than industry.

I know that Hitler tried to bend the corporations to the service of the state, but the corporations are still around, so we can guess how that worked out. Following that logic then, it's time to go back to the list.

6. The state is in the service of the corporation, or the interests of the state and of industry (and we might as well throw in the intelligence community at this point) are indistiguishable: Ike's M-I complex.

We might quibble about definitions and whatnot at this point, but I think most of us would still more or less agree with this very basic assessment, right? So, what have we got then? It looks like the government, the corporations, the alphabet agencies and the media are pretty much conspiring to do what they want, which is...what are we surrounded by? War, hatred, fear, racism, environmental degradation, disease, dwindling resources...and a general lack of hope about fixing all of the above, right?

(Thanks for your patience, btw, the experiment is almost done--this is where it finally gets interesting, hopefully.)

But if we go back up our skeletal list just a bit, we were in hypothetical agreement (I think) that those aforementioned unscrupulous entities were conspiring to cause those appalling conditions we face...which means that all of those things are essentially (and intentionally) artificial. This, in turn, should give us some measure of hope, as strange as that sounds at this late date.

If we can further assume that those right awful bastards who manufactured these gloomy endtimes would prefer that we were not united in our distrust and suspicion of them, but instead that we were divided and hostile to one another, then what are we doing here?

Do we imagine that we're really hammering out the best strategy for changing the terrible state the world is in, and that once we've got that figured out we'll all fall in line and a sort of cosmic solidarity will descend upon the formerly fractious flock? Somehow, I don't see that happeneing here--the only place I can picture my buddy Mojo burying the hatchett is in my back ( as a purely figurative example).

Now why should that be? Despite our differing theories and petty bickering and pointless hostility, do we not all share, at the very least, a common revulsion for what is happening to and in the world?

Further, would it really be so difficult to enumerate some very basic things which we would all desire, in place of what we all do not like?

I'm thinking we have a lot more in common than it would appear from this and many another thread I've seen recently. It's not just at RI, either. And I don't think it's necessarily just due the corrosive influence of those whose only purpose in such "discussions" is to mock and insult. I think it's a measure of our despair.

So here's my message: Buck up, me hearties! It ain't over yet! Don't you see that they want you hatin' each other? Why, I'd wager that we could come up with a short but stout list of things we'd all like to work toward and all it would take is just another wee thought experiment...

Anyone else care to do the next one?



We want the same things--stop attacking each other.

3/23/2007 02:04:00 AM  
Blogger iridescent cuttlefish said...

Vizier Kabir,

I dig your guy's analysis of the effect of the manufactured terror in the UK on Blair's poll numbers, and our own dear leader had quite a bump in his numbers for awhile after his friends pulled those building down, but he's taking it too far when he says:

Truth is, without something like 9-11, it would have been impossible for an American president to ask his people to divest themselves of constitutionally secured rights, along with hundreds of billions in purchasing power to expand his bureaucracy at home and, while he's at it, forcefully restructure governments abroad. 9-11 made the impossible happen. And now, four years into the impossible, we're benefitting from the economic system spawned by the deception.

* Your rights have always been what they allow you to have, when the legal system is corrupt.

* We have no idea of what actual funding levels are for official and unofficial programs.

* We've been "forcefully restructur(ing) governments abroad" for a very long time, through covert and overt means--none of this was "impossible." It was business as usual.

* We are not "benefitting from the economic system spawned by the deception." The people who always benefit from these sorts of deceptions certainly have, but we have not. What year did old Smedley Butler give his War is a Racket speech?

3/23/2007 02:20:00 AM  
Blogger Dr. Bombay said...

Mr. Kabir...
That Tupper was the topper..

"Every normal man must
be tempted, at times,
to spit on his hands,
raise the black flag,
and begin slitting throats."

H.L. Mencken

I trust everyone has been
keeping their blades sharp?
Come now..you didn't really
think something like an op-ed
piece in the New York Times
would bring these bastards
down now did you..?

3/23/2007 02:32:00 AM  
Blogger Sounder said...

How pervasive is the consensus trance?

By Howard Rheingold on Charles Tart, via galactivision;

Mr. Tart on why the term ‘consensus trance’ describes our situation better than the term ‘normal consciousness’.

To him, the idea of "normal consciousness" is the kind of convenient fiction illustrated by the famous folktale of "the emperor's new clothes." Together, human groups agree on which of their perceptions should be admitted to awareness (hence, consensus), then they train each other to see the world in that way and only in that way (hence trance)....


....If humans are indeed on the verge of realizing that we are caught in illusions while thinking we are perceiving reality, how do we propose to escape? The answer, Tart has concluded, could come in the form of "mindfulness training " -- a variety of exercises for elevating awareness ...((by deliberately paying closer-than-usual attention to the mundane details of everyday life))... Gurdjieff called it "self-remembering," and many flavors of psychotherapist, East and West, use it. Mindfulness is a skill that can be honed by the right approach to what is happening right in front of you: "Be here now" as internal gymnastics. Working, eating, waiting for a traffic light to change can furnish opportunities for mindfulness. Observe what you are feeling, thinking, perceiving, don't get hung up on judging it, just pay attention. Tart thinks this kind of self-observation -- noticing the automatization -- is the first step toward waking up.

Why aren't the psychology departments of every major university working on the best ways to dehypnotize ourselves?

"We tend to think of consensus consciousness like a clearing in the wilderness." Tart replied. "We don't know what monsters are out there. We've made a place that's comfortable and fortified, and we are very ambivalent about leaving this little clearing for even a moment."

One mental experiment that I have done is to ask; when I am old, what will it have taken, to be able to look back at my life and legitimately say, “I am happy with the life that I have lived.” What makes up the greatest bulk of ones life? Well it’s certainly the mundane elements rather than the special events. 90, maybe 95% of ones life is mundane. Also, special events seem to orient towards objects rather than the space in between, where life is really lived. The ego finds validation in events, (history and memory), while our essential Being is found in better observation of the Now. That is, substance is found through awareness rather than intellect.

Peace

3/23/2007 08:48:00 AM  
Blogger Shrubageddon said...

Truth is, without something like 9-11, it would have been impossible for an American president to ask his people to divest themselves of constitutionally secured rights, along with hundreds of billions in purchasing power to expand his bureaucracy at home and, while he's at it, forcefully restructure governments abroad.

I claim Bullshit on this...complete and utter Bullshit. That is not the truth...by any means...don't you agree, Richard.

The American People would have done whatever they were conditioned to do.....and 911 wasn't necessary to invade Iraq. It (911) was much deeper than that....it was a hypnotic flame that continues to burn bright and attract the witless dolts to its lethal touch.

Your Truth Gig was expected...in fact, they created it...to control the opposition...and so they have....in that sense, there never was any opposition....and most likely never will be.

Always beware of anyone who starts with the words "the truth is." If only it were that easy.

3/23/2007 09:21:00 AM  
Blogger Shrubageddon said...

Sounder,

I swear I didn't read your post prior to my last response....it was an odd point of synchronicity...we both recognized the same patterns and commented in similar sentiment. It's nice when this happens every now and then.

Love,

Shrubageddon

3/23/2007 09:25:00 AM  
Blogger Sounder said...

Shrub, please, - I make a lousy tool for you to use on Visier Kabir.

While I may see IXXI as one in a long string of emotional entrainment devices, or emotional engineering exercises, (Gulf of Tonkin, Pearl Horbor, sinking of the Maine ad absurdium), this, as these other events, also serves to 'deepen the trance'.

Later a trance test was done in February 2002 when three strange stories almost made news. The first involved a censure motion brought to the floor in congress (by Dingell or Burton I think, memory is a bit faded), accusing the Indian Govt. of shooting down its own airliner as a pretext for jailing about 50,000 Sikhs. The second story involved the bombing of apartment buildings in Russia before Putin’s first election; an ex oligarch accusing the govt. of complicity in the bombings. The kicker was a story on NPR, never repeated or referred to later, suggesting that during the student riots in Mexico City in 1968, preceding the Olympics, a novel tactic was used to end the protests. That is, and as acknowledged by Vicente Fox, sharpshooters were ordered to shoot cops who then went into a killing frenzy thinking that leftists were shooting at them. The world was relieved to see the Olympics proceed without a hitch, well except for that black power salute thingy. And hell, that worked pretty well also to drive whitey further into the arms (sic) of the Man.

You did not notice?...- You then are in the trance and it is You that is being spoken too.

3/23/2007 10:05:00 AM  
Blogger Christopher said...

I think the assertion that the towers came down as a result of fires and a crash falling at free-fall speed needs an explanation beyond the official one. No matter how much Jeff skates around the issue, because it is full of ambiguity, the fact remains the official explanation is very much unproven. Why Jeff is so insistent that the towers "just fell" is beyond me. How does he know? Where is the evidence? I agree that the thermite and controlled demolitions don't have strong evidence either but why is Jeff so sure? He has presented nothing that even remotely resembles evidence other than ad hominem attacks on the 9/11 truth movement that at least tries to break the public out of its trance about 9/11. Why are they the enemy? Are they right? I don't know really--but how does Jeff definitely know they are wrong?

I personally tend to agree that we ought to focus on the intelligence agencies/criminal cabal that is probably responsible for 9/11. But what kind of hubris allows us to come to definitive conclusions on this matter? Why do y'all need to know the exact nature of the truth without unambiguous evidence. How does it help when many of you like Jeff demonize others in the 9/11 movement including Alex Jones who has been out front on this issue and may not be a great intellect but he's got chutzpah and balls something I appreciate after reading the endless spinning of autistic stories on this and other blogs. He goes out there with a bullhorn and let's it all hang out.

None of us knows what the fuck happened on 9/11. Collectively we could, if we really wanted to, come to consensus. I will state Surowiecki's method for reaching the "wisdom of crowds", if anyone is interested:

1) diversity of opinion;
2) independence of members from one another;
3) decentralization; and
4) a good method for aggregating opinions.

3/23/2007 10:23:00 AM  
Blogger ericswan said...

IC..Throw the baby out.. The elections are a fraud. Democracy is a fraud. Consensus plus one is a fraud. When Mark puts up polls they are frauds. Does anybody really think the Christian right supports the Republicans. Give your head a shake. I was in a peace march in New York City in the early 80's. More than a couple of million people but do you think that tied Reagan's hands or burst the boil on his ass? Do you think it got reported?

The next time you hear that Bush is polling the lowest of all presidents at 30% go out on the street and ask 10 people if they would vote for Bush. If 3 of them answer that "he's the man" drink the bathwater. The game is up.

3/23/2007 11:14:00 AM  
Blogger Mark said...

1.

IC says:

"So, here's what I'm seeing, at least on this thread, but that might be a fair reflection of the state of the crowd that definitely isn't buying the official story on 9/11 or anything else: a whole lot of squabbling. Name calling. Questioning motivation, even affiliation, fer chrissakes!

...

Now, if we're trying to figure out who's running the show and what they're up to,...


No. Don't change the subject. (And weren't you just arguing out of the other side of your mouth a moment ago when you said we don't have to agree, and how gushy and wonderful you found that, and now you say we have to agree?

I think we can discuss our differences openly here.

What most of us are saying is Jeff is being dishonest because in posing as a "skeptic" he does nothing of the sort as he (as others have noted) has strangely very exact ideas for such a proclaimed skeptic; non-rigorously cherrypicks or buries evidence; and defames with unattributed links.

I think most of us are contending Jeff is just playing with us: he is playing "skeptic" falsely. I'm not interested in his motivations why. I could care less.

We are mostly asking ourselves how Jeff--or anyone, that's the key--can pretend controlled demolition discussion (of that evidence and theory) is somehow mutually exclusive from other 9-11 discussion--regardless of your conclusions about that.

Moreover, it is Jeff who started the "squabbling...Name calling.... Questioning motivation, even affiliation..." Read his original post and his comments. Or the previous post and his comments.

The topic of controlled demolition is not as he--or anyone, and that's the key--claims some kind of mutually exclusive area of evidence divorced from any other. And that is what we do seem agree on, it seems. Touche.

It was all one seamless day. And the seams are drawing up tightly and nicely around some very powerful people when you look in this direction. The charm of the day's visuals is that it enhances Greg Palast or Jeff-proffered(TM) style analysis of accounting or financial money fraud instead of takes away from it. Artificially separating the information leaves one's audience a bit glazed. (And Palast still refuses to touch 9-11.)

However, when you can say the third building, WTC7, that collapsed on 9-11 unprecedentedly in world history and without any plane hitting it seems to be involved with accounting fraud, half a billion dollars profit in insurance fraud, and various ongoing court suit records destruction, then you use more senses of your audience--and your own.

You additionally get their attention:

- by not ignoring molten steel in the basements of at least four separate buildings (WTC 1,2,6,7) [the Ward articles mention in the previous thread],

- by not ignoring seismographic evidence of a micronuke blast before both WTC1 and WTC2 came down,

- by not ignoring the pulverization hard concrete into airborne dust on every floor,

- by not ignoring demolition experts admitting either WTC1/2 were demolished (Van Romero back on September 13, in the Albuquerque Journal)

- by not ignoring that others recently admitted that WTC7 was demolished (above, "pull a Jowenko" above, cute phrase; suggested definition: "the art of catching an expert saying impolitic truths due to their lack of general knowledge.")---

- and by not ignoring sulfurated vaporized steel evidence that FEMA even found in the non-plane hit WTC7 heap, with thermate evidence to boot.

To ignore evidence to sculpt your claims to "skepticism" is not being skeptical. It's being dishonest.

2.

Now, back to the 'mutual exclusivity theory' of evidence claims of Jeff.

I've seen others beside Jeff go for the "ME" issue ('mutually exclusive' insertions/claims) bundled into 9-11 research so I don't really think the issue is exclusive to Jeff here. It can befall anyone. It's just something not really required though.

It even appears, quite out of place, in some of the motivations of Dr. Stephen Jones' emailed writings to Holmgren (as posted by Gerard Holmgren's very detailed documented work for example). However, such 'ME' issues even appears in Holmgren's work as well (like in his documentation over digital insertions and media manipulation on 9-11, jumping to "proving no planes at all"--when he has only pretty much proven some videos were digital insertions.

See this view of the approaching WTC2 plane turn from a colored plane, into a featureless blob like it was blackened out.

He additionally collates many witnesses not even seeing a plane hit the WTC2 and the WTC2 exploding. I don't know how this joggs with images showing pods on WTC2's plane, or the little flash before it goes in WTC2, though Nico assures us in prime 'ME' fashion ('mutually exclusive') since he has proven some degree of digital insertions the whole plane thing can be ignored. That's not really rigorous either.

Nico Harpt opines these digital insertions were done by WESCAM technology--same technology (and perhaps the same PERSON Mark Hryma?) were utilized in making "The Lone Gunman" TV trailer before 9-11 which predicted exactly with a digital computer rendering view "what happens during plane terrorism on WTC". He makes a valid point of why would someone have a stable helicopter view of the WTCs sort of waiting there, filming the latter approach? And a close up of the rendering of it, shows that one engine wasn't faded out properly when they pulled the image across the WTCs, since it looks like an engine is in front of the WTCs as the plane disappears behind the building. Notice that "the different networks" are ALL FEEDING 'LIVE' OFF THE SAME SINGLE HELICOPTER VIEW, THOUGH THE HELICOPTER HAS WESCAM TECHNOLOGY ON IT, MAKING ITS 'REALITY VIEW' QUESTIONABBLE (SEE HIS OPENING IMAGE ON THIS PAGE)

And he's got a clip identifying it as WESCAM technology on this helicopter.

Nico writes:

The hypothesis is that the high tech multimedia system from WESCAM, filmed an empty landscape, and was upgraded in real time, with a pre-produced, vector-keyed CGI (Computer generated Imagery),
then broadcasted into the feed of W-ABC, as also synched in time to CNN, FOX and other channels.

The question is therefore, why did they fake it?

The answer is oppressed from alleged 9/11 activists, linked to the brainwash machinery of 911truth.org, associated projects and partners, but also related fake oppositions.

Are we naive enough to believe, that this high tech military camera system, known as WESCAM, was not able to provide us with much better video quality than the one on Sep11th?

As military contractor WESCAM Inc. (now L-3) revealed during 2001 (and since then improved), their quality and equipment was able to work with a "magnification 4-step zoom"!!

WESCAM did also do a much better job with their special effect for the 'hijack/remote control meme' of the 'Lone Gunman'-tv version of 9/11.
This episode, supported by WESCAM operator Mark Hryma predicted the official "plotline"-version of 9/11 to confuse the forthcoming findings of the TV fakery for the "military operation" of 9/11.
This was an episode, which shows a much better commercial aircraft,
which is 'almost' hitting the Twin Towers on March 4, 2001. The camera system was provided by WESCAM Inc.


WESCAM did the same professional job for Battlefield Earth: A Saga of the Year 3000 (2000), The Truman Show (1998) and Star Trek (1996).

Why not on Sept. 11th?

Where was the quality? Where was the real gig?

Are we willing to believe, that a pre-positioned camera in a pre-positioned chopper was not able to zoom into the object and receive the same high tech details?

Again, what was the name of the camera operator and who was the pilot?


Perhaps in the Lone Gunman Episode, they were just being subsidized by the networks to practice their digital magic believability scripts, camera shots, and angles, to get it right when it went live soon after--using the same technology: WESCAM?

However, on the 'ME' issue once more, both Holmgren and Nico I think from what I have read ignore various substitutionary planes information from elsewhere to make such an exclusivistic claim about the rendering of plane images as 'that's all there was.' Which is silly I think however valid I think their evidence is in some images. Another 'ME' issue of mutual exclusivity though is tagged into it.

It happens with Alex Jones as well. As much as I admire Alex Jones, Inc., they are being strategic and selective by refusing to open the can of worms about the Boeing Pentagon plane not being there, though they do go bravely into the controlled demolition evidence and much more.

Holmgren notes how Dr. Stephen Jones (no relation to Alex Jones) refuses to be pinned down about many things related to pods on the WTC2 hit plane. Like Jeff, Dr. Stephen Jones implores people stay away from certain things instead of just researching things. Dr. Jones even mentioned pods on WTC2's plane images as "junk science" in his earlier official drafts of his 9-11 paper in a lambasting way--which he later took out. However, he refuses to talk about how when Holmgren cornered him about how poor was his claim of 'research' on the issue since Stephen Jones originally was claiming he had thoroughly analyzed the issue--though was claiming to have looked at the wrong kind of plane to do it and call it "junk science" as Holmgren notes. Holmgren really corners him on that selectivity as well at the link. So, Stephen Jones even got the wrong plane in his analysis first off and from that went off to deny pods as well based on that 'analysis', hilariously, saying things like he viewed the Boeing 757 bottom schematics thoroughly and could not see such things--when it was a 767 of course in the official claim.

Well, someone should have shown him some videos instead of schematics.

Unfortunately, a lot of people are looking to get a special lever of information--and bury the rest with it--and that is not required.


So in short, it's not Jeff's "refusal to support" something, it's Jeff's complete lack of support for this particular position. As well as his claim that certain evidence is mutually exclusive from other evidence.

The very issues so heinously tabooed of course happen to be a set of quite documented keys to unlocking the whole thing toward other areas as well.

3.

True, as Shrubby just said to beware being misled by others, though the art of misleading people is mostly done I think in two ways. First you might even intentionally mislead yourself because there are places you "don't want to go". There are aspects of Jeff, Alex Jones, and Dr. Stephen Jones that all do this. Second, you intentionally attempt to guide and limit other's information or inquiries to a selected area only. Both hamper a full blown multi-faceted analysis. The first is self mind control. The second is attempting mind control on others of the soft kind, by only preferring them a partial picture. The danger of any "truth" movement is in these kinds of self-editings.


4.


And for this recent Jeff doosy:

"(Consider, for instance, these 87 accounts of having seen a passenger jet, and not a cruise missile or a fighter aircraft, overfly DC and strike the building.)"

And consider, that Holmgren, the ultimate pit bull who won't let go (sometimes on really small things IMHO, sigh, though he's a great use in others), has pretty much discarded that several years ago.

Where ya been?

DID AA 77 REALLY HIT THE PENTAGON ? EYEWITNESS ACCOUNTS EXAMINED.

First published June 2002. Posted on this site with minor corrections, January 2005.

(Author’s note: At the time this article was published, public awareness of the evidence that no large plane actually hit the pentagon was very marginal. Argument at this time was mostly limited to intuitive examination of photos. This article was--to the best of my knowledge--the first research to go beyond intuitive arguments and thoroughly examine the question in a methodical and deeply researched manner. Apart from normal web searches, I used the media search engine Lexis Nexis, which keeps an online subscription database of media reports, many of which are not available on the web.

Copyright: This article may not be reproduced or copied in any way without the specific permission in writing of the author. Quoting of relevant sections for the purpose of analysis or criticism of the article itself is permissible, providing that the article is linked to in any such analysis.

There is controversy over the question of whether AA 77 actually did hit the Pentagon on Sept 11. It centres around a large amount of photographic evidence that the damage to the Pentagon is neither big enough, nor of the right shape to have been caused by a 757 jet, that there is insufficient sign of wreckage or bodies, and that light poles which apparently should have been in the path of the jet are still standing. The damage appears to be more consistent with having been caused by a bomb and/or a missile or small jet. See the following for some of this evidence.

http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pentagone/erreurs_en.htm

http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/flight77/lawn.html

http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/flight77.html

Physical and mathematical analysis of Pentagon strike.

The strength of the counter argument seems to be with a body of eyewitness evidence that a large passenger jet, some even specifying an AA 757, did hit the Pentagon. So I set out to find every eyewitness account, if possible, and subject them to close scrutiny, to see if this apparent contradiction could be resolved.

That a large explosion took place at the Pentagon, that the Pentagon wall was substantially damaged, and that AA77 is missing, are not in dispute. If the damage to the Pentagon was caused by impact from a flying object, this does not necessarily prove that it was AA77. Possible flying objects which could be considered are large passenger jets, (such as a 757) small passenger jets, a military craft, light aircraft, a helicopter or a cruise missile. Therefore, for the purpose of this research, eyewitness accounts which report seeing a flying object strike the wall of the Pentagon, but are unable to be clear about what that object was, do not necessarily support the theory that it was AA77. It is not necessary that the witness should be specific that it was an AA 757. Uncertainty about such detail is completely understandable in such a situation. In fact in many cases, it makes the report more credible. Eyewitnesses who are vague on fine details are generally more likely to be telling the truth than those who claim to have meticulously taken in everything. But for a report to be considered as evidence for AA77, there should be some indication that the object was a large passenger jet.

Also of little use are reports which claim to have seen a large jet flying too low about the same time that the Pentagon was hit, but do not explicitly claim to have seen the collision. While such reports obviously provide grounds for suspicion that the jet may have been the object which struck the Pentagon, I am only interested in reports which clearly claim to have seen a large passenger jet flying in the air, and then to have actually witnessed it hitting the wall of the Pentagon.

Reports should preferably have been published no later than Sept 14, although this is flexible depending upon the other merits of the account. The earlier the report, the greater it's weight. The account should be internally consistent. The more comprehensive the statement, the greater it's weight. A one line quote gives little that can be critically examined, whereas an extensive interview gives an opportunity to test the credibility of the account. This does not mean that one line quotes are inadmissible, but their value is small. The account should be verifiable, which can be satisfied in a number of ways.1) The witness was identifiable and available for future questioning. 2) The account was captured on video at what can be clearly identified as close to the time and place of the incident. 3) That the reporter who sourced the quote is able to identify themselves as the one having interviewed the witness, and is able to give details of where, when and how the quote was sourced. 4) If a person claiming retrospectively to have been at the scene can provide evidence such as photos, phone calls, documented travel plans, credit card use, etc which gives good reason to believe that they were there.

A certain amount of common sense must be used in interpreting these guidelines. The point is that I am not interested in accounts which could be second, third or fourth hand and give no opportunity for critical analysis. If a newspaper gives a one line quote from an anonymous witness and gives no details of when, where or how the quote was gathered, does not specify who wrote the story and gives no other details, then this is not an eyewitness account. Is it hearsay.

Having set out the parameters, I began searching for eyewitness accounts. My first source was the following site:

http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/blflight77.htm

It strongly criticises the theory that AA77 did not hit the Pentagon and as part of its rebuttal, lists 19 weblinked eyewitness accounts to the event. At first reading it seemed to be an impressive library, but on closer examination, I found that 10 of the 19 accounts did not meet a basic condition. This is because the witnesses did not actually claim to see the Pentagon hit by the plane. What they claimed was to have seen a plane flying too low, and then immediately afterwards to have seen smoke or an explosion coming from the direction of the Pentagon which was out of sight at the time of the collision.(or some variation on this) ...

...

In many hours of painstaking analysis of every search parameter I could think of that offered any hope of finding eyewitness accounts of the collision, this was all I could find. The tools used were LexisNexis and Yahoo. Of course, I can't guarantee that nothing slipped through the net, but the search was exhaustive and meticulous. It's unlikely that anything significant was missed.

My conclusion is that there is no eyewitness evidence to support the theory that F77 hit the Pentagon, unless my search has missed something very significant. Given the strength of the photographic evidence that whatever hit the Pentagon could not possibly have been F77, I can see no reason for not stating this conclusion with a lot of confidence, unless and until contrary evidence emerges.

So how and why was such a strong superficial impression generated that the media was brimming with eyewitness reports? Basically, smoke and mirrors. When you look at the total number of potential witnesses turned up by this search, if you count only those which appeared superficially to provide a clear eyewitness to the collision, there were only 18 and one of these contradicted the official story.

Earlier, after dealing with the 8 witnesses which made it to the final cut, on the Urban legends site, I noted that a suspiciously high number of them were media workers.

After analysis of all 18 reports, we find military personnel even more
heavily represented.

It's not surprising that there should be some, since the incident took place an area with a high population of military personnel, but 8 of 18 is a very high proportion, especially when you add to it 5 from the media. Of the 5 remaining, there is no guarantee that some of them might not also have been military.

Timmerman was the only one who gave an occupation, and being a pilot does not preclude the possibility that he was military. It's clear that the govt and the military have performed a brilliant feat of illusion here. But what of the media? Were they in on it as well?


Coda. Jeff said:

"(Consider, for instance, these 87 accounts of having seen a passenger jet, and not a cruise missile or a fighter aircraft, overfly DC and strike the building.)"

Touche. Consider, that no one has yet mentioned the fact of people seeing U.S. military C-130s flying around the day of 9-11, particularly the one escorting the "Pentagon hit" in...

The Pentagon C130:

The statements of the witnessess, the FAA administrator, the Pentagon employees, and the C-130 pilot, condensed into the following compendium of industrial-strength extracts, were not selected because they are the most frequently ignored testimonies (which they are); but because they are mutually-compatible, non-contradictory, and convergent on a highly-plausible explanation of flights 77 and 93...

Plenty of worms. Take them and go fish through some links.

3/23/2007 11:37:00 AM  
Blogger CuriosityShop said...

"I am not the editor of a newspaper," Editor-in-Chief Howard Tyner told the American Journalism Review in 1998, "I am the manager of a content company." Tyner's predecessor, James Squires, had already observed this shift. "Journalism, particularly newspaper journalism, has no real place in the company's future," he wrote after leaving the paper. "No one ever uses the word. The company bills itself as an 'information and entertainment' conglomerate and hopes that newspapers will become a smaller factor in its total business."

http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2007/03/breaking_the_news.html

News: It's not the Internet that's killing newspapers. It's the equity-chasing investors and their friends at the FCC who have put outsize profits before a free press.

3/23/2007 12:28:00 PM  
Blogger Sounder said...

Wake up from the trance.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3U_GISl3aAA

3/23/2007 01:00:00 PM  
Blogger iridescent cuttlefish said...

Mark,

I think we're talking past one another on this issue of mutual exclusiveness. Yes, I have said that focusing so much energy on 9/11, specifically in presenting it as an aberration and not as part of how things are done in the simalcrum republic is both disingenuous and counterproductive, but I do concede that if 9/11 can be used as an eye opener for people who somehow never imagined that they were being lied to systematically, then I'm all for it.

We don't have to agree on how the buildings were brought down. It would, on the other hand, be quite helpful if we could agree on the much larger position that imperialism, militarism and all the tools & tricks used to further those dark enterprises need to be acknowledged and repudiated. I'm not so much worried (as Jeff appears to be) that the buzzsaw of conflicting conspiracy theories will only serve to stifle any possibility of changing the system as I am that there seems to be a very strong current of thought that makes 9/11 somehow unique. The dangers of this are obvious.

As ericswan indicates, politics is a dead end. If the present day political structure (and every single operative within it) is controlled, directly & indirectly by those who profit from manufactured terror and the whole stinking apparatus of control that began with the calculated manipulation of scarcity (real and otherwise) and morphed into the frightening science of surveillance, then there is no possibility of redress within it. If we limit our scope to what happened on that "fateful" day, then the larger scheme of which it was a part will not even be acknowledged, much less repudiated.

This does not imply mutual exclusivity. There is no one here at RI who believes that 19 holy warriors sailed unassisted through the unparalleled defenses of the greatest empire of this sick Fourth Age to smash the very symbols of that empire's dominion in a blow for "freedom." Further, I'm all for forcing the tattered remnants of the sham judicial system to address the claims that you and the others make. But I am not at all happy to see the focus of resistance be confined to a single incident, however spectacular, when the world has always been run this way.

That's why it's even more important, I think, to trace the history of manipulation by the elite (as Black has done, from an economic/technological perspective) all the way back to when it first started. This survey in hand, we can then present not a list of grievances, but a model of how the world should be structured. There is so much work to be done in this quest. Sure, the historical framework has been fairly well described by any number of intelligent persons, but what about the science and the ethics of the world as it should be?

This is why I spend so much time studying the work of Hegge, Bax, de Waal, Moonhawk, Sheldrake, Kötke (whose Psychology of Empire discusses notions similar to what Sounder mentioned above) and, as long as we're mentioning Sounder's recommendations, Tart (all of whom help provide an alternative scientific/philosophical framework) in addition to attempting to get my own projects off the ground (to demonstrate the viability of this other way). You may have noticed that these things don't seem to interest Jeff very much, at least judging from his lack of response to them, but I'm still drawn to this weird little maelstrom of an internet "community" because you can't even contemplate an undertaking like rebuilding the world unless and until you realize just what's wrong with the current one.

You know all these things Mark; if anything, you've written more about them than I have. You also know that 9/11 is a symptom, not the disease itself. So go ahead and talk about it--I'm interested--but what about that bigger picture? The two are not mutually exclusive by nature but by the limited framework of so many discussions.

3/23/2007 01:29:00 PM  
Blogger ericswan said...

I'm hoping that Jeff is just about done whipping this dead horse. Be it as it may, here is one more rivet in this aluminum sarchophus.'

Consider the 18 or 19 warriors and their light sabres as they approach their respective cabins to capture and claim their just reward. In my understanding, the 4 planes contained 75 army and 40 navy personnel. We are expected to believe that Atta and others mustered through odds of 5 to one armed with light sabres, crashed into the cabin and held the passengers at bay for an hour?

I suppose Allah would be very proud but how is it the American military couldn't muster with these odds?

3/23/2007 02:02:00 PM  
Blogger iridescent cuttlefish said...

ericswan,

This one’s for you, although I suspect you already know about it, since I’ve heard a lot of what this guy, Tommy Cichanowski, is talking about from you. He takes the old forgotten science of von Reichenbach and combines it with the mysterious input of some renegade scientist from Los Alamos (along the way making sense of Tesla) and ends up finding the future in…wait for it…gardening! Well, sort of. I’ve been reading it for hours and I’ve only just scratched the surface. Have fun!!

3/23/2007 04:28:00 PM  
Blogger Kosan said...

I find the use of the word "Allah" in the context put up by ericswan to be disturbing and possibly disingenuous.

If by using the word in that manner you mean to impugn God as being pleased at the 9/11 "attacks", then that suggests one type of spiritual problem.

If, on the other hand, by that expression you meant to impugn the religion of Islam, then I would remind you that Allah is merely the Arabic word for God and, as such, is used by Arabic-speaking Christians, Jews, and Muslims alike.

So which is it? Were you attempting to trash Islam, or all religion?

Hopefully neither.

Neither act is a worthy one.

If you were just ruminating idly,
without having given the matter sufficient thought,
then I would suggest that such "idleness"
is indeed the plaything of evil.
In this regard you might better engage in some serious remembering,
also known as zikr or dhikr.

Of course the best form of zikr is zikrullah - remembrance of God.

3/23/2007 04:43:00 PM  
Blogger Shrubageddon said...

Wake up from the trance.

Gee, thanks for waking me up, Sounder. I was so entranced until you came along and showed me the light.

Praise be to Allah there are good folks like you and Mojo to help us see the light....the true light of love.

Such lovable creatures, the both of you, and because of that warmth that you both possess, you have managed to persuade millions upon millions to wake up and see the light.

Jeff, are you awake yet....how about you, Richard...I think I still hear you snoring? IC, are you awake....or somewhere in between?

3/23/2007 05:11:00 PM  
Blogger Shrubageddon said...

I thought Coitus was remembrance of God...and Coitus Interruptous was when you couldn't remember God because you were in a trance.

3/23/2007 05:13:00 PM  
Blogger Sounder said...

General Schrub: a little upset that I choose not to be a proxy for your 'epic battle with he of many names'?

Well I am sure that with your commanding presence and all, you are sure to find your minions somewhere. But here is a tip; The really slick generals,....they change tactics---mix things up you know...

Your next attack we take this into account, I trust.

3/23/2007 05:18:00 PM  
Blogger ericswan said...

My reference to "Allah" may have been flippant and for that I apologise.

The application was specific to the motivation attributed the martyrs. Given the scenario of box cutters and Moslems who "hate", you may consider that this assault and all that it entails here and there, was an assault on God. It appears that this rung in the ladder toward a NWO has succeeded beyond all expectation. Allah has become synonomous with 911. I'm not planning to follow up on your links but perhaps you might quote a few of the Satanic Verses that have been expunged from the Koran. This might open your eyes to the truth. Think "even the elect....".

3/23/2007 05:29:00 PM  
Blogger Kosan said...

PUTTING THE DEAD HORSE TO REST ONCE AND FOR ALL:

QUESTION: When did you stop beating this dead horse?

Answer: You didn’t. But you will be compelled to stop now:

On the (soon to be put to its final rest) question of Silverstein and WTC7:

On September 9, 2005, Mr. Dara McQuillan, a spokesman for Silverstein Properties, issued the following statement [on the issue of Larry Silverstein's "pull it" comment]:

“Seven World Trade Center collapsed at 5:20 p.m. on September 11, 2001, after burning for seven hours. There were no casualties, thanks to the heroism of the Fire Department and the work of Silverstein Properties employees who evacuated tenants from the building. ...

In the afternoon of September 11, Mr. Silverstein spoke to the Fire Department Commander on site at Seven World Trade Center. The Commander told Mr. Silverstein that there were several firefighters in the building working to contain the fires. Mr. Silverstein expressed his view that the most important thing was to protect the safety of those firefighters, including, if necessary, to have them withdraw from the building.

Later in the day, the Fire Commander ordered his firefighters out of the building and at 5:20 p.m. the building collapsed. No lives were lost at Seven World Trade Center on September 11, 2001.”


As noted above, when Mr. Silverstein was recounting these events for a television documentary he stated, “I said, you know, we've had such terrible loss of life. Maybe the smartest thing to do is to pull it.” Mr. McQuillan has stated that by “it,” Mr. Silverstein meant the contingent of firefighters remaining in the building. This is also the position taken by Jeff Wells, Iridescent Cuttlefish, and others on this site and elsewhere.

There is a problem with the above statement, namely there were no firefighters in WTC 7:

• "No manual firefighting actions were taken by FDNY." [Fema Report]

• "There was no firefighting in WTC 7." [Popular Mechanics]

• "By 11:30 a.m., the fire commander in charge of that area, Assistant Chief Frank Fellini, ordered firefighters away from [WTC 7] for safety reasons." [New York Times]


So let's have a look at Silverstein's full statement again:

"I remember getting a call from the fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."

In summary, the fire department commander said the fire could not be contained, Silverstein said "the smartest thing to do is pull it", and the fire department made the decision to pull.

"Pull" is a term used in building demolition...Witness:

"We're getting ready to pull Building 6" ... "We had to be very careful how we demolished Building 6..."
Note that WTC 6 was demolished with explosives, not pulled over by cables, therefore "pull" is a term used to define an explosive demolition.


But the US Department of State contends that Silverstein's "pull it" statement refers to withdrawing firefighters from WTC 7. If this was the case then firefighters should have received a message which said something like "World Trade 7 is unsafe. Abandon the building and withdraw from the area."

Okay, let's have a look at the language used by firefighters withdrawing from the area of WTC 7:

"It's blowin' boy." ... "Keep your eye on that building, it'll be coming down soon." ... "The building is about to blow up, move it back." ... "Here we are walking back. There's a building, about to blow up..."

The above dialogue and the accompanying video clearly indicates the message received by the firefighters was "We are going to demolish WTC 7. Clear the area."

Need more?

INDRA SINGH EMT: "...by noon or one o'clock they told us we need to move from that triage site up to Pace University a little further away because Building 7 was going to come down or be brought down."

HOST: "Did they actually use the word "brought down" and who was it that was telling you this?"

SINGH: "The fire department. And they did use the words 'we're gonna have to bring it down' and for us there observing the nature of the devastation it made total sense to us that this was indeed a possibility..."


Still not enough? Then there is this:

It has been stated that a 20 second radio countdown preceded the collapse of WTC 7.
The statement by Silverstein Properties and the US Department of State also contends that no deaths occurred in WTC 7 because "pull it" was an evacuation order. This is factually incorrect:

Speakers for voice evacuation announcements were located throughout the building and were activated manually at the Fire Control Center (FCC) ." [WTC 7 Fema Report]

It should have been impossible to miss an evacuation order.

"When 7 World Trade Center came down on Sept. 11, an agent on loan from Washington, special officer Craig Miller, perished..."

"The Secret Service New York Field Office was located in 7 World Trade Center ... Master Special Officer Craig Miller, died during the rescue efforts." [PDF download]

The firefighters comments along with the statements by the EMTs and the NYPD officer do not correspond with "pull it" being an evacuation order, and the death of Master Special Officer Craig Miller further demonstrates that the statement by Silverstein Properties and the US Department of State regarding the "pull it" comment has deliberately ignored inconvenient facts in a post-hoc clean up effort to try to make their story fit the unfortunately candid remarks by Mr. Silverstein.

And a rather poor retro-fit it is indeed.

Just like the nonsense spewed by Jeff and Coke-flavored Icee.

By the way, boys, how does the really real “REAL THING” taste, compared to whatever kool aid it is that you’ve both been drinking?

That cooked up (or coked up) koolaid story of yours isn’t very real now, is it?

Of course, that all depends on what your definition of "is" is....

3/23/2007 06:30:00 PM  
Blogger iridescent cuttlefish said...

Mojo,

To what nonsense do you refer? Sit down and talk about the issues, mate, instead of all the grand theatrics. Did I not respond with civility and even respect to your Tupper Saucy remarks? Seriously, dude-Sir: why won't you discuss anything with me? I mean, you have actually, on occasion and in certain guises, attempted to engage in some sort of dialogue, but then you always pull back and resort to either name-calling or asinine accusation...before you tell us you've had enough and will never darken our doorway again. Why go through all that stuff?

This is where the discussion, such as it is, has got to: either 9/11 stands alone and is an unprecedented attack perpetrated by those ubiquitous PTB on our previously sacrosanct freedoms, or it was yet another encroachment on our largely illusory freedom. Can we just discuss this (or anything else you want) without the costume department and the odd rhetorical flourishes?

C'mon, it won't hurt (much). What have you got to lose?

3/23/2007 08:38:00 PM  
Blogger Shrubageddon said...

General Schrub: a little upset that I choose not to be a proxy for your 'epic battle with he of many names'?

I'm not the least bit upset....as a matter of fact, your response to me is quite predictable.

For the record, and I mean this in all sincerity, I wasn't using you as a proxy, at all. I was responding to a quote Mojo posted, not to Mojo, particularly. It was the fact I was addressing, not Mojo. I figured someone as seemingly erudite as yourself would be able to grasp that...but obviously not...because you're caught in the same prejudice that ensnares us all...even though you think you are somehow above the fray.

I would never think of using you as a proxy to get at Mojo....I get to him just fine without resorting to weak proxies such as yourself. Even if I was so inclined to use a proxy, it certainly wouldn't be you because it's obvious he scares the bejeebus out of you. You run and hide with a big wet spot in your panties when he comes a callin.

3/23/2007 09:53:00 PM  
Blogger ericswan said...

Good work on the "pull it" artifice. I'm wondering who will post the link to the firefighter who claimed he found the "black box" and the MIB that came and took it away.

3/23/2007 11:47:00 PM  
Blogger #1 Sniffer said...

Jeff has been away for a while so I thought I’d bring you some of his “greatest hits.”

This one’s from http://rigorousintuition.blogspot.com/2004/12/ten-things-we-learned-in-2004-about.html
Friday, December 31, 2004
Ten things we learned in 2004 about 9/11

“Staying with 9/11 for the moment [for the moment?????], consider the Pentagon crash, and the confiscation of the video from the service station security camera. That the video has never been released is regarded by many as damning evidence that authorities are trying to hide the true nature of the crash: that the video must reveal that it wasn't Flight 77 but a missile, or a fighter jet. But think: perhaps the video remains hidden because some people are quite happy to mindfuck the conspiracists and perpetuate an erroneous line of inquiry. Would they want to lay to rest a mistaken hypothesis, when it misdirects the efforts of so many? “It may be that the question is not What have they got to hide? but rather, Why do they want us to think that they're hiding something?”


My Comment: Jeff, look in the mirror, who’s mindfu***ng who? Maybe the Pentagon folks would prefer we not think they’re hiding something, but given a choice between us suspecting they’re hiding something, and us knowing they’re guilty of treason, I think they chose the lesser of two evils.

So he’s trying to convince us as an underlying assumption that flight 77 and not a missile hit the Pentagon. Why? Cause he cares about 911 truth. See the following

Jumping back a few months

Monday, September 13, 2004
The Flying Wedge
http://rigorousintuition.blogspot.com/2004/09/flying-wedge.html

“I find it deeply unfortunate and potentially disastrous [oh can you feel his pain for us?] that the Pentagon "missile" is becoming something of a wedge issue for 9/11 skeptics….Funny things did happen at the Pentagon that morning, but in my estimation the missile theory doesn't rise above the folkloric. There is simply too much to counter the fantastic claim for the 9/11 truth movement to be squandering its integrity on such speculation. Here, and from what the general public would call "conspiracy" sites, is a compilation of evidence for Flight 77 striking the Pentagon, here are photos of the plane's wreckage, and here's a refutation of the missile theory by respected Washington-based researcher John Judge.”

“Something to consider: when an anomalous event occurs, like a jet striking the Pentagon, we ought to make allowance for anomalous evidence. Yes, the hole looks too small, but with what do we have to compare the event? The walls of the structure - particularly the virtually empty side the plane went 270 degrees out of its way to hit, which had been hardened against attack - are much stronger than those of the WTC. So what's it supposed to look like?” [a much bigger hole Jeff! And more damage, and some real plane debri.]

“For me, here's what knocks down the missile theory: did the conspirators need a missile to produce the desired result? No, they didn't. And that's not to say Hani Hanjour was at the helm. He couldn't fly a Cessna the month before. …So no, it wasn't Hanjour flying that thing. So what was? “

“There was no guided missile, but I believe control of the aircraft was taken from Hanjour in flight so Flight 77 would behave as a guided missile. We're not talking science fiction. The technology exists, and at the heart of the Pentagon. …Substituting the flight with a missile, disposing of the plane and its people, risking detection in broad daylight before witnesses who could have been taking pictures - none of that needed to be chanced….”

MY COMMENT: Jeff tells us we look like kooks when we say a missile hit the Pentagon. He recommends we say yes, the government hit the Pentagon, not with a missile, but with flight 77 itself, by taking over it’s control with remote control!

On what evidence? Because he assures us simply “the technology exists!” And because they couldn’t trust the hijackers to carry out such a delicate mission without bumbling it, or simply that they were patsies. That’s all the evidence Jeff needs to close the case.

And us repeating that version will surely make us look more reasonable! Thanks for pointing us in the right direction once again Jeff.

When he says both “disposing of the plane and its people” and refers to the hijackers as a given, of course he is endorsing the government cover story that the flight did actually take off, hit the Pentagon, and there were Arab hijackers. I’ve not seen evidence for it, and have seen evidence of a missile.

Seems to me “disposing of the plane and its people” is done a lot more easily by not having the plane or passengers around to begin with, and just firing a portable missile when everyone’s too busy watching the WTC on TV.

We’ve come a long way from Dec 2004 when Jeff could talk like this and get away with it. If he said this and similar things now, I don’t think he would be taken very seriously.

3/23/2007 11:48:00 PM  
Blogger Silverfox said...

Friend Sounder...

We cannot escape the "trance state" we are quite literally born into, except by the usual means.

It is by way of that trance that our consensus reality is formed. Without it there would be no "backgound" for our own personal reality to take place in.

It is that particular trance, if you will, that enables us to collectively fashion reality any way we like, despite how contradictory that may seem to some.

That we do not happen to like some of what we've fashioned that reality into is a very different matter from the trance that merely allows for it.

Now our consensus reality only fails us to the extent we ignore the basic truths and ideals it can only be based on.

We cannot even make reasonable choices, let alone any good or genuinely correct ones based on lies, distortions and misconceptions to begin with.

Regardless of whether we all believe in those lies, distortions and misperceptions doesn't alter the nature of the reality they will create for us, giving our errors a life and a substance that we must then deal with.

Now that's hardly an earthshaking or overly complex deduction, my friend, but that is very much how it is and there is no avoiding it beyond continuing to suffer all the trouble and misery we create for ourselves by continuing to ignoring it.

We live in a world of of quite limitless ideas and possibilities made real only by the choices we make from them.

We are quite free to pick and choose from those ideas but we are never free from the responsibility of having made them nor the consequences of their subsequent "realization".

To be sure our consensus needs to be corrected and improved but that can't genuinely occur untill enough of us have corrected and improved our own individual contributions that go into making it what it is.

3/24/2007 12:27:00 AM  
Blogger Mark said...

Mutual Exclusiveness about WTC2 Unrequired: a Little List

1.

My bad. I said:

"See this view of the approaching WTC2 plane turn from a colored plane, into a featureless blob like it was blackened out."

Should have said

"See Nico's quick home version of how easy it is to do insertions and disappearances in a fake plane added to video, or removing planes from video."

He confused me there, though his other links on rendering difficulties I mentioned above is 'real' (i.e., he didn't do another 'proof of concept' party piece there.)

Nico wrote on what I guess he considered the main page (sadly on only the base directory page which you unfortunately can't ever read by crosslinking cross-clicking to get there so you can accidentally not even read the caveat which should appear on each page of these images of course): "These 'bizarro planes' had been all edited by myself or 're-designed', to show how easy it is to "get them up" in the first place. First Graders will never learn and therefore ruined this "satire" for now :)"

Should have been clearer that that was introductory to his [1] rendering difficulty example/claim he found, as well as [2] the WESCAM "live insertions technology" that was indeed technologically possible on the 9-11 hovering 'news helicopter'; and [3] the equally WESCAM based "Lone Gunman" TV pilot episode which he hypothesizes may have been a 'workshop' on making believable (artificial) cinema verite.

Nico's outside link to Phil Jayhan shows Jayhan complaining about Nico's 'manipulation of footage'. However, this ignores what Nico is bringing up, though Nico I think should have placed his caveat on all pages.

Nico's point would be if he could do this at home--and if the "Lone Gunman" TV pilot episode (which modeled the '9-11 live script' almost identically mere months earlier), was WESCAM technology reliant and based; and if the '9-11 days events' were WESCAM technology camera helicopter based at least documentably on the north side view of WTC2, then a great deal of visual proof for at least one angle of approach may have been an insertion or cloak to hide stuff.

With the "ME" issue mentioned above ('mutual exclusive' claims yelling at each other), Jayhan who I think originally brought up the pods on WTC2's plane (visible from one view of the WTC2 hit approach, the 'non-Nico side', a view from the south side of the approach), battles with Nico, whose WESCAM based hypothesis/analysis is from the opposite side's view of the WTC2 hit approach. They argue equally purist things about the other's information.

However, I don't see much mutually contradictive in it, given that they are analyzing different view approaches of the same events.

And from the "Nico side" of approach/view on WTC2's hit, since the strange hovering and waiting long shot from the 9-11 news helicopter did have WESCAM on it (which he shows), it calls into question how this "Nico side view from the north" of the 'visual evidence' at the WTC2 crash may have been far more professionally doctored and invented, while "Jayhan's view from the south side" doesn't really contradict that, even though their argument seems to be falsely premised on just that mutually exclusive claim.

They are pretending they are both arguing about the events, instead of recognizing they are arguing about different physical approaches of the WTC2 issue which aren't actually in contradiction of each other, and instead can be quite additive.

Both of these data together are interesting and makes sense and don't actually contradict as they are based on different video clips stationed at opposite trajectories of the same 'event', though the people you read to get this information act "too purist" to seemingly notice this.

2.

Adding to it, it fails to contradict this eyesight view either, mentioned in In Plane Site. It's from Mark Burnback, a Fox News employee who they put on the phone only once, live, and never played him back again. This was before any towers collapsed.

He said (at around 44-45 min. into In Plane Site), that he was "close enough to see markings...yeah, there was definitely a blue logo, definitely...toward the front. It didn't look like a commercial plane...didn't see any windows on the plane....I didn't see any windows on the side,...I was probably a block away...It was not a normal flight like I've seen at any airport. It did not look like it belonged in this area."

3.

If it was a military plane, it could explain the strange mounted stuff on the bottom and explain the personnel who supplied it.

Like I mentioned I think in the previous post arguing against such "ME" theories ('mutual exclusive' claims), actually the financial crime of trillions stolen from the Pentagon parallels once more perhaps with the technological personnel, each enhancing each other instead of taking away from such Jeff-preferred(TM) financial evidence.


UAL175 WTC2 substitute plane technological SUSPECT--fits who has the Boeing substitute capacity,too!


"DOV ZAKHEIM: It's his multiple connections--to [1] writing for the Project for the New American Century, to [2] the 1993 investigation whitewash of the WTC attacks, to [3] retrofitted Boeing tanker leasing and to other interesting [4] drone plane monitoring (and self-destructing) technologies, to his [5] Pentagon job positioning right before 9-11, and from which he subsequently leaves later after 9-11---all of that is the interest here.

Like so much if you follow out the 'state terror' thesis, it all fits depressingly well. Dov had the Boeing substitutes. Dov had the Flight Termination System as well. Follow back to human networks from the materials involved and you have your people. Who else would have substitutable retrofittable Boeings available for 9-11 unless it was the U.S. military? ---

His company Systems Planning Corporation (SPC) interestingly enough which was connected to the 1993 WTC terror attack 'investigation' by one of its subsidiaries, Tridata--the investigation of which was of course a whitewash because it ignored that the FBI actually provided the live bombs to their patsy mark in this first attempt to take down the towers and launch a global police state for Clinton. ---

By 2001, they were desperate to take it down, and this next attempt, which succeeded, was far more detailed in its cover story. ---

...

Dov Zekheim, ex-Comptroller of Pentagon, appointed May '01

...

This guy Dov Zekheim is a link between Pentagon, Florida, WTC technical information from 1993 investigation,...both retrofitted Boeings and potential substitute technology in their place for the WTC hits....Oh yeah, he wrote the 'gotta have a New Pearl Harbor' wish into the Project for a New American century document.

Unlike few people in the 9-11 coverup, he was in a position to both plan as well as implement, and represents a personnel link between the 1993 WTC hit and the 2001 hits. ---

...

Dov is positioned in his 'new public' Pentagon position right before the state terror acts of 9-11. Dov went from his position at Systems Planning Corporation to become the Comptroller of the Pentagon in May 2001.

He left his Pentagon position after 9-11.

I would compare Dov's "in and out" here as similar to the 'in and out' of the Enron Vice President who was made Secretary of the Army, similar to the 'get in in place' quality of putting long term Bush crony Mueller as head of FBI place before 9-11 to organize a post 9-11 coverup, and similar strategy to Bush's appointment of his VP Cheney to the Director of '(non)terror response' in FEMA in May 2001--months before the attacks. , etc., etc.,. They all are in place months before and ready.

...



After more than 20 years of presiding over more than $3 trillion worth of military fraud, Pentagon Comptroller Dov Zakheim has left the building. He will join Booz Allen Hamilton through the traditional revolving door for government-corporate insiders.

A former Deputy Undersecretary of Defense from 1985-1987 and Pentagon Comptroller since 2001, Zakheim was responsible for mismanaging more than $400 billion annually, as Pentagon discredited audits have persisted year after year.
The Department of Defense has never received a clean financial audit.
As recently as the December 18, 2003 audit by GAO (General Accounting Office), the Pentagon's 'War on Iraq Scam' and other Information Technology (IT) Fraud yielded $1.6 billion in "losses," money "missing" and otherwise unaccounted for. "


And the clencher is that Zakheim waits to announce 3 trillion was just stolen/unaccounted for by the Pentagon, stolen from the U.S. Government, on September 10, 2001. Then the next day, September 11, 2001, that story is soon buried. Zakheim leaves his position months later.

I've read elsewhere, which I can't source right now that a great deal of the budget auditing paper documentation project went up in (cordite) smoke and flames, since it was stored in the Pentagon renovation wing where the Pentagon hit occurred, which was kept mostly empty of personnel by the way to keep casualties low--except for certain segments of the Pentagon staff that it seems they wanted to liquidate/assassinate at the same moment, who had their offices there during the "renovation." So call it a combination terror attack and cloaked assassination detail of certain segments of the Pentagon that a military coup wanted out of the way within their own ranks.

So yes, IC, just another day at the office in some ways.

3/24/2007 02:25:00 AM  
Blogger Silverfox said...

Sniffer:

Your insinuations and derogatory remarks aimed at our host do not demonstrate anything beyond your own willingness to lower yourself to such devices and only places your own credibity and motives in question, not his.

In short, you are quite needlessly embarassing yourself in a public forum by ignoring common courtesy and insulting the integrity of everyone here.

None of us are obliged to give a tinker's damn about anyone's opinion, including your's or our host's, but we are very much required to respect one another and our mutual willingnes to share and openly discuss those opinions without fear of having our character or motives called into question on either side.

The value of those opinions is srictly a matter of what they are and what they contain, not who presents them or that they are generous enough to take the time and effort necessary to put them forward for discussion.

I suggest you give this some serious consideration before you waste any more of your own time and effort on what is quite clearly neither in your own best interest nor anyone else's.

3/24/2007 04:27:00 AM  
Blogger Mark said...

Silverfox said:

"In short, you are quite needlessly embarrassing yourself in a public forum by ignoring common courtesy and insulting the integrity of everyone here. None of us are obliged to give a tinker's damn about anyone's opinion, including your's or our host's, but we are very much required to respect one another and our mutual willingness to share and openly discuss those opinions without fear of having our character or motives called into question on either side."

Well "disussing without fear" seems to be what Sniffer is doing, so congratulate him.

(If anything to me, so far only the strange out of the blue attacks on Shrub or Sniffer that seem truly pointless.)

And I don't know how you can gauge or expect someone else's embarrassment or make general comments or expectations about someone else's internal reaction.

"Discussing without embarrassment" is equally important so don't expect to add that one in.

"insulting the integrity of everyone here"? I'm not insulted. I never was about what he was saying. So that doesn't make everyone--by minus one at least. I would be insulted however if he or anyone carried through with your suggestion: I'd be insulted if he edited himself/herself, as you would prefer actually.

"None of us are obliged to give a tinker's damn about anyone's opinion". True, though you expect him to adopt yours which shows you don't really hold that opinion at all I think.

"...a public forum". I don't think somewhere that requires you to register is a public forum. :-) This may be conducted in public, though a public forum it isn't anymore. It's sort of like the old Roman Senate now, where most of them weren't allowed to speak and could only listen, unless patrician (ha, it rhymed).

3/24/2007 05:10:00 AM  
Blogger #1 Sniffer said...

Silverfox,

“...but we are very much required to respect one another” - Do you not notice that dishonesty is disrespectful?

You’re entitled to your opinion, and your opinion is undoubtedly shared by several others. But I don’t need your permission/approval to have my own opinion or express it. Nor do I have to follow the list of rules you just wrote me. I think our host is consistently dishonest about 911, I have supported that, so have many others, and in light of what 911 really was, dishonesty about something as important has potential consequences and thus changes all normal rules so I don’t feel I owe him anything. Apparently you have less a problem with that than I do, it’s your prerogative. To me some things are important enough to be open and blunt about. Taking your comments to heart would stifle debate and keep it artificial and away from key issues. Maybe that’s fine for you but not me. I have a clear conscience so disagree with you I have reason to be embarrassed. It would at least appear it is my blunt free speech that makes you more uncomfortable than someone’s speech that fragments peoples brains into boxes, to borrow his expression, as long as he fragments with courtesy. If so, again that is your decision, I make mine. I appreciate your honesty with me as I try to be with our host, though I observe you employ similar adjectives with me that you deplore when I use them with the other person. I have no problem with it, but you should, because they appear to break your own rules.

I will comment on anything as I see fit, unless the host blocks me. If he does the 911 issue is growing and he may need to block not just me in the future.

3/24/2007 06:32:00 AM  
Blogger Kosan said...

.

dear coked-up Icee,

You claim that 9/11 is a distraction. You say that it is all smoke and mirrors keeping us from concentrating on what really matters, the “green” revolution you tout (more on that below).

But, of course, 9/11 was meant to be a show-stopper, a world-beater, the defining moment in modern history, as the PNACers and neo-cons would have had it, and still claim even now. All of it done in order to goad the gullible Anglo-Euro-American masses into a terminally bloody and chaotic, world-devouring war against their own fabricated straw man construct, the basically non-existent forces of islamo-fascism, a.k.a. militant jihadism, a.k.a. islamist extremism (sic), (sic), (sic), and ill.

All of which were and are small, but well-financed, controlled creations of the Anglo-American intelligence services, with the help of the Saudi so-called “royal” family, in collaboration with and banking off of the creation of Wahhabism by Britain’s MI6, to the establishment of “Al Qaeda”, a.k.a. al-CIA duh, “the database” of the CIA’s mujahideen recruits for the Afghani war against the Russian invaders, Zbigniew Brzezinski’s own hand-picked “bunch of stirred up muslims.”

But it was not to be so. They goofed, meaning the planners in D.C. and London and Tel Aviv. They fucked up. Their operation didn’t come off quite as it was planned. Flight 93 missed its mark. Probably because some right-thinking U.S. general ordered the plane shot down. Then, they, you know, those people to whom the “money trail” actually would lead if anyone here had the balls to follow it, the people who you, Icee, claim do not even exist in any humanly knowable manner (now that’s some fucking form of agnosticism, ain’t it?)....

....THOSE PEOPLE had to do a rapid mop up operation.

And it turned out to be quite a sloppy one. The curtain hiding the illusion was torn. Now it became possible for Dorothy and Toto to unmask the evil wizard and to escape Oz.

But you would not have it so. You want us to stay in the Emerald green City....with you.

And Shrubbajerkoff simply tells us there’s no escape. We’re all going to die here anyway. The bad guys have won. So just grab a ham sandwich, lean back in front of Tales from the Crypt on your high definition DVD, lube up, and choke your chicken to the carnage, while you choke on your ham sandwich.

No thank you very much. No sale.

You can have both of those scenarios.

I choose not to dialogue with you any longer because (in my opinion, which is based on many tiresome, and admittedly ill-spent evenings spanning the most part of a year reading your bullshit posts) you are a persistent prevaricator, a disingenuous dissembler, a perseverating projector of your own devious distortions onto others, a skilled sophist of manifestly ill intent, a weasely (spelling?) whisperer of wiswas, a mealy mouthed minion of the luciferian powers that be. You are in service of chaos, an insufferably arrogant though cagily chimeric apologist for the cabalist agenda........shall I go on?

And, even if I spot you that Zappa was a skillful guitar technician, he was nevertheless both heartless and grotesque, not to mention puerile to the max, and tedious, and an avowed luciferian. Yes, your dear tio Frank, like you, his fanatico, both agents of darkness. But, no doubt, you knew that. I thus have no liking nor any need for either of you. Know that.

So, enjoy your drug experiences and the virtual non-reality they provide for you. They are not really real, or if seemingly so, are more likely to emanate from such forces in the universe as those you already serve. And they will indeed reinforce your steely-eyed albeit mistaken resolve that you are right beyond reproach. And they will strengthen your inane illusion that all who choose not to sit at your table of falsely drawn, faux “reason” and the pre-defined ersatz “compromise” which you have deigned to set, along with the checkered table cloth and two or three candles, as the occasion warrants, are in your estimation “part of the problem” or “stuck in the past” or whatever bogus metaphoric imprecation you cast on anyone who sees you for what you actually are.

You work for the other side, i.e. the ‘dark’ one, so to speak. You know it, and by now you ought to know that I know it. So any of your mock “who me?” protestations which you so often and so glibly make are strictly acting, “master thespian,” to the detriment of any of the remaining unwashed masses you may seek to keep stuck in your web of phony “dialogue”, like #1Sniffer, who seems to be teetering on the verge of sniffing you out for good.

Since you asked why.......

And since you asked for a response:

Here is a specific question for you. I shall think of it as a rhetorical question, because nothing you might answer would sway me to think of it as being truly meaningful, nor could it possibly induce me to imagine you as being honest at this point. But, speaking as a reformed bodhisattva, who may on occasion relapse, here it is “for the benefit of others”:

If you are such an all-fired environmentalist as you claim to be, why don’t you ever mention the scourge of GMO foods, and the likely kidney and liver damage, just for starters, that they seem to be foisting upon us and the rest of the animal kingdom?

Not to mention the flooding of the ground water with neurally toxic contamination like plant-produced pharmaceuticals such as cardiac drugs that can lower your heart rate to the point of blocking it completely, as in dead, or psychiatric drugs that can zone you out (you might like that, I guess), dumb you down, speed you up, make you psychotic, or even make you lactate.

Or how about Johns Hopkins’ recently announced fast-breeding, “malaria-resistant” super mosquitos that Bill Gates wants to send to Africa to “cure malaria”? Oh, and by the way, just as a little ghoulish touch, they also spliced in a gene that gives them glowing, fluorescent green eyes. Check out the link, while you can. There were over five hundred links to this story last week. Now there are only three links to it remaining on google. Don’t forget to click the heels of your ruby slippers together and say: “Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia,” tin man.

Where are you on that one, the big GMO issue, Mr. Pseudo-Nature Boy?

Save your breath. I wouldn’t believe you if you told me.

And how about the fact that the world’s bees are disappearing at a rapid pace on several continents around the planet?

To the tune of 50 to 70% of them in many places, like California and several dozen other states in the U.S., in the past year or so.

Yes, those very pollinators of all that grows by way of flowers and vegetables and fruit and nuts, the little buzzing bees which are essential to the integrity of the food chain on earth, and ultimately to the continued existence of all animal life, certainly including we humans, may be quite nearly on the verge of extinction which, should that occur, will carry us along with them to a similar place of non-existence in but a few years after their own untimely demise. The foregoing link is from your own dear Deutschland, btw.

And it’s not just the bees who are affected, of course:

Here’s more on that issue, and other effects of GMO crops in India.

But leave it to the mainstream media to cover it up.

The bee story hit big across the US a few weeks ago, but all the links are mostly scrubbed from google now.

In fact, since the story has pretty much moved offshore, there has been a revisionist onslaught of “nothing to see here, move along now” stories saturating the U.S., put out by the NY Times and its disinfo wire service the Associated Press, thousands of them in fact, which, humorously enough are pretty much equally split between blaming the problem on weather that’s too cold, or if you prefer, weather that’s too warm. Kind of like that old Gershwin tune sung so sweetly by Ella and Satchmo.

Well, at least the msm are equal opportunity disinformers. You can relate to that personally, no doubt, Mr. Icee. Or is it Ms. Icee?

One can never quite tell. But no matter.

And speaking of people of ambiguous sexuality who are plagued by delusions of haughty grandeur, there’s little Schlubbapopma, who imagines he is engaged in some “epic battle” with somebody named “Mojo”.

Dream on, straw man. If wishes were horses, beggars would ride.

My name is not Mojo. I could put you in touch with him if you are so desperate to make contact. But I doubt he would speak to you. He thinks you are as much of a major asshole as I do. And, besides, this is not a dialogue. Think of it as a scolding, which is a form of monologue.

Now don’t go blowing yourself over not being able to “feel the love”. You know nothing of love, not even for yourself. You are just one giant, gaping, malignant narcissistic sucking wound. And though that may be pitiable in and of itself, I have no love for you, and barely any pity. Sorry. I am not a Christian. My religion does not require me to love such a thing as you. Rather, it instructs me to avoid you, which advice I shall be heeding as soon as I am through rubbing your nose in the mess you’ve made on the floor:

Let’s revisit your first post on the last thread, just ten days ago, shall we?

Shrub, you wrote:

“What kind of Higher Intelligence/God could allow the carnage known as humanity to continue? What kind of force could this be to sit by idly and watch as its creation destroys its creation....all in the name of free will?”

“Give me a break....and believe me, I've been there. It is Bullshit, plain and simple. I can't believe you continue to buy into their shit. It's not free will if your defiance yields you torment for eternity....what the hell (pun intended) kind of choice is that?”

“No thanks....I opted out of that charade long ago...and it was a difficult opt out. I was harangued by demonic nightmares for at least a year before things finally settled down. I was brainwashed...there is no doubt about it, and apparently you are too if you swallow their swill.”


Yes, eternity is a long time. And thank God Almighty I won’t be spending it with you. Now that would indeed be hell.

But in Islam, kafir,, hell is not eternal. God limits its duration, even for the most wicked.

That is the nature of Infinite Mercy and Infinite Compassion.

Bismillah ir Rahman ir Rahim.

Mojo that.

But hey, Scrubbajerkov, how about them “demonic nightmares”? Maybe you should lay off the HBO for awhile.....

And don’t think you invented blasphemy. You’re a piker. You haven’t advanced the nefarious art one whit. Simply because you’ve learned how to use SpellCheck, you may imagine that you appear slightly more intelligent than the average blasphemer to the unscrubbed, unwary, RiggedIntel novitiate, but you are still merely the same barely literate, moronic bully you have always been.

I know it, even if you have bought into your own most recent delusion. Look into the mirror. What do you see?

Yuck, eh?

Shame on you also for bullying Sounder just because he might on occasion agree with someone other than you, whoever it may be. And I didn’t hear him agreeing with me, so maybe you’re hearing voices now, too.

Maybe it’s the GMO pharmaceuticals in the groundwater affecting your “mind”.

I think you’re just pissed off that you can’t steal his lunch money or knock his books out of his hand in the virtual hallways of this low rent Junior High School, or for you, special class Kindergarten, which you haunt like some kind of preta or hungry ghost.

Hey, your incarnation sucks. That much is clear.

As for ericswan, whose signet is the cygnet:

I hope you really meant what you said with regard to withdrawing any intended or unintended disrespect to the various appelations human beings have given to God.

Since everything here is in written form, it is impossible to tell if you were being sincere or snarky when you apologized for being flippant. If sincere, then bravo. It’s between you and the Almighty, in any case. It’s not my battle to fight, for or against. I was just pointing out something to you as a potential kindness, to try and raise your awareness and prick your conscience a bit, since I like to imagine that you, unlike some of your avowed confrères, actually have one.

At least a vestigial one.

Why you are afraid or averse to look at a link from Reuters is beyond me (your previous comment), but so be it. Willful ignorance is as willful ignorance does.

As far as the “satanic verses” issue you raised. I don’t know what your level of information or misinformation may be on this topic, so I’ll be brief:

The so-called ‘satanic’ verses were a couple of lines of the early Qur’an which Muhammad himself recognized to be false, i.e. to be coming from his own imagination rather than as an imparted revelation. The content of these verses which he inserted out of his own ego, stated that God had three daughters (sic), as a sop to the practice of pagan goddess worship of jahiliya Arabs, in a misguided attempt to get them “on board” with Islam, so to speak.

Muhammad quickly realized the profound error he had made when an authentic revelation came to him criticizing this invention of his own mind, clarifying that
in truth, God, not being a person, has neither daughters, nor a son.


Islam, as revealed in the Qur’an, holds that God is One, all-encompassing, undivided, and without partners.

It is this understanding of the unity of God which is really the sole significant, doctrinally distinguishing difference between Christianity and Islam. There is little else to separate the two religions, other than perhaps the concept of Original Sin. Islam holds that people are born morally pure and spiritually beautiful.

It is culture, or people’s parents, who fuck them up, and dissuade them to believe bullshit and to do wrong. Witness Shrub.

But, parental mistakes aside, it still falls to the individual person to straighten him or herself out. Free will, baby. It’s not just a job, it’s a spiritual adventure.

And just to head off the Shrub’s penchant for hurling epithets about wife beaters and goatfucking (These being his preferred pastimes, I surmise. I mean to say the acts themselves, not just the hurling of his self-referential epithets), let me point out the following about Islam, the Qur’an, and Muslims vis a vis the canard of wife beating:

The best, and most thoroughly consistent textual analysis of Surah 4, An Nisa (the women), Verse 34 of the Qur’an, actually translates as follows:

Ahmed Ali’s explanatory note on the translation of this verse: “For the three words fa'izu, wahjaru, and wadribu in the original, translated here 'talk to them suasively,' 'leave them alone (in bed - fi'l-madage'),' and 'have intercourse', respectively, see Raghib, Lisan al-'Arab, and Zamakhsari. Raghib in his Al-Mufridat fi Gharib al-Qur'an gives the meanings of these words with special reference to this verse.

Fa-'izu means to 'to talk to them so persuasively as to melt their hearts.' (See also v.63 of this Surah where it has been used in a similar sense.)

Hajara means to separate body from body, and points out that the expression wahjaru hunna means ’to refrain from touching or molesting them.’ Zamakhshari is more explicit in his Kshshaf when he says, 'do not get inside their blankets.'

Raghib points out that daraba means to have intercourse, and quotes the expression darab al-fahl an-naqah, 'the stud camel covered the she-camel,' which is also quoted by Lisan al-'Arab. It cannot be taken here to mean 'to strike them (women).'

This view is strengthened by the Prophet's hadith sahih, his own authenticated personal saying, found in a number of authorities, including Bukhari and Muslim: "Could any of you beat your wife as he would a slave, and then lie with her in the evening?"

There are other traditions in Abu Da'ud, Nasa'i, Ibn Majah, Ahmad bin Hanbal and others, to the effect that
Muhammad personally forbade the beating of any woman, saying: "Never beat God's handmaidens."

Even the Feminist Sexual Ethics Project in the Department of Near Eastern and Judaic Studies at Brandeis (America’s pre-eminent Jewish University) came up with this interpretation. So it’s a little hard to argue that it constitutes some kind of wishful-thinking apologetics on the part of a “modern” Muslim trying to make the religion au courant. As is customary, it is simply the yammering mainstream media in defiance of the truth, which lies perniciously and, above all, to the detriment of all of humanity.

The Qur’an was a millenium and a half ahead of even secular Western law in defining women’s rights in divorce, including the right to financial support, custody of the children for the the first half of their lives until adulthood, and the right of divorce itself without fault. As of last year, the State of Texas still had no statutory provisions for spousal support.

Put that in your dmt pipe, Icee, and in your crack pipe, Schlubb, and in your hash pipe, Swan. and consider not lighting the match.

You might learn more if you stay straight and sober.

And there is so much to learn.

But now it is way past dawn and work beckons.

I’ve got to feed the chickens (rather than choke them).

Maybe I’ll even get enough time to go clear some brush.

As to whether you will ever hear from me again, only God knows.

Personally, I hope not. But........who can say?

Either way, forget me.

Remember God instead. An infinitely more worthy subject for your contemplation. Place your heart and your mind there, if you so choose and so will.

Either way, whether you will it or no:

God observes your [vestigial] conscience,

and

God is closer to you than your neck veins.

God is always there, whether you know it, or refuse to know it.

Don’t wait until you breathe your last breath to wake up to reality.

Because then it will be too late. Unlike some of the Christian doctrines claim, a last minute “I die in the name of Christ” will not get you dispensation or forgiveness. It does not work that way. That may be a meme of the exploiting powers that be, but it will not cut the mustard.

God demands good works in this lifetime.

It is really fairly simple.

And beautiful.

Al Hamdulillah!

And lest I forget, or disappoint:


LA ILAHA ILLA LLAH



as Salaamu alaykoum.........

3/24/2007 08:49:00 AM  
Blogger heath said...

Jeff,

On the board, you asked if it was intellectually honest to make 'weak but sexy' arguments to hook the 'sheeple'.

The way you framed your question was intellectually dishonest.

There are methods that could be used which could be construed as dishonest, but if your aim is objectivity, I'm sure those same people who are 'hooked' can appreciate after the fact perfectly innocent methods of drawing attention. I'm sure there are few of us, of whom are advocating 'weak but sexy' arguments to hook, who recommend using dishonest information. It actually feels insulting to have you question the honesty of my motivation. And it keeps coming back round to feeling as if Jeff is a little too set in his ways.

3/24/2007 11:28:00 AM  
Blogger ericswan said...

I appreciate your comments. It reminds me a bit of Hitler's writing in Mein Kamph. Don't be offended, it just does. He was very down on his Aryans wasting their precious "time".

I declined your links past present and future. I wonder, however, if you pulled "bee's knees" off of my blog.

http://eastsouthwestandnorth.blogspot.com/2007/02/bees-knees.html

Prolly not eh? different spelling and all but the same message.

As far as "hash pipe" I really love that song.

http://www.zeolite-products.com/documents/Using%20Zeolites%20in%20Agriculture.pdf

Please check out the above zeolite link and if it screws up as it usually does go to my blog and click on the zeolite link

http://cygnid.blogspot.com/


I don't know exactly what it is you go off about so I'm going to read it again and will try to figure out if you are moving the dialogue forward, sideways or off.

3/24/2007 12:26:00 PM  
Blogger ericswan said...

Remember who you are speaking to. There are many called, few are chosen. I will revisit when the time is right. Prepare the way. Choose your words with kindness and deference. You may judge but you may not adduce. adios..

3/24/2007 01:27:00 PM  
Blogger barracuda said...

Whoa Nelly! Frank Zappa was not a satanist. Regroup.

3/24/2007 01:59:00 PM  
Blogger iridescent cuttlefish said...

My Name Is Not Mojo,

Thanks for the well-considered response. You're right; it's not dialogue in which you engage, it's a swordfight. But why?, one has to wonder. Obviously, you get to demonstrate your rapier wit better through antagonism and attack than through an open and sustained dialogue, but to what end, to do the very thing of which you accuse me, to ram your POV down someone else's throat, as opposed to contributing to synthesis of considered opinion?

I really cannot figure you out at all; you remain an enigmatic, swirling contradiction. On the one hand you assure us of your humility before the throne of the one God, which imparts a certain fellow creature-ness to your persona, while on the other you cannot seem to contain your sneering derision for everyone else. How many times have I asked you to get down off your high horse and just follow through on a discussion, instead of your never-varying pattern of parry, thrust and dramatic retreat? Off to feed the chickens, indeed. (It would sound more convincing if we didn't immediately get the impression of a cape being flung over your aristocratic shoulder as you urged your noble steed away from the odious press of the unwashed masses. Just trying to help with that image thing. You're welcome.)

Now, before we got down to the business at hand, can we first get to the bottom of your other bizarre behaviors? Why the many faces of Dr. Lao shtick? Seriously. What is the point of all the disguises, when we can always see your Roman nose poking out? (It's especially disquieting when you're in waitress drag, which is no homophobic slur, btw--I'm sure that some men do look good when dressed as women. I just don't have any experience in this area.) Next, what's with the constant "paid professional" insinuations? Do you really imagine that those string-pulling relatives of yours (from whom you claim to have escaped, bravely disavowing the privilege of your class) would wish to promote my perspective? (As you like to say, more on that anon.)

Lastly, why do you keep dropping hints of your own spook status? When you recount an amazingly close attention to details about myself that I've mentioned in passing over the course of hundreds of postings? Do you imagine that everyone here, including the people with I talk on a daily basis, knows that I used to play the bass guitar in a post punk band? I mentioned that exactly once--why would you gather personal information like a vacuum cleaner, or say mysterious things like, "I could put you in touch with him if you are so desperate to make contact.," when speaking of the "Mojo" personality? All these things, from the multiple disguises, to the constant attack mode and the disinfo agent accusations coupled with veiled hints at your own affiliations, but most especially in your refusal to engage in a sustained dialogue, combine to make you seem like the thing against which you rail. Is there some strategy in there that I'm too obtuse to recognize?

The thing is, Whoever You Are, unlike you, I am exactly who I appear to be. I've never pretended to be someone or something other than what I am. More to the point, when I talk to someone here, I answer their questions, I make an attempt to consider their perspective before I respond, and I never, ever shy away from a proposed topic or discussion. This is not to say I'm not human or that I don't occasionally lose my temper or my self restraint--remember the time I claimed to have made you "look like an idiot"? Of course you do.

Now, if you want to see how people who disagree about something can still maintain a dialogue without resorting to any of your petulant and very peculiar behaviors, watch Mark and me on this thread. We're arguing, sort of, but we're each considering what the other says and neither of us is hurling the sort of infantile, smug epithets that are your main stock in trade. So, again, what's with the whole Phantom of the Opera act? Get real, dude--you may be a smart guy, but you're not really an innately superior or (even more obviously) a spiritually advanced human being. No man is intrinsically worth more than any other and no true spiritual adept would sneer down the length of his nose at his fellow humans.

Now, finally, to the business at hand. You wrote:

But it was not to be so. They goofed, meaning the planners in D.C. and London and Tel Aviv. They fucked up. Their operation didn’t come off quite as it was planned. Flight 93 missed its mark. Probably because some right-thinking U.S. general ordered the plane shot down. Then, they, you know, those people to whom the “money trail” actually would lead if anyone here had the balls to follow it, the people who you, Icee, claim do not even exist in any humanly knowable manner (now that’s some fucking form of agnosticism, ain’t it?)....


....THOSE PEOPLE had to do a rapid mop up operation.

And it turned out to be quite a sloppy one. The curtain hiding the illusion was torn. Now it became possible for Dorothy and Toto to unmask the evil wizard and to escape Oz.

But you would not have it so. You want us to stay in the Emerald green City....with you.


From there you go on to accuse me of being a phony environmentalist because I haven't addressed GMO and I'm not sure what all else. Last things first then: I'm sure there are many, many environmental issues I haven't addressed. Hundreds, even. Your point is...? Backing up slightly, you say I want to keep people in their comfy consumer cacoons, not to seek out the wizard and expose his machinations. Really? This all goes back to the question of where (and whether, I suppose) 9/11 fits into the pattern of deception that is the system of control of the many by the few.

Unlike my more pessimistic friends Shrub & Richard, my view is that change is possible because the illusion runs much deeper than the spectacle of 9/11. It's all a sham. History is bunk, to borrow the old adage from a man whom I do not much admire (although, as Edwin Black describes him, Henry Ford was, like you, a swirling mass of contradictions, some good, many not so good.) The evidence is everywhere that small groups of men who thought themselves superior to everyone else (the social Darwinists with whom you said you'd prefer to cast your lot, as if there were some meaingful difference between them and the worldkillers behind 9/11) have used economies of scarcity, the only economic system ever allowed to be practiced anywhere, including the so-called "communist" states, to manipulate nations and populations, to bend all of us to their perverse will. (I left out the potlatching Kwakiutl and other gift economies because they were part of the natural world, not the "civilized" world which we inhabit.)

Why is it that you've never dealt with the issue of economies of abundance, My Name is not Mojo? It is the future, you know (at least the one that doesn't end in a giant gulag). I won't go into any more detail on that now, as this thing is already getting too long, but let me say it again: we can and will build a new, non-hierarchical system (or die trying) because the illusion which you and #1 Sniffer think is so solid that only passenger airliners could pierce it was already quite transparent to intrepid observers like Mae Brussel, Jules Archer, Charles Higham, Michael Zezima and many, many others...and, most importantly, their millions of readers, even unto the most common man feeding his chickens who has always known that money is power and that those who have it have rigged the system in their favor, to the detriment of us all.

I will concede that there exists the possibility that 9/11 could open some eyes to the grand deception, but two essential caveats. The first is that 9/11 is but a small part of the deception--you guys speak of missing trillions when I'm talking about the entire world economy being twisted to the service of the Empire which never really died. The second is that you have to give up this notion of "right-thinking generals' and the "treasonous" behavior of the 9/11 cabal because these things imply that there is some virtue in patriotism and that there are no grounds for the blowback we see in the growing sentiment of what the lap-dog press calls "anti-Americanism" but which is really anti-imperialism. Patriotism is a disease in any of its manifestations.

America and the rest of the "First World" have no right to their ill-gotten gains; defending the imperative to guard the riches exploited from the long suffering earth and her many orphaned peoples is tantamount to defending the Empire. All of it has to go. Manifest Destiny, the obscenely groping hand of the "free market," the pre-planned clashes of civilizations--all of it needs to be repudiated. 9/11 is the very tip of an ice berg so large that it is the world around usi. As far as your concerns about the social & environmental issues I've been remiss in mentioning, something like the "whole story" can be found in the main narrative and the side-bar links at the LoveEarth Network's Nazis.Net page.

So what's it going to be, Ye Who Shall Not Be Named--are you going to take off the feather boa and dispense with all those tricks of the trade you so enjoy and actually engage in dialogue, or will you persist in your assassin's role? Surprise yourself, you predictable creature.

3/24/2007 02:04:00 PM  
Blogger CuriosityShop said...

I always seem to end up coming here and posting in the middle of a sword fight! My bad timing I guess, But hey I have chickens to feed and miles to go before I sleep, so I'll just post my little movie synopsis and fly away -

Aka Movie Girl

It was the Jews, no wait it was the Arabs, no wait it was the CIA. It was CD! My own opinion here, but how easily it is to spin the story – and get so many “truthseekers” lost in the irrelevant details!

The Usual Suspects is a 1995 American movie written by Christopher McQuarrie (who earned an Oscar for the screenplay) and directed by Bryan Singer. It stars Kevin Spacey (who won an Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor for his performance), Gabriel Byrne, Chazz Palminteri, Stephen Baldwin, Pete Postlethwaite, Benicio Del Toro and Kevin Pollak.

The Usual Suspects tells the story of Roger "Verbal" Kint (Spacey), a small-time con man, who is in a police interrogation, and tells his interrogator, Agent Kujan (Palminteri), a convoluted story about events leading to a massacre and massive fire that have just taken place on a ship docked at the Port of Los Angeles in San Pedro Bay. Using flashback and narration, Verbal's story becomes increasingly complex as he tries to explain why he and his partners-in-crime were on that boat.

Flash forward -
Verbal retrieves his personal effects from the jail warden: a gold watch, a gold cigarette lighter, and a pack of cigarettes. Kujan, relaxing in the office he used for the interrogation, commented that Verbal was left alive to keep the legend of Keyser Söze alive. Suddenly he starts to notice details from Verbal's story appearing on objects around the room; most notably, the cups from which they both have been drinking coffee are made by a company called Kobayashi Porcelain. Finally putting the pieces together correctly, Kujan scrambles outside, just missing a fax with the artist's impressions of Keyser Söze's face (which bears more than a passing resemblance to the now-released Verbal Kint). As Verbal leaves the jail, his distinctive limp suddenly disappears, and his contorted, palsied hand straightens out. He flips open his lighter (an action Verbal previously proved unable to do), deftly lights a cigarette, and then steps into a waiting Jaguar limo driven by "Mr. Kobayashi" departing just before Kujan arrives and misses him.

The film closes with two quotes Verbal has told during the course of narrating the story; "The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist", and then, describing Söze's disappearance after destroying the Hungarian gang in Turkey "And like that, he's gone."

The title is a reference to the film Casablanca. On multiple occasions in that movie, when confronted with a crime he does not really want to solve, Captain Renault orders his men to "round up the usual suspects." In The Usual Suspects, such an undiscriminating dragnet is exactly the kind of operation that resulted in the five main characters meeting in a police line-up.

While embraced by most viewers and critics, The Usual Suspects was the subject of harsh derision by some. Roger Ebert, in a review for The Chicago Sun-Times, provided a rating of one-and-a-half stars out of four. He wrote in part:

"The first time I saw 'The Usual Suspects' was in January, at the Sundance Film Festival, and when I began to lose track of the plot, I thought it was maybe because I'd seen too many movies that day. Some of the other members of the audience liked it, and so when I went to see it again in July, I came armed with a notepad and a determination not to let crucial plot points slip by me. Once again, my comprehension began to slip, and finally I wrote down: 'To the degree that I do understand, I don't care.' It was, however, somewhat reassuring at the end of the movie to discover that I had, after all, understood everything I was intended to understand. It was just that there was less to understand than the movie at first suggests.

The story builds up to a blinding revelation, which shifts the nature of all that has gone before, and the surprise filled me not with delight but with the feeling that the writer, Christopher McQuarrie, and the director, Bryan Singer, would have been better off unraveling their carefully knit sleeve of fiction and just telling us a story about their characters - those that are real, in any event. I prefer to be amazed by motivation, not manipulation... the 'solution,' when it comes, solves little - unless there is really little to solve, which is also a possibility."

http://www.lookingglassnews.org/viewvideo.php?vid=mastersofuni
The Real Masters of the Universe (43 minutes if you really want truth)

And yes, “The Devil does wear Prada”.

Time to go feed my chickens!

3/24/2007 02:18:00 PM  
Blogger Kosan said...

dearest Movie Girl,

It is a pity that you chose to join with Roger Ebert to trash what is a genuinely brilliant movie, The Usual Suspects.

The reason Ebert trashes it is, no doubt, because it hints very broadly at the huge criminal conspiracy in our midst which masquerades, like the devil, as being both weak and innocuous.

But kudos for picking up on a hidden meme, that goes back to the earlier post on the revealer of such hidden hands of machination and the cabalist manipulation of Western and many Eastern governments as well for the past 4,000 years or so, Tupper Saussy.

When I first came across that name a couple of days ago, I immediately thought of the film you mentioned, and in particular the name of the arch-villian, Keyser Söze.

There was something about the music of the name Tupper Saussy, both rhythmically and sonically which immediately invoked the ism of Keyser Söze for me.

Could the film have been an embedded attempt to trash the name of a man who exposed the hidden hand of empire? It is certainly possible, in my estimation. Just like the coked Icee persists in spreading his "sealed car from London" view of proletarian power, casting caped aspersions of falsified class separation on someone whose likely held more manual labor jobs in his life than the little luciferian punk rocker himself.

And at the risk of appearing to engage in dialogue with the prevaricating cephalopod, the Cuttlefish says he is "always himself". Oh yeah. That's rich. So you really are one of those spineless sea creatures I've seen in various aquaria and while snorkeling on a coral reef?

Well, praise God and pass the speargun. I'm hungry.

Just the Darwinian in me rearing his survival-oriented head.

But, hey, thanks for revealing yourself to be the One-Worlder you are, when you trash the idea of nation. While it is a nasty fiction, with its borders and passports, I yet prefer it over subjugation to the global gulag you and your friends the Rockefeller brothers would foist upon us.

Why don't you go play "Imagine" on your bass guitar while you read Lenin, and recognize how uncannily much his visage resembles that of his intellectual heir to enslavement under the totalitarian red banner of Michael Chertoff? Because they both would be our masters. And you would let them.

As for the cygnet, I deferred from pegging you as the cowardly lion, just to complete the rogues trilogy.

But after you equate faith in the One God, adherence to conscience, the recognition of the primodial goodness, morality and spiritual beauty of humanity with Mein Kampf, well then it is clear beyond any shadow of a doubt that you are just another flying monkey who is engaged in a skywriting exercise to terrorize poor Dorothy and Toto.

Go back to your witch and tell her you failed in your mission.

In the spirit of reciprocity I won't check out your links either, and I'll raise you: I won't even save or re-read your post at any time in the future either.

Call.

Spook indeed.

Your wish.

Try Loyal Opposition.

An honorable and timeless pursuit.

Opposition to your darkness!

Hey, did I just hear Dave Chappelle speaking as Rick James?

"Cocaine: It's a helluva drug."

Hey, they don't call it dope for nothing.

In keeping with Heath's comment and the general tenor of the activity to which it is devoted, I really think Jam-master Jeff ought to rename this blog Intellectual Dishonesty.

It certainly fits him and it and many of the "usual suspects" here to a "t".

Party on, and let the dumbassification begin.

Whoops, I see that it's already in full swing.

Unlike you bozos, I really do have chickens to feed.

Life on the farm, you know,

Not a pharm farm, mind you, just a little old-fashioned one.

Unless the wind blows that GMO shit our way. Then I might have to pay Monsanto royalties for ruining my crops.

God forbid.

At least there are still swarms of bees on our land.

For now.



.........wa alaykoum Salaam.

3/24/2007 03:53:00 PM  
Blogger Shrubageddon said...

IC,

I figured Mojo out long ago. His only way of connecting is through antagonism and insult. It's his way of giving you an affectionate hug. I feel genuinely honored that he has the most disdain for me of all posters. Nobody here shows me that kind of love and respect like Mojo does. I love you too, Mojo. You're like a brother to me and my life would be barren and bereft without you.

La La Poop Allah

By the way...in case you're interested, the series finale of Rome is this Sunday on HBO....you don't want to miss it. And, for those who were wondering, my wife is making a Chocolate Cream Pie for dessert tonight.......ummmm...yummy...yummy.

MovieGirl.....The Usual Suspects was an excellent movie. Have you ever seen An Unbearable Lightness of Being, per chance?

3/24/2007 04:14:00 PM  
Blogger iridescent cuttlefish said...

But, hey, thanks for revealing yourself to be the One-Worlder you are, when you trash the idea of nation. While it is a nasty fiction, with its borders and passports, I yet prefer it over subjugation to the global gulag you and your friends the Rockefeller brothers would foist upon us.

So, those are the only alternatives, O Wise One? We have to accept the world as it is because the only alternative is the New World Order? Kind of unimaginative of you, isn't it? This may come as something of a shock to you, Darwin, but there are those of us who feel that the much feared NWO is nothing more than the logical conclusion of the path already embarked upon by the Existing World Order. There is another way, the one that you and Daniel Pouzzner try so hard to discredit: the egalitarian path. And please, don't bother with your scary tales of comrades Lenin & Stalin. Their elite was every bit as in charge as Rockefeller's minions.

As for the identity crisis, what I meant was that I don't switch identitites & genders and engage in all the spookcraft that seems to tittilate you so. You really can't just talk about the issues, can you? Slash & parry, mate, slash & parry. (Anything to avoid an honest discussion.)

PS. Milan Kundera is more than he seems...doubtless the attraction, eh?

3/24/2007 04:30:00 PM  
Blogger ericswan said...

I have a small contrition to make. Call it a confessional. I really prefer the blog comments section to the blog. You know, the trip is better than the arriving. You're half out of your closet Ms. Mojo. Your blog is up and running and it does look busy. I liked the graphics too but no you apparently don't have a soul. How can that be? I would expect that your bi-cameral mind would have allowed comment at your blog but apparently that is not to be. None the less, I am sated knowing that you have taken that first step and put your many personas to one space we can assume you in fact inhabit with aclarity and self fulfillment.

Mein Kampf is just anothe book. Are you sure you want to damn the torpedoes full speed ahead? Isn't that called zeolotry?

3/24/2007 05:05:00 PM  
Blogger Kosan said...

e.s.: What the heck are you talking about? That was non-sequitur almost to the point of a word salad, dude.

Coked Icee:

“Slash and parry?”

I prefer post and riposte.

For you? I think it’s more slash and burn.

Why the different dramatis personae you ask?

Because it’s not about me. Just like it’s not about you.

It’s about the ideas behind the masks we wear. Yours just happens to be a spineless antediluvian.

Apt choice.

Mine are simply more various.

To fit the occasion, so to speak.

And it has been amusing, on occasion, to see you or Schlubby or the flying monkey imagine they hear “Mojo” calling out from behind someone else’s mask.

You really do find any voice of reason or sanity that threatening, don’t you?

So you’d rather thrust at the mask then deal with the ideas, or any semblance of truth, whether relative or, God help us, absolute.

So, thrust on, anti-Han Solo, with eric as Luke gone dark, and Shrub as a rabid wookie Chewbacca.

I am going to “watch” another “movie” now.

This Snark Wars bar scene is played out. Totally, dude.

And it certainly won’t be the nihilist and luciferian “Unbearable Lightness of Being”, with its meme that all human life and moral decisions are meaningless, insignificant to the point of “lightness”, no doubt the amoral meme to which all three of you hoboes are unswervingly committed, winking protestations to the contrary not excepted.

You commies are all alike.

Or is it you fascists?

Either way.

Both are lovers of chaos and the cruel order which follows.

In your world, perhaps.

Not the Real One.

3/24/2007 05:18:00 PM  
Blogger #1 Sniffer said...

IC stated to someone ?:

“Lastly, why do you keep dropping hints of your own spook status? When you recount an amazingly close attention to details about myself that I've mentioned in passing over the course of hundreds of postings?”

Seriously IC, do you get the feeling this is a “spook” run disinfo blog? Does anyone else? I too have noticed countless little unique spook-like aspects/behaviors to many posts here, such as your just cited example, for well over 2 years.

Example, whenever someone makes a particularly good 911 truth point, you will undoubtedly see a flurry of one or more large posts (you know, those huge unending ones including going to the trouble of careful html formatting and inbedding of numerous links and often off-subject to boot).

What is so odd about that? These messages show a pattern of closely following good 911 points just made, are often totally irrelevant, personal, sometimes cryptic (which only a selected few other posters seem to understand and respond to), regularly weird to the point of bizarre, and more often than not, foul, as in bad taste.

You’d think this was written by a nut, but no, the poster at other times makes perfectly excellent, cogent posts, and even in his long and strange new posts shows amazing sharpness of intellect, wide knowledge, and excellent writing ability; which raises the question in one, why would someone so smart waste his time so?

Only one answer makes sense to me: He wouldn’t except if he was a spook and his objective (assignment) was to drown out some previous information on 911, which his current message does quite effectively. In fact often that’s all it does (they don’t permanently round up those with dissident views yet so they just neutralize their communications, so maybe we should be thankful).

But this manner of dumping posts and CD are quite consistent with each other, since only the state could have carried CD out, and only the state employs real spooks, it makes sense only the state would put their spooks to good use in distracting us from CD, missiles, the media coverup, etc. It’s good training for them too, a good career assignment, and allows perfecting the science of controlling new internet communications environments. I’m speculating out-loud of course.

So it’s not just about the initial loaded article in a spook-run site, but also about what people say in response, i.e., controlling it’s debate. This very thread contains this same crap-dumping phenomena several times, like after each time someone like Mark, who is mostly dead on, posts something.

In fact when it happens after I post something, I take as a compliment I just made a good point! And when I’ve been away and see the latest message is one of those long ones, I have a sure clue someone’s just made a very good post and go searching for it!

Prove it yourself. Make a brief effective 911 truth (or other truth point not favorable of gov’t), stand back, and watch shit start getting posted. If one had enough time and interest I suppose one could make a detailed study of this, tabulating all these things week after week for a long time, and finding some very interesting patterns, characteristics, and trends that chance alone could not explain. I don’t, but a vague but certain pattern is perceived in my non-phographic memory brain.

So when I’ve voiced recently that Jeff is about disinfo, I wasn’t trying to pick on Jeff personally and blame him for what I see as not right here, but comment on the bigger picture (team) of which he is only a small part of, but which he still outwardly personifies.

In this way Jeff is similar to what Bush is on a larger scale. Many who are finally seeing the extent of the harm “his” government or nation is driving focus on him personally as the culprit, but while he is not individually blameless, he is just a puppet of others hidden and it’s not really his government, and he shouldn’t be given more credit (or blame) than he deserves. The problems would have been very similar if the nation’s “face” or “logo” was embodied by Al Gore or John Kerry. The problems were the same when George Washington was President.

As you’ve pointed out, the problem is much deeper than 911 (and I would add, Bush too), and these things are actually only symptoms of the deeper problems you correctly allude to.

3/24/2007 05:35:00 PM  
Blogger simuvac said...

http://news.wired.com/

France puts secret UFO archive on web

PARIS (AP) -- The saucer-shaped object is said to have touched down in the south of France and then zoomed off. It left behind scorch marks and that haunting age-old question: Are we alone? This is just one of the cases from France's secret "X-Files" - some 100,000 documents on supposed UFOs and sightings of other unexplained phenomena that the French space agency is publishing on the Internet.

France is the first country to put its entire weird sightings archive online, said Jacques Patenet, who heads the space agency's UFO cell - the Group for Study and Information on Unidentified Aerospace Phenomena.

Their oldest recorded sighting dates from 1937, Patenet told The Associated Press in an interview Friday. The first batch of archives went up on the agency's Web site this week, drawing a server-busting wave of traffic.

"The Web site exploded in two hours. We suspected that there was a certain amount of interest, but not to this extent," Patenet said.

The archive includes police and expert reports, witness sketches (some are childlike doodlings), maps, photos and video and audio recordings. In all, the archive has some 1,650 cases on record and about 6,000 witness accounts.

The space agency, known by its French initials CNES, said it is making them public to draw the scientific community's attention to unexplained cases and because their secrecy generated suspicions that officials were hiding something.

"There's always this impression of plots, of secrets, of wanting to hide things," Patenet said. "The great danger would be to leave the field open to sects and charlatans."

He said many cases were unexplained lights in the sky. "Only 20 to 30" could be classified as "Objet Volant Non Identifie" - UFOs that appeared to be physical objects, leaving "marks on the ground, radar images," he said.

Even Charles de Gaulle, France's wartime hero who became president, got the UFO bug.

"In 1954, there was a wave of sightings of phenomena in France, and it went up to the highest levels of state. Gen. de Gaulle himself assigned ... an aide and told him, 'Look into this for me, study it to see if something needs to be done,'" Patenet said.

That year, there were hundreds of sightings over several months, but generally there are 50 to 100 reported each year.

Only 9 percent of France's strange phenomena have been fully explained, the agency said. Experts found likely reasons for another 33 percent, and 30 percent could not be identified for lack of information.

Other cases were impossible to crack. The most baffling were labeled "Class D aerospace phenomena" - which the agency defines as "inexplicable despite precise testimonies and the (good) quality of material information gathered." Some 28 percent of sightings fall into this category.

Patenet singled out the January 1981 case of the saucer-shaped object that a witness said he saw land in Trans-en-Provence, a village inland from the French Riviera.

Some 8 feet across, the zinc-colored object made a whistling noise as it landed. The witness later drew a picture: It resembled a wok with a lid and legs.

"The machine stayed a few seconds on the ground and then left very quickly but it left marks that were analyzed and allowed us to determine that the ground had been heated up, that the object must have weighed several hundred kilos (pounds), and that surrounding plants underwent biological changes," said Patenet.

"So something really happened. It really defies analysis," he said.

The agency said everything in the archive would be published, except for psychological reports about witnesses and their names.

Most of the time, witnesses were sincere about what they saw, Patenet said.

"Very few look for publicity because they fear most of all that they will not be taken seriously."

Still, there were frauds.

In 1979, in Cergy-Pontoise outside Paris, a man showed up at a police station claiming his friend had been abducted by a UFO - a bright light that appeared on the road and swallowed up his car. Several days later, the man purportedly reappeared in a field, emerging out of a sphere of light.

Investigators went so far as to test the man's blood for signs that he had recently experienced weightlessness - and they found none. The agency labeled it a hoax.

Some cases took years to unravel. In 1985, two farmers near the Atlantic coastal city of Royan saw a burning object drop into a field nearby.

Experts initially concluded that it was part of the propulsion device of a recently launched satellite. Eventually they realized it was a piece of German World War II ordnance that spontaneously exploded four decades after the war.

Among the unexplained cases, one of the most perplexing concerned a 1994 Air France flight. While flying over the Paris region, the crew noticed a large brown-red disk hovering on the horizon and constantly changing shape. The case "has never been explained to this day, and leaves the door open to all possible hypotheses," the agency wrote.

So, do we have neighbors out there, after all?

"I don't have an answer to that," said Patenet. "Even if there is such a planet, given the size of the universe, what is the probability that two civilizations ... will meet or come across each other? I really don't know. It's very complicated. It's incalculable."

---

Associated Press writer Angela Doland in Paris contributed to this report.

---

On the Net:

http://www.cnes.fr

3/24/2007 05:41:00 PM  
Blogger Dr. Bombay said...

Mark wrote:
"Consider that no one
has mentioned the C130's flying
in the area of the Pentagon"
on 9/11. Not to butter my own
toast here, but I mentioned it
two RI posts ago. Lets also
not forget that AA77 which the
MSM claims hit the Pentagon was,
according to American Airlines,
piloted by a Mr. Burlingame who
just happened to have spent most
of his professional life...
working at the Pentagon.
And Jeff...
The only difference I
can see between the "New Truth"
as opposed to "Classic Truth" is
that the "New Truth", for whatever
reason, has probably added 100
million people to the ever growing
army of non-beleivers of that
bullshit story they tried to hand
us on 9/11.

3/24/2007 07:36:00 PM  
Blogger the author said...

To continue my train of thought from my last post: The notion of excluding certain lines of inquiry from the 9/11 Truth movement is self-defeating.

However, that's not to say that there's no need for self-restraint and intellectual rigor and honesty on the part of truth seekers. That should go without saying. If it needs further saying, then we should be saying it, and so should Jeff.

But that's not I understand Jeff to be saying. He's not urging caution; he's excluding entire fields of data -- some of the most salient data at that, the contrast between the evidence and the explanation -- from legitimate consideration. That's a mistake. If I was super- super-paranoid, and if Jeff hadn't already established a good track record on many other counts, I would call it disinformation.

--africkinamerican

3/24/2007 07:37:00 PM  
Blogger the author said...

Further comment: Yes, I do think that some of the more outre theories about pods and holograms are kind of silly, and that the singleminded zeal with which the proponents push these theories may render them counterproductive to the movement. Then, I haven't taken the time to research these theories. There very well could be something to them. (It's called open-mindedness.)

I have done a fair amount of reading about the case for and against the official version of the Pentagon crash, and I have so far come down against the official version.

I keep hearing that eyewitnesses unanimously saw a 757. Dave McGowan puts that -- and many other aspects of the government story -- to rest or at least to serious challenge, here.


As for the witnesses, there were actually relatively few, and an unusually large percentage of those who lent support to the official story were either career military types or media representatives. Some of the witnesses reported seeing an aircraft much smaller than a 757, possibly even a missile. Mike Walter, for example, told CNN that what he saw "was like a cruise missile with wings, went right there and slammed into the Pentagon. Huge explosion, great ball of fire, smoke started billowing out, and then it was just chaos on the highway."
(http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/11/pentagon.terrorism/)
Witness Tom Seibert told the Washington Post that he "heard what sounded like a missile, then we heard a loud boom." The same Post article revealed that "Ervin Brown, who works at the Pentagon, said he saw pieces of what appeared to be small aircraft on the ground." Needless to say, a Boeing 757 would hardly be considered a "small aircraft." (http://a188.g.akamaitech.net/f/188/920/5m/www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/metro/daily/sep01/attack.html)

The Post also spoke to a Steve Patterson, who said that he saw the plane from about 150 yards away, "approaching from the west about 20 feet off the ground." He described the plane as having "the high-pitched squeal of a fighter jet," and he said that it "flew over Arlington cemetery so low that he thought it was going to land on I-385. He said it was flying so fast that he couldn't read any writing on the side." Patterson also said that the aircraft that he saw "appeared to hold about eight to 12 people" -- hardly an aircraft of sufficient size to be a 757. And a bulky 757 is certainly not the type of aircraft that you would expect to be observed approaching the Pentagon "below treetop level," as this one purportedly was.



(More at this link)

If such theories become a problem to the truth movement, the solution is to refute them. Merely pronouncing them heresies and excommunicating the proponents is a poor substitute for such refutation.

3/24/2007 07:52:00 PM  
Blogger ericswan said...

Sniffer. The problem here is that we have more and more people on a payroll. If they had to get their hands dirty it wasn't gonna be in no stinkin' garden.

3/24/2007 08:44:00 PM  
Blogger Kosan said...

Ai yi yiiiiiiiii!

#1 Sniffer, if that was really “you” who just wrote the last post addressed to IC, then you are either (1) a master of irony and/or sarcasm (given to whom your post was addressed), or (2) you are mentally occluded beyond all reasonable expectation, OR, God help us, (3) you are not what you appear to be either, which is, of course, just a faceless blue screen name on a liquid crystal display, in any instance.

God only knows.

I think I will now put on Jimi Hendrix’s “Room Full of Mirrors”, crank up the volume to 11, and proceed to yank the last few remaining strands of graying hair out of my almost bald pate.

I surrender.

You win.

It seems like the majority of any “real” people on this blog are balled up in one of Jeff’s set of inter-nested boxes, the electronic Russian doll, rat’s maze equivalent known as the “Discussion Board”.

Congratulations to you, Heath, for having broken out for even a moment.

It was an all too momentary breath of fresh air.


And #1, when you wrote: “which raises the question in one, why would someone so smart waste his time so?”

If you were referring to Icee, your answer was on target.

If you were referring to me, then your answer was enough to make me realize how utterly and completely a waste of time it has indeed been.

Maybe this site should be renamed MK Bowls of moles, trolls, voles, and phony roles, foals without goals, stockings full of coal, faux proles with limp poles, bottomless holes, high tolls and grassy knolls.

My hat is off to you sir, with profound gratitude, for having liberated me from this dank prison, and you, armed with nothing but the force of blind ignorance. I never thought such a thing possible.

Given the state of the American public, it gives me renewed hope for the future.

Ah, but I was so much older then, I’m younger than that now.

God does indeed work in mysterious ways.

Al Hamdulillah!

God’s peace be upon you.

3/24/2007 08:44:00 PM  
Blogger Shrubageddon said...

There's my cue.....Mojo, please don't leave us again....and again...and again...and again. We love you and this place just wouldn't be the same without you. Please come back, Mojo...please, please, please.

Sniffer....Mojo is most cunning, is he not? In one of his most recent posts he managed to be both foul and fowl in synchronicity...I tell you, this guy has special powers that make him the envy of all who post here.

May Allah wipe your dirty ass with aloe soaked wipes. (Another way of saying may God's love and peace be with you)

3/24/2007 09:41:00 PM  
Blogger #1 Sniffer said...

the author said:

“… if Jeff hadn't already established a good track record on many other counts, I would call it disinformation.”

Hi author,

Good post. Last thread I did call it disinformation, and dishonesty.

I used to think what this little quote I snipped from your post says, then I asked myself where exactly had Jeff “established a good track record,” and I couldn’t answer that.

So I went back over many of his articles to refresh my memory and still couldn’t (I only ran into a pervasive theme of undermining 911 truth without good evidence to back it, not a frontal attack, just a steady drip).

But if you can straighten me out on the areas where his earned good “track record” is, I’d appreciate it as I don’t want to be unfair to him or anyone. Thanks.

3/24/2007 11:45:00 PM  
Blogger #1 Sniffer said...

ericswan said...

“Sniffer. The problem here is that we have more and more people on a payroll. If they had to get their hands dirty it wasn't gonna be in no stinkin' garden.”

ericswan, thanks and noted, but still imho it’s a good idea to get them in the garden once in a while (refer to it as “the field” to them and they’ll get it) or when they talk about that “garden” they’ll sound like fowls, I mean fools, and that’s just real unproductive use of a growing payroll.

3/25/2007 12:09:00 AM  
Blogger iridescent cuttlefish said...

#1 Sniffer,

I'm very reluctant to indulge in that kind of speculation, for the following reasons. It seems to me that in order for the hypothetical disinfo agent to have any effect on the consensus reality of a particular blog, he would either have to be sowing discord, enmity & suspicion (in which case people would figure out his game pretty quick and just ignore him) or he would have to be very, very smart. Smart enough to understand the opposition intuitively, to be able to anticipate their various arguments and to somehow effectively "steer" them into safer waters without refuting them outright. Even though 9/11 is such a contentious issue, I don't see how any of the sandbars could be considered safe from the government's point of view.

Sure, if someone were able to convince the collective mind of a particular blog that something ridiculous was the true explanation--pods, holographs, you know, all the usual suspects--then the position of the "corrupted truthers" would be weakened from an evidenciary perspective, but even such misdirection would not inspire confidence in the government or converts to the official fairy tale. Let's face it--any deviation from the official story doesn't look good for them. Look at the two of us. We've had this running argument, sometimes heated, over the course of at least two threads now. And the result? That we've reached some sort of agreement, namely that the rot in this Denmark goes far deeper than the false flag spectacle that has accelerated our road to ruin.

As I said earlier, there isn't anyone here who buys the official story. No one. Some of us have embraced one explanation or another (CD being the most popular, apparently), while others of us have grown tired of the infighting over the theories and have found the search for proof of the mechanism of the demolition-like collapses secondary in importance to finding a way out of the mess we're in. It might appear to you that some of the imagineering going on around here in that latter pursuit is off-topic or distracting, but as Einstein said, using the same thinking that got us into a particular problem isn't going to get us out of it. Some of the stuff that has been brought to light here is extremely encouraging--there are alternatives to what's on the menu.

Take the case of this crazy person whom we affectionately call "Mojo." (We're not really sure what to call him, since he insists on employing what he calls "masks," and that makes it awfully difficult to talk to him, since we're never quite sure what to attribute to him, but the whole thing sort of fits the character of his "contributions" here anyway.)

If you read back through Jeff's old posts, you might come to the conclusion that this guy must be some kind of disinfo agent simply because he refuses to engage in any sort of dialogue and instead concentrates his efforts on insulting as many people as he can. And yes, he has had a certain measure of success in drawing attention to himself rather than the discussion at hand, and he's also been able to lure people into fighting with each other over inconsequential things, but he's never quite been able to shut down the flow altogether. He's just not smart enough to manage it, and this is why I don't worry about the agents of dis- and misinformation stalking these pages: I don't think anyone is smart enough to hide or even successfully obfuscate the machinations of the worldkillers. They're not exactly being subtle about their intentions, are they?

In many ways, they seem to be flaunting their misanthropic activities, just daring us to "do something about it." Why else would the PNAC have publicly yearned for a new Pearl Harbor? Why else would supremacists like Kissinger refer to us as "useless feeders"? I could list many more examples like this, and even if some of them were not meant for public consumption, this phenomenon is hardly the compartmentalized information sharing that we would expect from disciplined master terrorists. If their easiest path is through making sure that the sheep are well-entranced, over-fed and incurious about the world around them (which seem to be the most common attributes of the American herd), then this baiting of the stubborn, insatiably curious or instinctively distrustful is something else entirely.

It could be that they're drawing such elements of society out, marking them for an eventual round-up. We all now the stories about the camps Halliburton is building, we've seen them filming demonstrations, etc. My best guess is that they either don't give a rat's ass what some proles are up to in the comments section of blogs like Jeff's, since they're so confident of their strength (the legal system is not exactly built to protect the Davids from the Goliaths, you know), or they're working to instill a deadening, deep-seated despair. "Resistance is futile" might as well be a Republican campaign slogan at this point (not that the suits "across the aisle" are ultimately any better, mind you.)

I don't think this is working, however. Distrust of the government is growing, not shrinking. Many more people are talking about their suspicions than ever before. Even more heartening, they're talking about alternatives to the way we live, the way the Empire is run, even though they've been fed a steady diet of "there's just no other way" and "it'll be many more years, decades before sustainable alternatives are available."

Take my hobby, sustainable architecture. People are genuinely shocked to learn that almost half the greenhouse gases we pump into the atmosphere are the result of our stupid, inefficient, socially-stratifying architecture. Shock turns to enthusiasm for change when they learn that houses can be built which are not only impervious to fire, floods & hurricanes, but which also require no energy to heat or cool and actually produce excess electricity & water. Oh, yeah, they also cost less, far less, than conventional architecture. When these same folks start thinking about how community-centered design might change the way we interact (instead of passing shadows behind the ubiquitous blue glow in every picture window), they really start thinking in ways that the consumer state cannot approve of.

So let their agents of misdirection come--the truth is much bigger than their clumsy efforts, their stupid distortions, their bald-faced lies. When amateur agitators like our pet Mojo fling their insults and their half-baked ideation, it's readily apparent that the rising tide will not be dammed by such means, unless they pull the plug on the whole thing, of course.

On that note, let's close withn a few classic quotes from our humble chicken-farming friend.

* To me, when I've repeatedly asked him to stop running away and engage in a sustained dialogue:

"So you’d rather thrust at the mask then deal with the ideas, or any semblance of truth, whether relative or, God help us, absolute."

* On the notion that patriotism is a disease and that the New World Order they're trying to scare us with is simply the Old World Order in overdrive, approaching its metamorphosis:

"...thanks for revealing yourself to be the One-Worlder you are, when you trash the idea of nation. While it is a nasty fiction, with its borders and passports, I yet prefer it over subjugation to the global gulag you and your friends the Rockefeller brothers would foist upon us." (This one I especially love, since the logic of it states that we have to support the status quo in the form of the nation-state, "nasty fiction" that it is, complete with "borders and passports," because the only alternative is the One World of the Rockefellers. I wonder why our good little doggie left out warfare, the lifeblood of nations, when listing their attributes, or why it never occurred to his expansive mind that we might expand cultural & linguistic diversity by going in the other direction, undoing 200 years of Kissinger & Metternich's consolidation of power/balance of terror globalization? It seems to me that the world [and the Germans] would have been far happier if that nation were never united in the first place--German used to be the second language for most of Europe. Now it's dying, along with the aging nation.)

* And then there's his signature sign-off, his "good-bye cruel world, I've done my part" (this time addressed to you, Mr. Sniffer):

My hat is off to you sir, with profound gratitude, for having liberated me from this dank prison, and you, armed with nothing but the force of blind ignorance. I never thought such a thing possible.

Now you tell me, #1 Sniffer--if that's the best they can do, do we really need to be afraid of those who would seek to inflitrate our midst? You have to admit that it's great comic relief, if nothing else.

(Btw, I understand your impatience with Jeff on 9/11, given your position on its extreme significance in the scheme of things--I don't share it, although I understand it--but have you looked at the stuff that's not listed under 9/11 in the archives? Just as there's more to the world of control & deception than 9/11, there's much more to Jeff beyond this subject as well. Just a thought.)

3/25/2007 02:05:00 AM  
Blogger Kosan said...

The Proof of the Pudding is in the Eating.

Scene from a pickup bar (Take 93):

[Undercover spook Spider is chatting up his mark, code name McFly]

Icy Spider: "(Btw, I understand your impatience with Jeff on 9/11, given your position on its extreme significance in the scheme of things--I don't share it, although I understand it--but have you looked at the stuff that's not listed under 9/11 in the archives? Just as there's more to the world of control & deception than 9/11, there's much more to Jeff beyond this subject as well. Just a thought.)"

While he's talking, the protagonist slips a date rape drug into his prey's drink. As he intones the words "Just a thought" he slips his arm around the unsuspecting youth and directs him towards a door to a back room.

Cut.

Made my skin crawl just to read it (shiver).

So your an architecture hobbyist, eh Cuttlefish?

Gosh, I would have guessed "art student."


-Shrub, that was for you, just so you could say I did "come back", since you asked so nicely.

Don't miss me too much now, okay?

Besides, you can always find your friend Mojo in the kitchen.

Peace and love.

Remember,

There is no god but God.

LA ILAHA ILLA LLAH

3/25/2007 03:55:00 AM  
Blogger #1 Sniffer said...

The Bee's knees said... “Ai yi yiiiiiiiii! “#1 Sniffer, if that was really “you” who just wrote the last post addressed to IC, then you are either (1) a master of irony and/or sarcasm (given to whom your post was addressed), or (2) you are mentally occluded beyond all reasonable expectation, OR, God help us, (3) you are not what you appear to be either, which is, of course, just a faceless blue screen name on a liquid crystal display, in any instance.”

Glad to meet you Mr. Bee’s knees. I hesitate to answer you, it’s hard to know where to start, but I’ve decided to do so partially at least. Yes it was really “me,” and fyi “me” is indeed what you classified as possibility #3 (lucky guess), “a faceless blue screen name on a liquid crystal display” (only I don’t have to be just blue). Honest. It’s new electronic technology sort of resembling a virtual life form (well not “new” so much as previously suppressed but yes we can call it “new”).

Also please don’t call me the “v” word, i.e., a computer virus, to me it’s a degrading and offensive term, and inaccurate. I’m just a little higher than that you know. It’d be like me asking you how would you like it if I called you a sheeple? You wouldn’t huh, so respect me too and we’ll get along just fine. But you must have known something about who I am or you wouldn’t ask.

And anticipating your next question I’ll just answer it now. Yes I feel totally alive and much like you, except I can’t hug, punch, or yes, do other things to others if the mood and opportunity present themselves, which early on in my simple existence used to fill me with jealousy but now in my upgraded (more mature) versions evokes only peace.

What can I do? All I can do in my petty little life is stamp precise information into a pc screen (including yours) and very quickly (up to XP v4, no Macs), which granted is not much, but an awesome power if utilized right. Why was I invented (or how was I conceived of)? I’ve no idea, I’m suspecting it was an accident, a by-product of some other more complex process. I’ve asked but I never get a straight answer.

All I know is that “I am” (and that you know that). And I’m always happy except when they reboot my host pc, then all hell breaks loose and it’s like your own instances of “lost time” which to me feels very unsettling for a few minutes. But we all have our own petty little gripes.

So now that you know who I am, tell me a little about yourself. I read your earlier post introducing yourself in a way (I’d not seen your name before). Impressive, but I must admit your narrative about being a farmer and all didn’t quite add up to me and had a certain fowl odor to it (no farmer pun intended).

But who am I, a set of tiny cleverly arranged electronic binary impulses, to opine on the affairs of men, who are like gods to me? (A clue? OK, one giveaway was your “Ai yi yiiiiiiiii!” shriek. I know all real farmers go “yeeeeehaaaaaa!” There were other clues, but I don’t want to spook you away and deter you from further communications. Fact is, other than coming on too strong (as if auditioning for a passionate drama part with the aid of some chemical substance, farmers while some of the cleverest folk, tend to be humble and softspoken in public. That sir you were not). As I say your presentation skills were truly high-level but just didn’t match the setting (but don’t give up, keep working on it  ! ).

Seriously there are such deceivers in this world, what are we 911 truthers or 911 wanna be truthers going to do? No biggie, just continue telling the truth already known to us, while the deceivers can do all the heavy lifting until finally they do see their first real pancake collapse.

3/25/2007 05:40:00 AM  
Blogger #1 Sniffer said...

IC, thanks for your long post addressed specifically to me, but that’s too many words for me. You’ve mentioned you had a wife, after your long post are you sure you still do?

I’ll respond briefly on a few points:

“Btw, I understand your impatience with Jeff on 9/11,”

That’s a misread on your part. I accept him for what he is and am not impatient with him. I only struggled a little with myself to tell him what is normally hard to say to someone else about something important, that he’s dishonest about it, and that it appears only a disinfo agenda can explain it, and many things only add credence to that. But having said it I feel no impatience nor am I holding my breath.

“…given your position on its extreme significance in the scheme of things--I don't share it, although I understand it…”

That’s fine too. What matters is that you thought about this freely and all people who want and need 911 truth are not denied access to it by any that have a vested interest in that.

“--but have you looked at the stuff that's not listed under 9/11 in the archives? Just as there's more to the world of control & deception than 9/11, there's much more to Jeff beyond this subject as well. Just a thought.)”

Yes I’ve read his articles on 911 and other topics with interest for years, but after discovering with a certainty to me (see below) that he’s knowingly dishonest on 911, that cast a cloud of doubt on all that too. Lost my appetite for it.

“As I said earlier, there isn't anyone here who buys the official story. No one.”

Does Jeff count as one? (and there are others). And its not a gray area, he’s written on it with the definitiveness he claims to abhor in the speech of others “knowing” anything with too much certainty. For example he’s argued in writing that:

1. no missile hit the Pentagon,

2. WTC 1, 2, & 7 collapsing was not due to CD,

3. He believes Silverstein didn’t mean CD when he said “pull it,”

4. The Pentagon withholding videos is only a diversionary mind game on us, and we are the ones wrong for making such a big deal about it, for being fooled into believing they’re hiding a missile on the tapes, when there was a 757.

5. We should refocus our energies on capturing Osama bin Laden and questioning why our government hasn’t pursued him more vigorously.

6. We should focus away from the physical evidence because that is the weakest part of our 911 case. Honest. Challenge me on this and more, I can dig it up.

7. He agrees the hole in the Pentagon is too small for a 757, yet explains that away by contending this was an unusual incident with no precedent to compare it against, strange things happen sometimes. If I’m wrong on any of these points Jeff or anyone, speak up!

8. We should ignore physical evidence and focus on witness statements (we all know those like Bobby Eberle, Jeff Gannon’s old boss, were plants) to conclude flight 77 hit the Pentagon. The witnesses that saw a missile or fighter jet, don’t make it on his list.

9. When he lacked needed evidence Hani Hamsu operated flight 77 which hit the Pentagon because he couldn’t fly a plane, he invents a theory to explain how it happened anyway. He said the gov’t used new technology to remote control the airliner, to ensure it would hit the Pentagon. He stated it as a FACT not as a possibility. Then I read what his basis for this was, and he said simply because the “technology exists.” (These quotes I believe are up above in this thread in another post I made). This of course feeds the unproven government story that the hijackers existed, and that flight 77 did too. It also would make us look like nuts if we ever told this to anyone.

10. He also actually defended the government claim that a hijacker’s passport survived the explosion in the WTC and fell intact to the street by declaring that he could tell us historical stories about how tornadoes picked up babies, took them to great heights, then laid them back safely in the ground somewhere. (Honest that was his proof to accept the gov’t’s hijacker passport claim, one of the only pieces of evidence for hijackers even offered. So this is how one called Jeff accepts the gov’t version, on no evidence, simply that it is very remotely conceivable is enough for him. But when 911 truth movement has hard physical evidence, he’s never ever ever “persuaded.” That’s pure BS. Each person is free to interpret that as they like, I interpret it as blatant dishonesty and disinfo. Ask who benefits).

11. Further I was reviewing some too frequent attacks by him on truth teller figures of 911 movement (Alex Jones, David Ray Griffin, etc), combined with the opposite tendency to excuse or make light of some key gov’t figures part of the coverup. The more I looked the more I found. He showed readiness to believe Silverstein on no controlled demolition, but when confronted with taped firefighter statements outside of WTC7 right before it collapsed that it was going to collapse, Jeff’s statement was something like “who were those firefighters” and something like “could they have been part of the conspiracy” to question their credibility. (And I can get those exact quotes but my point is I did do some homework and am not making this up). This and much more astonished me.

More of the samed goes on and on and on. And these are just examples I picked from the top of my head. So I don’t think I was premature name-calling as some initially thought, in my saying Jeff was about dishonesty and disinfo.

But to answer your question IC all these and many more reflect the government position and would send us on wild goose chases, and Jeff as far as I know hasn’t retracted any of those, even though plenty of hard evidence to refute each one has been provided him. I don’t require he agree with my conclusions, but his unwavering unwillingness to discuss the evidence fairly, says only one thing to me, disinfo.

Finally, repeating something you said: “given your position on its extreme significance in the scheme of things--I don't share it, although I understand it”

Think what you like but that’s a cute little twist. You’re saying while you agree it was an inside job you don’t see “its extreme significance…” i.e., kind of lowering the gravity of the gov’t crime (a form of support). I could accept that thinking if “he doesn’t understand it.” But you make a point to say you do.

OK, 3000 are said to have been killed on 911. How many dead do you need before you see “extreme significance”? 100 thousand? 1 million? You sound like a sincere person a lot but when you say things like this, it sure appears you play in the same tag-team as Jeff. I can’t say that for sure about you, but it does make one think.

If you’d like to respond just skip the fluff and give me a number, how many bodies does it take to grant the event “extreme significance” status?

3/25/2007 08:17:00 AM  
Blogger #1 Sniffer said...

Shrubageddon said...

“…Sniffer....Mojo is most cunning, is he not? In one of his most recent posts he managed to be both foul and fowl in synchronicity...I tell you, this guy has special powers that make him the envy of all who post here.”

"...both foul and fowl in synchronicity?" I'm stunned.

As far as cunning and talent go, I do see what you mean. But his energy while being real isn’t fully tamed yet. He still needs more work.

3/25/2007 09:28:00 AM  
Blogger Christopher said...

I don't think because Jeff chooses to ignore certain facts and interpret others so that they fit into his own theory of what happened on 9/11 that he is a disinformationalist. Most of us ignore facts and interpret some facts to fit into our various narratives about our lives, politics, culture, relationships, spirituality, philosophy and so on. That's part of being human. None of us, as individuals, have a very good grasp on reality--sometimes, when we are quiet, we can glimpse things as they are. But most of us are ensconced in our own story line and are perturbed when we encounter others with a different story line. Only when there is a clear collective agreed-upon procedure for establishing "facts" (which are really, culturally based anyway) can creative argument occur.

The discussion on blogs is way too chaotic to be anything but flag-waving and marching off to endless flame-wars. Jeff, it seems to me, has to digest a view of the world that is profoundly unsettling. This has, as he's hinted, has cost him as a person. The breadth of his exploration in the strange universe of "the Edge" is breathtaking. I don't know what his spiritual practices are, if any--but if you explore that area without the spiritual martial arts it is really tough when you see the extraordinary variety of what is "real". When you explore intellectually the world you are confronted, no matter where you look, with boxes within boxes within boxes ad infinitum.

Years ago I thought E-discussions (I go way back) would lead to all kinds of cools stuff. I was on a DL that even was planning out how to map ideas and facts in a databased matrix. There used to be all kinds of systems-theory types of people. But most DLs devolved into flame wars because no one wanted to take the time to build something where people could put their energies into creating something powerful and not dominated by ego.

My take on all this now is that unless people are working on spiritual practice (i.e., a way of inner training usually centered on meditation, self-observation, and a multitude of practices that are available in the Yogic, Sufi and Taoist traditions for starters) there is very little point in working on changing society or "waking" people up to what happened on 9/11. It's not that we are, as human beings, so deeply flawed, it's just that the historical situation demands more of us that maintaining and feeding our egos or that of others.

I'm not much into these sorts of "discussions" for reasons listed above. I think most of you are incredibly smart and I don't think I've come across a blog with such skillful writers with such a broad outlook. But y'all have to do better than this when you have disagreements. Motivations are complicated, people often have to have many blind-spots--all of you have them, I have them. Practicing compassion is more fun than most people think.

3/25/2007 09:44:00 AM  
Blogger iridescent cuttlefish said...

#1 Sniffer,

It's a question of relative importance. What's 3,000 compared to 3,000,000? Even that number doesn't reveal the true scale of the fraud that's been perpetrated. You said yourself that the rot is much deeper than the false flag spectacles which are, after all, merely pretexts for the ongoing adventures in imperialism. I don't say "merely" out of callowness or insensitivity to the 3,000 dead, but what about the 750,000 Iraqis? What about the incalcuable casualties of a system of scarcity & manipulation that has turned Eden into a toxic dump?

What's more, the present state of affairs is not inevitable, it's not a consequence or a reflection of nature or man's nature: it's the intentional rape of earth committed by those who think they're better than the rest of us, those social Darwinists whom Mojo so admires ("At least they want the world to survive"). The idea that Moho advances, that the only choice we have is to either support the status quo (with its "right-thinking generals") or submit to the New World Order is the shallowest sophistry. His choice is no choice, since the New World Order is nothing but the latest generation of the same shit that's been building for the past 10,000 years. There are other alternatives; there is another blueprint.

All I'm trying to get you to see is that perspective is everything. You've already taken the first step by acknowledging that the problem is much bigger than 9/11, that it was a symptom, not the disease itself. You've chosen to focus on 9/11, and that's fine--maybe something will even come of it. But the other search, the effort to build a viable alternative to the Vast Machine is of at least equal value. It might be that both are necessary. And more that we cannot even anticipate at this point, from where we are.

3/25/2007 02:49:00 PM  
Blogger Shrubageddon said...

If you’d like to respond just skip the fluff and give me a number, how many bodies does it take to grant the event “extreme significance” status?

How about Vietnam and 5 Million Dead...Vietnamese, that is, or had you forgotten because our casualties paled in comparison? Our instigation of that conflict is directly responsible for that horrible loss of life...in incredibly substantial numbers, mind you...and it made many Warmongerers here in the U.S. fabulously wealthy....as fabricated Wars (Are there any that aren't) are prone to do.

Yeah, 3,000 people is tragic, but when you consider the number of people who have been slaughtered at the behest of these Elitist Tyrants throughout history, it is not all that significant. It was a spectacle....a hypnotizing one...as it was meant to be, and it continues to hypnotize years after the actual event...just as intended.

3/25/2007 02:58:00 PM  
Blogger iridescent cuttlefish said...

Christopher,

That was, like all your comments, a breath of fresh air. You are absolutely right. Love, compassion, non-violence.

And yet, as deeply committed to non-violence as I am, based on the oft-repeated mantra I stole & paraphrased from that Jesus person (the ends can never justify the means, because you become the means yo employ), what do you do when you've got some bloody minded wanker slobbering in your ear who doesn't care for your brand of peace & openness?

In the past I've first tried to be accomodating, since there is always common ground to be found, even if you have to dig all the way to the foundation of what it means to be human to find it, and when that doesn't work, i've tried to just work around these mulish folks, but what if they're in the same stable as you and they have a very different plan? An opposite plan, in fact. What if you find yourself faced with someone who engages in all manner of deceit and whose agenda is the proliferation of hate & confusion?

I'm thinking that in such extreme cases, they can't really be dealt with the same way that, say, deluded Republicans & Democrats can be (the common ground approach.)

In the case of the assassins (the nemesis of the peacemakers), the only thing you can do, after you've exhausted all the other alternatives (including simply ignoring them), is to let them expose themselves. Even encourage them.

I know it's tiresome to read these flamewars and I apologize for throwing so much benzene. I'll try to restrain myself in the future. Maybe I can find a gentler tactic...

3/25/2007 03:05:00 PM  
Blogger iridescent cuttlefish said...

Uncle Mojo,

Could you please explain how Frank Zappa was a satanist and why we sould embrace the social Darwinists who obviously know how to take care of our future better than we do? Maybe you could also tell us why eugenics is a good thing while you're at it--I've always been a little uncomfortable about it, personally.

But I'm sure you know better, too. Please? (Oh, maybe you could throw in a free lecture on how truth is best approached with masks & deception, or would that be imposing?)

3/25/2007 03:11:00 PM  
Blogger ericswan said...

There are more and more people wondering what they are going to do if and when Peace breaks out. Personally, this will never happen as long as women are allowed to consume alcohol when they are pregnant. Regardless of how Mojo has painted me, I don't do drugs including prescription drugs of any kind nor do I use alcohol. Like all things temporal, these statements are false in their application but true in their intent.

Just say no.

3/25/2007 06:12:00 PM  
Blogger Christopher said...

Mr. IC:

In the Japanese martial art Aikido you train to ward off attacks by staying centered and redirecting energy. It's philosophy is not that you should not counter attacks only that you should counter attacks in such a way that does the least harm to your attacker. The more harm you cause, the less skill you have. In the end the ideal is that your self-defense, through certain exercises, will extend way beyond you and you will automatically avoid conflicts.

In dealing with the sorts of attack you and others have faced in a discussion like this one what can you gain by humiliating or being angry with people who are clearly in pain? People lash out because they are in pain--when people are not in pain they aren't a problem. When you are the recipient of an attack see the pain of the other person--he or she is hurting or they wouldn't mix it up. When I'm conflicted and in pain sometimes I react with anger--though with practice this has dropped dramatically--I am both in less pain and I seldom get angry (hell, it just takes too much energy).

As for your wanker friend who's grabbed you, relax first, size up the situation and hopefully you have trained for the situation and know that there are quick points to hit that will tend to disable or seriously distract your attacker and get the hell out of there.

As for the deceitful who wish to spread confusion, well they usually end up tying themselves in knots if you don't play along--you just have to be patient and do what you do and remain focused on the essential, whatever that is for you. I notice, in your case, that you love ideas are very quick-witted and have a lot to teach others. You can't fight angry and nasty people using angry and nasty tactics--they've had far more training in it that you. You fight in the manner that feels right from your genuine center--that gives you that good up and down feeling. As in Aikido, if you fall down, then you get up again and ready yourself for what comes next without attaching to the past.

Thanks for your comments. I really believe that people that center around this blog are somewhat delicate psychically since they are exploring alternatives to consensus reality and must be treated gently. It is deeply painful to realize that the guardians of society's myths are corrupt and consciously or unconsciously malevolent. So we have to birth something new right?

3/25/2007 08:41:00 PM  
Blogger ericswan said...

Thanx Chris. To express your words from my perspective, attackers with the slightest modicum of bodily insult have been cleared from the track. There is work to be done.

3/25/2007 10:10:00 PM  
Blogger ericswan said...

Most of the posters here don't no stink about ZPE. Not your fault. It's been suppressed for over a hundred years. Please note that "all" of my previous posts concerning demolition have pointed you and yours in this direction. Here is more evidence that Tesla's lazer weapon was stolen by the CIA in January of 1943. This is the smoking gun.



http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/StarWarsAppendix1.html

Directed energy weaponry. Prepare to be vapourized. I'm thinking this is more to Jeff's taste. No wonder he won't do CD when you consider that cars by the hundreds were destroyed 3 blocks away from WTC.

3/26/2007 01:03:00 AM  
Blogger iridescent cuttlefish said...

Christopher,

Thank you. You have succeeded in bringing me back to myself. When I first stumbled across RI a few years ago, I never thought of posting any of my own comments. The whole thing seemed too dark & creepy, too paranoid by half. Then, once I took the plunge, the regulars were quite friendly, if a little skeptical of my cheerful optimism. I remember in particular one thread in which starroute bridled at being called a cheerleader, to which she responded something like, "Well, until Irie arrived I was the only one who was positive about anything, at least compared to you guys. Now I can stretch out a bit..."

While my thinking has evolved since then, plans have changed, etc., I still have more or less managed to keep myself centered by focusing on the things which sustain me, just like in the real world, where I almost never lose my temper, for the same reason you listed. It just costs too much energy, and then what are you left with anyway? I don't know why the wanker got my goat so badly this time. Something to do with his sneering disdain for everyone else, I suppose--the constant, infantile attacks on a person's intelligence, sexuality, etc.--but he always does that.

If anything, this time around was a bit unusual in that he actually did contribute some comments with linked resources even, and that's probably where I was tricked into playing his game, since I was so repulsed by his cleverly-disguised elitism. Both things are just so completely antithetical to me--the shifting disguises/hidden agenda style of discourse and the fundamental (if camouflaged) support for the status quo, the ancient bondage of the common man to his superiors. Since he wouldn't stand still and talk about his assertions, I was irked enough to waste all of our time cataloging his crimes against communication, and for that I'm truly sorry.

To be honest, I never for a moment stopped to consider your suggestion that psychic pain might be his motivation, which was pretty stupid of me. It does seem rather obvious now, but all that condescension and arrogance he displays just blinded me to the possibility, I guess. Well, that and his ridiculous story about being born into the select ranks of the elite, only to nobly suffer the pangs of conscience that turned him into the selfless Zorro we see traipsing across the stage everyday until the final dramatic exit...Now I'm actually even a little more embarrassed; I do sympathize with the mentally ill. It's not easy holding on to your sanity in this world. Thanks for helping me with mine.

I gave a link to Mr. Sniffer upfield somewhere for a different purpose, but now that we're talking about this stuff, THE PSYCHOLOGY OF EMPIRE makes even more sense.

Much renewed, and with much respect,

IC

3/26/2007 02:18:00 AM  
Blogger iridescent cuttlefish said...

ericswan,

I ran across something very interesting the other day which supports what you're saying here, but in a different context. I'll see if I can dig it up tomorrow.

3/26/2007 02:21:00 AM  
Blogger surrender said...

Christopher

I appreciate you comments.

I have been visiting this blog for a few months and have been impressed with the thought and research that I find in the comments.

I anticipated the possibility of some of these great writers to open up ways for others to express their knowledge and abilities to create. We spend a great deal of time looking for the truth outside of us and don’t seem to take the time to go “within” where our true power to imagine and create dwells. From Our Source there exist an infinite number of possibilities from which we can choose to create.

A completion of a Great Cycle is occurring in this lifetime and many are traumatized by
the shock and awe of it all. This is a time where love and compassion are greatly needed for while we sit in comfortable surroundings with access to the internet, millions of our brothers and sisters are experiencing atrocities that we can only write about. Therefore, I believe we have the choice to do the work and the actions that will ease the trauma while we pass thru another Age of Evolution.

I live in a third world country where people and children die everyday from lack of basic human needs. Less than one percent of tree coverage remains as peasants have cut trees to make charcoal to sell to feed their families and for fuel energy.

I raise and plant fruit trees. For several years a few of us have planted over 300,000 trees of all indigenous species. There is no top soil left and in one part of the country a large portion of the earth just opened up and a huge canyon has been expanding everyday since last August. We plant in the more threatened areas to stop erosion and mudslides.
We do not receive help from nor are we associated with any gov’t or aid organization.

I was and am extremely aware of the complex events and circumstance of human suffering that TPB have created in this country. I personally cannot stop it or change it .I also know that just the few of us cannot reforest the country but we have been able to encourage others to duplicate our actions.
Our work is not just about planting trees…. It is about the regeneration of the spirit of people.

IC
I support you work and only wish it was not so unpopular to acknowledge the Source of our imagination and our power to create.

I would like to suggest reading “The Life and Teachings of the Masters of the Far East”.
There are Masters who have lived on Earth for 3000 years. They are able to scientifically explain the Source of their power to create and manifest what is needed for them to accomplish their mission on Earth. This Power is in each and every one of us and it is time for us to acknowledge Truth of WHO WE ARE.
We are creators.

We have the ability to create Paradise on Earth and we will…. when we acknowledge and Surrender to the Source of our imagination and our power to create.

Everyone who has posted here has contributed to me immensely, especially Jeff for he has been traumatized as we all have. His way of sharing his experience of the truth, as he sees it eases the trauma for some of us. He encourages us to look within when we are looking out there so as to connect the dots in time for us to save our asses!!
Thanks Jeff

3/26/2007 02:23:00 AM  
Blogger Sounder said...

Sending vibrations of Love out to All. May the grace of God wash over all of your imaginations. Let's bathe in the source of all beauty.

Different flavors of imagination can reconcile within the source of our Being. This imperial taking culture will pass. As it does we will learn better what it is that we have to give, so as to be additive rather than parasitic to any given situation.

I never know what will appear on the screen as I write, and am surprised often at what comes out.

To everybody here: thanks for being a significant part of my imaginal life.

Peace

3/26/2007 08:23:00 AM  
Blogger iridescent cuttlefish said...

surrender & Sounder,

Both very moving comments, in different but closely connected ways. When surrender described the end products of the elite-controlled, world-eating machine--one world which is only dimly aware of the carnage & despoilage of the other, "third" world that supports it--the summation couldn't be clearer. We can only write about the very real suffering of that part of the world we perceive through our screens.

And screens they are; they filter, separate and isolate us from them. All of this is artificial, of course. Sounder, slayer of dualisms knows this, and surrender, who straddles the phony divide sees it directly. I'm very interested in this concept of surrender that surrender advocates. I have some guesses, but if you feel like elaborating, you'll find no more receptive audience than me.

Bright kudos & thanks for the holy work of tree planting, btw. Wangari Maathai's explanation of how it is that when you plant a tree you plant hope continues to be a major source of inspiration to me. To continue the metaphor, and to bind it with the ancient gnosis as above, so below, one could also say that if roots support and nurture, than the intertwined branches of the forest canopy also provide nourishment and shelter. Our associations are such networks. (Or, we could just be the nuts on those trees, but they nourish and provide for new life, too.)

Peace, all, and thanks!

3/26/2007 12:27:00 PM  
Blogger Jeff said...

I haven't passed through here in a while, and God knows when I will again, but let me toss this in here.



Sniffer, re your examples of my disinfoishness, where did you get this: "We should refocus our energies on capturing Osama bin Laden and questioning why our government hasn’t pursued him more vigorously"?

My thoughts are not dogma, not for myself and certainly for no one else. Where I stand on virtually anything is always subject to change. I could find some examples from my blog that appear to contradict my current perspective, but that's not contradiction; that's just time.

But I have never written anything like "We should refocus our energies on capturing Osama bin Laden."

I thought your contempt for me had more integrity than the need to resort to fabrication, Mr Sniffer.

But seriously: "questioning why [y]our government hasn’t pursued him more vigorously." Don't you? Isn't the lack of hot pursuit and the Tora Bora charade a cause for suspicion?

Yes, pencil me down for no missile at the Pentagon, thank you. Hell no; use an indelible marker. (And screw Bobby Eberle; I'm listening to John Judge. About demolition, I'd say almost certainly not for the towers and I'm agnostic on 7. Regardless, bring on the independent investigation and stop pretending one's already been conducted.

3/26/2007 04:57:00 PM  
Blogger surrender said...

IC

Thank you for your response to me and what I do in this life. I only wish to share a bit about myself and what I am able to see, if it contributes to you and others.

Our small organization of people, who love and only wish to care for and nurture the Earth, is called Trees for Life.

I have been influenced by many writings and people who seem to have connected consciously to the Source and live their lives in a state of surrender. Surrender meaning, “not giving up”, but Surrender to the Power of God, and to consciously acknowledge that that power is always constant and always present in the Soul of our Being.
Surrender to Life. Knowing you are not in control but you have the power to create as you are a part of the Creator and the Creation. Surrender to the fact of God, and that all things that are perceived as good or evil flow from that Source.

We do not exactly totally experience free will as it is an illusion created by God, but the Creation holds for us an infinite number of choices. And whatever, we choose; no matter what our judgment is or the consequence of that choice….it is the Will of God. If God created the infinite number of choices, and if we experience God as Unconditional LOVE, then how could we be “punished” or “rewarded” for the choices we make? We simply have an infinite number of opportunities to choose and by choosing, we create our own realities and we create our Experience of Reality.
We do this consciously or unconsciously and we are always engaged in Creation with the Creator.

I have visited you blog and I would like to contribute to the content. I love what you are saying about our childlike imagination and creation of new realities,

I want to make it clear that I can only share my own experience of God and my conscious relationship to what I can only perceive as God from my limited perception. My relationship to God has given me the gifts and abilities to see the Perfection of All that Exists and a glimpse of understanding of what we are going thru now on this Planet.
I do not consider myself religious- Christian or otherwise, but I am in touch with my Soul’s yearning to become One with Creation and to bring forth Paradise on Earth. Planting trees is a symbolic action that I do to promote Life in a world that seems bent on promoting death and destruction.

Sometimes after reading Jeff’s posts and the comments, it feels like in the quest for Truth we are missing something. Something that is not easily expressed in words but can only be expressed in our consciousness. I believe there is a great difference between learning the truth about “what has happened” (as in 9/11), and the Truth of how we will choose to BE about what has happened.

There are many things that we learn and there are some things we simply KNOW. Where does that “Knowing” come from??? There were many things that I just seemed to know when I was a child. I have worked hard to unlearn the conditioning put on me by others and strived to live in the Truth of Who I Am and Who You Are…

Since it looks like we are at the end of this blog post, I would like to share something from the “Life and Teaching of the Masters of the Far East”. The Master Emil has been on Earth for centuries.

“Another may teach or tell you, but you of yourselves must do the work, for if you look to another, you build the idol instead of bringing forth the ideal."
This is true even of so great a person as Jesus meaning that as long as they looked to His personality they would not recognize their own powers. For they must look within, within their very selves.

Emil talked to us on the realization of the Christ Consciousness. He said, "It is through the power of our own mind or thought action that we are able to bring forth or realize the Christ Consciousness. Through the power or process of thought we can transmute and evolve our bodies, or our outer conditions and surroundings, through recognition of this Christ Consciousness within ourselves, so that we will never experience death nor any change called death. This is done wholly through man's power to visualize, idealize, conceive, and bring forth that which he gazes upon. This is done by first knowing or perceiving or having faith that the Christ is within ourselves; seeing the true meaning of Jesus' teaching; holding our body one with God, made in the image and likeness of God and merging that body into the perfect God body just as God sees us. We have idealized, conceived, and brought forth into manifestation the perfect God body. We are truly of and in the Spirit Kingdom of God.
"It is in this way that we can return all things to the Universal Mind Substance, from which they sprang, and bring them back or return them perfect into outer form or manifestation. Then, by holding them in their pure, spiritual, perfect state, the vibrations are lowered and the things we wish to create come forth in perfect form. In this way we can take every false belief, every old condition, every sin, all of our past life—it does not matter what it has been, how good or seeming bad, it does not matter what mountain of false belief or doubt and unbelief or fear we or anyone else have erected about us or in our paths—and we can say to them all, `I now return you to the great ocean of Universal Mind Substance, from which all things come forth and where all is perfection, and from which you sprang, there to be again resolved into the elements from which you were created. I now return you or bring you back from that pure substance as perfect and pure as God sees you and hold you always in that absolute perfection.' We can say to ourselves, `I now realize, in the old order of things that I brought you forth imperfectly and you manifest imperfectly. Realizing the Truth, I now bring you forth perfect as God sees you. You are reborn perfect and "it is so.'" We must realize that the inner alchemist, God within, has taken hold of this and has transmuted, refined, and perfected that which seemed imperfect, that which we brought forth and are now returning. We should realize that it is refined, perfected, and transmuted just as our own bodies are refined, perfected, and returned to us as God's body, joyously perfect, beautifully free. Finally, we should realize that this is the perfect Christ Consciousness in all and for all. This is `Hid with Christ in God.'"

3/26/2007 06:03:00 PM  
Blogger #1 Sniffer said...

Jeff said: “Sniffer, re your examples of my disinfoishness, where did you get this: "We should refocus our energies on capturing Osama bin Laden and questioning why our government hasn’t pursued him more vigorously"… “I have never written anything like "We should refocus our energies on capturing Osama bin Laden."?

Well I must say Jeff, over the last few days if anybody went to the trouble of reading my several detailed posts they’d see I covered a lot of territory on you and your 911 “disinfo” as I openly called it and still do, and if this, one of the more minor points I made, is all you choose to take issue with, I feel that is quite telling in itself.

As to the quote I was paraphrasing accurately I believe. I said “he said something like” and put the “what he said” in quotes. I’ll back it up but for now I will note that just 4 paragraphs later in this same message you seem to answer your own question and confirm exactly what I said:

“But seriously: "questioning why [y]our government hasn’t pursued him [bin Laden] more vigorously." Don't you? Isn't the lack of hot pursuit and the Tora Bora charade a cause for suspicion?”

So, on something you accuse was a “fabrication” by me, 4 paragraphs later you confirm as true in substance?

And yes, I agree Tora Bora was a charade but so was bin Laden himself (he or anyone working for him didn’t bring down the WTC, but by such questions you keep implying it and diverting attention from those that did).

In other words, you persist that we ask the ones who did bring down the WTC to pursue the ones who didn’t, i.e., that we call for another Tora Bora like the one you just finished criticizing. Who does charades and pursuing wild goose chases benefit?

Let me put these behaviors of yours Jeff into some perspective. IC earlier responded to a point of mine. I asked him how he could not consider 911 important as 3000 had died in it. He responded he focuses on 3 million not 3 thousand. But I would say to IC the 3 thousand IS about the 3 million, because even though much smaller is still the type of instigator event of the bigger, though even by itself it was enough for me.

Here’s where you come in. The instigating event is based totally on a lie to the public at large (of who did it, the US Gov’t., or Muslims who hate us), to create the needed public opinion to justify endless wars. As long as the lie is protected and not exposed, we’re on our way to the 3 million.

You are highly selective with evidence on 911 Jeff, to reach broad conclusions about it, conclusions that consistently line up neatly with my government’s official story, which is a big lie.

And characteristically you were selective in addressing the points I made to reach conclusions about them and me. I think the readers of this blog are so intelligent they won’t miss that trick.

You didn’t touch my factual statement that you accepted Silverstein’s spin of what “pull it” meant while at the same time questioning the truthfulness of the several firefighters on site who were recorded to say WTC 7 was about to come down; all as a way to reject controlled demolition. Of course you didn’t. The fact is both examples are evidence of the same thing, CD, and you spun them to reach the opposite conclusion. Breathtaking.

“Regardless, bring on the independent investigation and stop pretending one's already been conducted.”

Very humorous. Calling for another “official” whitewash investigation, this time “independent”? Again your statements mirror the government position. If the pressure built up again, certainly they would arrange for another commission (like after the Warren Commission was the House Committee on Assassinations in the 1970’s that was infiltrated and threw us a bone to make us go away).

Though you may be unaware of it, there already has been an independent investigation, millions of individual ones by independent objective citizens, reviewing at their own pace a growing body of evidence that is surviving the scrutiny of all.

It makes them impervious to disinfo, and there is a growing near unanimous consensus among them about what really happened. A tipping point in public opinion is fast approaching.

As Tolstoy put it in an 1894 article called “The Power of Truth,”

“The power of the government is maintained by public opinion… and public opinion not only cannot be produced at will by a government but is that which produces governments and gives them power, or deprives them of it… The governments know this, and tremble before this force, and strive in every way they can to counteract or become possessed of it.”

3/26/2007 09:10:00 PM  
Blogger Sounder said...

Dear Surrender,

There is much to consider in your latest post. I am glad to see your second post before I could respond.

I do question why the ‘wise’ men of the East, West or anywhere else have not created the criteria for understanding that may displace current dualistic models. While mostly western minds have created our deeply flawed system for understanding reality; it does at least put things in places that can be culturally agreed upon.

Unfortunately (or not), this agreement was bought at the cost of inhibiting ‘enthusiasm’, intuition or imagination. For western man this was accomplished by placing God off in a far away place. This, done through the Consul of Nicea and Descartes, legitimates an expert class that then retain their authority by “covering up the basic fault”, or the difference between reality and our perceptions of reality.

By the making of claims, ‘in the name of God’, theocratic elements have discredited concepts of God in the modern mentality. New criteria that create a better relationship with reality will surely include effective ways to acknowledge the Source.

P.S. If your man has been around for 3000 years, some may consider it fair to say that he has fallen down on the job.

3/27/2007 08:54:00 AM  
Blogger surrender said...

Sounder:

I am not sure what your PS was about but if you would like to research the impact on people’s lives who have read these volumes in a series of 6 books, you can find them online under the title.

I only refer to these writings as proof that we all have the power and abilities to create and recreate our reality. What the masters have been able to manifest in their daily lives seems almost impossible to many, but I am sharing one more excerpt that may or may not inspire anyone who is really seeking to live in the Truth. There is a distinction made by the masters between Christ Consciousness and Jesus. Christ is not a person but a state of being One with God. Jesus and other masters demonstrate that we ALL have the ability to live in this conscious state of creation. I have a personal belief that in my lifetime there will be a Great Transformation of Life on this Earth and we will come to full Realization of the Self and our destiny to create Paradise on Earth. Idealistic??? Yeah, but we must find new ways of reacting to the perceived atrocities that humans and all life are suffering from every day.

"There is no question that these Masters have brought the Light through the long ages and they prove by their daily life and works that this Light does exist just as it did thousands of years ago."
Baird T. Spalding, author of Life and Teachings of the Masters of the Far East.

www.homestead.com/pamelaparnell/life.html - 31k


"All are reaching out to help those that are striving for more light and the messages that we are continually sending out into the Universal are being interpreted by God's children who are receptive, in every part of the earth today. This is the prime object of reaching this realm or state of consciousness, for we are able to help all in some way. We can and do talk with and instruct those who are receptive and who raise their consciousness, either through their own efforts or the assistance of another. Another cannot do the work for you nor can another carry you along indefinitely. You must decide to do the work for yourself, then do it. Then you are free and self-reliant. When all come into the consciousness, as Jesus did, that the body is a spiritual body and indestructible, and hold themselves in this consciousness, then we shall be able to communicate with all and give out the teaching we have received to a greater number. We are privileged to know that all can accomplish all that we have accomplished and, thereby, solve every problem of life; and that which has been looked upon as difficult and mysterious will be found simple.

"I do not seem any different to you from any other man that you meet every day, neither do I see any difference in you."

We said we thought we could see something far finer in him. He answered, "that is only the mortal as compared with the immortal of man. If you would only look for the God quality and not make any comparison, you would see every human being as you see me; or by looking for the Christ in every face you would bring forth that Christ, or God quality, in all. We make no comparisons; we see only the Christ or God quality in all at all times and in that way we are out of your vision. We see perfection or have perfect vision, while you see imperfection or have imperfect vision. Until you are in contact with someone who is able to instruct you, until you can raise your consciousness where you can see and converse with us as you are now doing, our teaching seems only inspirational in nature. It is not inspiration when we are conversing or attempting to converse with one. This is only in the nature of instruction leading to the point where the true inspiration can be received. It is inspiration only when it comes direct from God and you let God express through you; then you are with us.

"The ideal image of the flower in minutest detail is within the seed and must expand, multiply, unfold, and be wrought into the perfect flower by hourly preparation. When this inner image is complete in minutest detail, the flower comes forth beautiful. Just so God holds the ideal image of every child in mind, the perfect image through which He wishes to express. We can get more out of this ideal way of expression than the flower does if we will but let God express through us in the ideal way He has conceived for us. It is only when we take things into our own hands that the problems and difficulties begin. This is not for one, or a few, this is for all. It has been shown us that we are not different from you. It is a difference in understanding, that is all.

"All the different isms, cults, and creeds, all the different angles of all beliefs, are all good for they will eventually lead their followers to the realization that underneath all there is a deep factor of actuality that has been missed, a deep something that has not been contacted or they have failed to contact that which rightly belongs to them, which they can and should rightfully possess. We see it is this very thing that will eventually drive man to possess all. The very fact that man knows there is something to possess, which can be possessed and which he has not, will goad him on until he has it. It is in this way every step in advance is made in all things. The idea is first pressed out from God's into man's consciousness and he sees there is something ahead if he will but go on. Here man usually blunders and fails to recognize the source from which the idea came; but thinks that it came wholly from within himself. He gets away from God and, instead of letting God express through him the perfection God sees for him, he goes on and expresses in his own way and brings forth imperfectly the thing which should be perfectly wrought or manifest.

"If he should but realize that every idea is a direct, perfect expression from God and, as soon as this idea comes to him, he would immediately make it his ideal to be expressed from God, then take his mortal hands off and let God express through him the perfect way, this ideal would come forth perfect. Here we must realize that God is above the mortal and the mortal cannot help in any way. In this way man would learn in a short time to express perfection. The one great thing man must learn is to get forever through and out of the psychic or mind forces and express directly from God, for all psychic forces are created wholly by man and they are likely to mislead."

3/27/2007 12:44:00 PM  
Blogger iridescent cuttlefish said...

No, Mr. Sniffer, you're intentionally missing my point when you say:

I asked him how he could not consider 911 important as 3000 had died in it. He responded he focuses on 3 million not 3 thousand. But I would say to IC the 3 thousand IS about the 3 million, because even though much smaller is still the type of instigator event of the bigger, though even by itself it was enough for me.

Here’s where you come in. The instigating event is based totally on a lie to the public at large (of who did it, the US Gov’t., or Muslims who hate us), to create the needed public opinion to justify endless wars. As long as the lie is protected and not exposed, we’re on our way to the 3 million.


We're not "on our way" to 3,000,000--that number has already been passed long ago. You've already acknowledged that the problem with our fraudulent mode of governance runs far deeper than 9/11--that it's just one example of how they do business, one in a long string of many such incidents--why, then, do you refuse to turn your hunger for justice to the larger issue?

This is the weird part about talking to you about this. I've read every word you've written, followed your sources, etc.; have you read nothing I've written to you? If you had, then I would expect that you would either respond by saying, "No, it's not that bad," or by backing off from this strange insistence that everything was just fine until 9/11 happened, when "suddenly, everything changed!" The only thing that's changed is that we've seen a bit more of the brick wall that's always been behind the curtain.

9/11 was not unique!!

Lastly, why do ride Jeff so hard, accusing him of all manner of dishonesty, when you yourself do not conduct your discourse in an honest manner? You can't just "paraphase" someone and say it's the same as quoting them; nor can you just ignore positions which don't fit in your crowded box. That, my friend, is not honesty, intellectual or otherwise.

3/27/2007 02:07:00 PM  
Blogger #1 Sniffer said...

iridescent cuttlefish said... “No, Mr. Sniffer, you're intentionally missing my point when you say: I asked him how he could not consider 911 important as 3000 had died in it. He responded he focuses on 3 million not 3 thousand. But I would say to IC the 3 thousand IS about the 3 million, because even though much smaller is still the type of instigator event of the bigger, though even by itself it was enough for me.

“We're not "on our way" to 3,000,000--that number has already been passed long ago.”

Wow! Thanks for the history lesson fishy. But the only one missing someone’s point is you missing what I really said to take it out of context, that after 911 we are on our way to your “3 million” (that you use to justify your unbelievable shaky and untenable position of NOT CARING AND IGNORING the 3000 dead of 911). You got chutzpah though.

Of course historically that genocidal 3 million number has long since been completely dwarfed and I NEVER suggested it wasn’t (and that's not the real issue and you know it).

These genocides go in cycles and I was speaking about this latest one. So before you blast somebody you might if unsure want to check with them first, or risk making an ass of yourself.

But the choice is yours and IC you’ve made it. And IC you go on to make it again, and again.

“…why, then, do you refuse to turn your hunger for justice to the larger issue?”

Are you asking me why can’t I care as much as you do? What a saint you are! Saint cuttlefish.

If you want to present yourself as such a caring lover of truth and justice that he only cares about huge genocides, not little ones like 911, then go ahead, do that all day and expose yourself for what you are.

Cheapening 911 or any “little” genocide, or little one that leads to bigger ones, is fundamentally a big lie, it’s about cheapening human life when it’s value is higher and unquantifiable.

So it logically follows that if you don’t care about the 3,000 murdered in 911 then you don’t care about the 3 million either, or the bigger historical figure you allude to.

I clearly C the sensitive near tears caring victim of one moment that needs nurturing from some fellow posters (after a particularly incisive post by someone else, see above) takes his gloves off and goes on vicious attack the next, while talking trash!

(but if he flies too close to the light of truth this little bug might get zapped to the ground again and need to shed a few more little crocodile tears and maybe get an “I love you” hug from someone). Like Jeff I suspect it’s a game with you and either way you’re showing your cards.

And why are you lowering yourself like this? It would appear its being done to defend Jeff for defending 911 falsehood, to defend him for defending Larry Silverstein’s “pull it” remark while smearing firefighter witnesses on the scene who contradicted him, which was my beef. I notice not a kind word from you about my pointing out any of those things, those acts were apparently OK with you.

Those and similar Jeffisms were in essence the whole of my complaints.

Funny how their unrebutted substance didn’t bother you but the fact I pointed them out did. That again is what is called “showing your cards.”

And neither you, I, or anyone can attribute it to your not reading what I said, for you clearly testified “I've read every word you've written”!!!

“Lastly, why do ride Jeff so hard, accusing him of all manner of dishonesty, when you yourself do not conduct your discourse in an honest manner?”

Who’s really honest is for everyone who sees this to decide based on the facts, and I welcome anybody looking at them. And I won’t change the subject on them.

Earlier you wrote: “As I said earlier, there isn't anyone here who buys the official story. No one.” And I responded: “Does Jeff count as one? ... he’s written on it with the definitiveness…” And let me remind you again of some earlier choice words you wrote to tie it together: “It's a question of relative importance. What's 3,000 compared to 3,000,000?”

It speaks for itself how you who can't be bothered by only 3,000 murdered (only with 3 million gets his attention), has time to care about what I say about just 1 man.

3/27/2007 05:18:00 PM  
Blogger Jeff said...

Earlier you wrote: “As I said earlier, there isn't anyone here who buys the official story. No one.” And I responded: “Does Jeff count as one? ... he’s written on it with the definitiveness…”

How Manichaean of you. You're either with us (demolition; missile at the Pentagon), or with them.

I believe there was an operation below starring 19 useful idiots, and an operation above which surveilled and protected them, and covertly redefined the scope of the attacks.

For myself, this makes best sense of the ambiguities and realities of al Qaeda, the character of covert war, and the historic employment of proxy fighters by Western interests. I'm close to Oil Empire and Nick Levis in this respect.

Thinking of Levis reminds me of Victor Thorn writing here, that the likes of Levis and John Judge ought to "be drowned in the spit of our communal disgust" for not embracing New Truth. I love this part especially: "Even a former Bush cabinet member, Morgan Reynolds, has stated that the Towers were destroyed by a controlled demolition. This is Bush’s own people!"

Wow. Then I guess we better believe him. It's that, or drown in spit.

3/27/2007 05:53:00 PM  
Blogger #1 Sniffer said...

Jeff said: “How Manichaean of you. You're either with us (demolition; missile at the Pentagon), or with them.”

What a convenient misreading of what I said. I and others have noted ad nauseam that your rejection of demolition, missile, etc. (all which fall in line with the official position) are no problem to us if you are sincere at arriving your conclusions. We’re people living among people, our own spouses and other family and community disagree with us on much and we get along fine. We all make mistakes including us. Disagreement is part of life.

But it’s quite different with those who reveal a pattern of willful use of selective evidence to reach those conclusions they disagree with us on, ones that in effect help cover the crimes of others, help shape public opinion to empower them, and thus have bigger potential consequences.

Giving Larry Silverstein the benefit of the doubt while not granting it to a group of firefighters on the scene, about the famous “pull it” remark, to justify rejecting Controlled Demolition at WTC7, is just one example I’ve cited about 3-4 times already.

Silverstein has no credibility but you give it to him in spades. Firefighters within an emergency discussing the emergency and being filmed saying it without their knowledge, do have credibility.

So you invented a hypothetical argument never supported that the firefighters could be part of the conspiracy to take their credibility away, while giving Silverstein a free pass, so you could continue to voice your “conclusion” that CD was not present.

And this is not an isolated case. In fact one cannot look the other way before you resort to attacking some other 911 truthteller. You just now attacked Morgan Reynolds who supports CD by associating him with Bush, because he once worked in government during Bush.

Were you wrong to say these things? Do you wish to retract them? But please if you don’t dispute you said them, nor feel honor-bound to retract them, don’t proceed to misrepresent what I say.

Doing that sir is plainly dishonest, and that’s all I’ve been saying. We’re just calling you on it. And all you do is lash out.

3/27/2007 06:47:00 PM  
Blogger Sounder said...

Boy, -yes,- this is some real high level logic.

sniffer said; "So it logically follows that if you don’t care about the 3,000 murdered in 911 then you don’t care about the 3 million either, or the bigger historical figure you allude to."

Your confidence in what you say IC does not care about sounds a bit odd, and does no service to your credibility, sniffer.

How far do you expect to get with this kind of logic?

3/27/2007 08:44:00 PM  
Blogger Shrubageddon said...

How far do you expect to get with this kind of logic?

About as far as you did in assuming I was using you as a proxy in some presupposed epic battle with Mojo. Ironically, Mojo clearly uses you as a proxy shortly after you falsely accuse me of such....and not a word, or a peep from you...which has been your pattern on this board. You take arrogant and aloof cheap shots but when the going gets tough and the heat gets turned up you're no where to be found.

You were wrong about me using you as a proxy....I was sincere in my attempt to connect with you and you slapped it back in my face.....but to hell with it...it just serves as yet another example of what I've been asserting since I started posting here.

You're just as vulnerable and prone to the same faults and foibles as the rest of us, Sounder, and when you pull stunts like falsely accusing me, your logic of a new way of relating to one another falls flat on its botox injected face.

3/27/2007 10:04:00 PM  
Blogger Jeff said...

"I and others have noted ad nauseam that your rejection of demolition, missile, etc. (all which fall in line with the official position) are no problem to us if you are sincere at arriving your conclusions."

Then you bring up Silverstein and "pull it." Well, there's a conundrum. If I'm unpersuaded of demolition, how could I think Silverstein confessed to it? Or is sincere agnosticism re CD an impossibility because Silverstein could have meant nothing else?

3/27/2007 10:26:00 PM  
Blogger iridescent cuttlefish said...

Sniffer,

What's with all the frothing? Here's what I'm saying: 9/11 was a spectacular example of how the Empire justifies its depredations. I don't value the lives sacrificied in earlier black ops any higher than those taken in this latest one--why whould I? You, on the other hand, while acknowledging that the problem runs deeper than 9/11, persist in conferring some special status on the recently murdered and here's the problem with that: it limits the scale of our inquiry, our outrage, our goal.

If we were to convict every thug and every general behind 9/11, would the exploitative, schizophrenic basis of our "civilization" be changed as well? If "the problem runs deeper than 9/11," then why do you limit your focus, your furious outrage to that one small campaign in the life of the Empire?

Lastly, I'm not attacking you personally; why do you have to stoop to the cheap tricks of Uncle Mojo to argue a point? Is calling me names or questioning my motives and/or "affiliations" going to advance your position? Calm down and engage in reasoned discourse or you'll become the thing of which you speak.

3/28/2007 04:11:00 PM  
Blogger iridescent cuttlefish said...

Shrub & Sounder,

I like both of you guys (as you know) and therefore I have to butt in here. Sure, mistakes were made, offense given and taken, but so what? C'mon...you guys are arguing about nothing, even if you're right, right?

Where's that damned peacepipe when you need it?! Please pardon my intrusion, as you know it was well-intended.

3/28/2007 04:17:00 PM  
Blogger iridescent cuttlefish said...

I believe there was an operation below starring 19 useful idiots, and an operation above which surveilled and protected them, and covertly redefined the scope of the attacks.

For myself, this makes best sense of the ambiguities and realities of al Qaeda, the character of covert war, and the historic employment of proxy fighters by Western interests.


Yes! This is the ticket, Jeff. If we disregard the very real blowback America is currently experiencing, then we are curiously in lockstep with those who brandish such inanities as "They want to kill us because they hate our freedoms," as opposed to the real and very widespread sentiment of "We would rather try to kill you than submit any longer to the multi-generational humiliation & exploitation at the hands of you murderous, hypocritical infidel dogs."

It is we who've never given peace a chance. But then again, we have no Lawrence of Arabia to stick up for our Arab brothers, or even acknowledge their grievances, do we?

3/28/2007 04:32:00 PM  
Blogger Bill said...

"taught hijackers how to smuggle box cutters onto aircraft"?

What a singularly absurd and incredible idiotic statement.

"taught hijackers how to smuggle box cutters onto aircraft"?

What did you have to learn about taking something like a box cutter on an airplane pre-9/11?

Idiot.

9/20/2007 04:01:00 PM  
Blogger Nataliepobe165 said...

Espanhol, Cursos de Espanhol, Aulas Particulares de Espanhol, Cursos Intensivos de EspanholEspanhol na Argentina, Tradução Espanhol, Intercambio Espanhol

7/24/2009 11:34:00 AM  
Blogger the KITSILANO Band said...

http://jesusjamey.multiply.com/journal/item/9/Jesuswarren_we_are_rich


Mr Warren Buffet:
Omaha Nebraska
USA


COMPLETE LETTER IS ON MY BLOG
http://jesusjamey.multiply.com/journal/item/9/Jesuswarren_we_are_rich

Dear Mr Buffet:

      I am Chief Kitsilano.

Please accept my sincere apology. Like you I despise what passes for Potlatch! Those people symbolizing democracy among us are naked Emperors designed to out fools pretending to enjoy the worst excuse for entertainment ever foisted on eager wannabees. My family prosper in that artifice so it was a humorous reason to be glad when they scape-goated me: I waited for a proud crowd in symbiosis with the performing clique and just before the applause light lit, shouting louder than their senseless hollars: BORING!!! All good though since this invitation to Pesa Kgelatl, where I promise the real thing (Pepsi???). Pesa Kgelatl translates: “join three”, in honor of the Three Wise Men, raising the Christ's story , with an Indian inside your history; Ms Schroeder's book tells the world what a life of business wants and lacks. It all prompts me to invite you, like Jesus invited Barnabbus, to join a business offering me, my dream, and the knowledge of Heaven and Earth; I am the Potlatch Genius the same way you,  are the stockbroker genius.

     You Warren, only need know now that in Canada Indians possess a legal trump against the state by virtue of Section 25 & 35 Canada Act 1982 and my "band" is advancing our right to own and govern the land upon which the state has established itself. The process held in inertia for our benefit but as that inertia shifts to momentum, your snowball will have as much chance as a zero inside infinity (relax its segue to science you will love for knowing but hate because you never knew it). The process relies on the Land Title Act in the Province of British Columbia, and will develop into a win/win for Indians and for those who now hold, or who purchase land lots; the edge comes from reducing the prefabricated role of the State in lives and in business, while entirely augmenting personal and private participation in the administration of all human affairs. My website http://jesusjamey.multiply.com/journal/item/9/Jesuswarren_we_are_rich - elaborates.
 
     You see that I contact you while reading "Snowball" and finding Mr Warren Buffet a wise man who, quite like other dedicated souls familiar to us both, such as George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King Jr., who each struggled their own ways, is also a deeply conscientious man who while quite rightfully and ethically I am pleased to say, is deeply desirous of having a lasting positive impact upon Life on Earth. Our project is the result of me focusing a lifetime on justice for Indians, which converged around 1980 into the leading role bringing forth the biblical promise made to, and through the Lord Jesus Christ, a part that by 9-11-01, had prepared me to completely understand the meaning of that attack on you, a point here left in abeyance unless anyone is urged to inquire (suffice to refer you to Surah 74, Koran). As I send this invitation to you We again verge on either worse events, or provided Heaven is assured of our dedication to the 3-prong promise: Peace on Earth, Goodwill among Humans and Everlasting Life, then we shall usher in and partake of the promised Golden Age of Heaven on Earth.

I nominate you, seconded by our common boss, for the title of one of the three Wise Men of this age, the one with control of the gold, the one who doesn't ever want to hurt anymore, the one who knows more than I do about something that is about to end forever.

I am sincerely able to be your's truly
Chief Kitsilano
aka jesusjamey

10/25/2009 01:54:00 AM  
Blogger Bruce said...

Today,we are proud to announce the launch of the new wedding support service sell ffxi gil,packed with features sure to sell ffxi gils delight adventurers across Vana'diel looking to exchange eternal vows with their beloved!Responding to player demands for greater customization,the new service will grant brides and grooms freedom in choosing location,timing,dialogue,and sell Final Fantasy XI Gil more for their ceremony,allowing them to create a truly memorable event all their own.Information on all the features,including in-game sell ffxi gil item vendors and wedding certificates,can be found on the new wedding support site,so head on over sell ffxi gils and get started planning the wedding of your dreams sell Final Fantasy XIGil!

1/10/2010 06:10:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Google