Ed - as usual, I see a lot of scattergun noise and a lack of any critical evaluation from you.
Once again, which of these hypotheses - the use of computer generated images (CGI), the use of video compositing (VC), or the use of holograms - do you consider credible in the WTC context?
Charles Drago Wrote:All intelligence operations have at least two objectives.
One of the 9-11 objectives is observed on this thread.
And that is precisely why I am insisting that those who propose the "video fakery proves no planes hit the Twin Towers" hypothesis produce some credible evidence to support their claims.
Otherwise, it is just diversionary garbage which can be used by the ruling elites to discredit deep political analysis of 9/11.
I am not giving TBP a pass on what 911 was to the American people and the world. Whomever caused it, planned it, carried it out, the results were all that TPB needed to advance their hegemonic agendas. For what it's worth all people and interests view the events of the world through a filter (different filters for each person). This tends obviously to distort their view of what really has happened and to use their colored obserevations of the events to serve their beliefs and goals.
Take Katrina for example. No one will claim that it was a planned act, a conspiracy of the PTB or the national security state. But observe how the PTB and the national security responded. Look at how they treated the people of NOLA... Blackwater even got into the act. Naomi Klein calls is disaster capitalism. This is opertunism by those in positions of power to advance their self interest.
With respect to the notion of non state terrorism... Professor William Blum and others such as Naom Chomsky refer to blow back. That of course is the response of the disenfranchised people to the oppression and abuse to hegemony by the US. Newton will describe it in terms of an equal and opposite reaction in mechanics. You don't expect to beat up on people without some sort of response. PTB label it terrorism... some call it assymmetrical warfare.
Individuals and *interest groups* are always looking to advance their self interest. Whether it is the zionists, the MIC, the politician who wants to live off the teat of the taxpayer... they will all be looking to make lemonaid out of lemons at every opportunity. Ya know sieze the opportunity sort of meme. That's is a fact... that is human / animal behavior.
There is a segment of the population which views the events of the world as driven largely by powerful unseen, undemocratic and essentially evil forces. The goal of these groups and individuals is always antithetical to the community of mankind and to the needs of the people, always undemocratically enacted and decided. More power, more abuse. Democracy is antithetical to centralized power structures.
The dust hadn't cleared on 911 and the vultures were already circling to grab from it what they could. And grab they did... the MIC which is largely a dinosaur with no real purpose (no credible enemy) found ample justification for their existence and to suck more resources from the taxpayers. The MIC of course is essentially large multinational weapons industry related contractors and the shareholders they represent who they make money for. Follow the money... war is a racket... it's all been said before.
Even the abused who showed sympathy for the loss of life soon became the victims of more abuse (terror) in the form of Shock and Awe and whatever they called the war in Afghanistan. Americans were treated to a haircut of their constitutional rights (more police power).. and the right wing saw little resistance to their hammer approach and exploited the fear that the people felt to herd them and mold them into mindless bots who hated the new enemy with a passion. How convenient! American always needs an enemy... the blacks, the Vietnamese, the Arab street... the USSR, Iran, Chavez, Castro, NoKos... Am I paranoid... or is the world out to take away my freedom?
There are false flag operations in history. So the PTB will at times conspire to change the course or history and blame it on some innocent victim... usually to start a war (of aggression) against the innocent victim of their attack.
There is also gross negligence and incompetence in play by the PTB and the mega corporations which dominate our lives. We've seen in the dangerous drugs approved for Pharma to profit off sickness, or the Ford Pinto gas tanks ... and many other product liability disasters... where usually there is no accountability or justice in proportion to the crime / wrong committed. I believe this sort of incompetence (perhaps driven by greed and ego) errected poorly conceived, designed and executed world trade center. Regardless of who or what took them down... they should not have come down if the they were designed properly. That's a fact.
GWB and the Obama want to look forward. To hell with the notion that justice looks back and tries to hold people and interests accountable for what they DID in the past. No proper investigation or assessment or justice. Witness all the abuses of human rights related to the recent wars... Abu Graib, Bragram Gitmo, torture, warrantless wire taps, drone strikes. The authoritarians (PTB) are pleased as punch at all these undemocratic developments. The people as usual are not and finding themselves living in a a neo feudal world as little more then serfs. One small step for man... one giant leap backward for mankind.
One can look at events (results of some cause(s)) and ascribe any number of causes to said event. These causes may have and usually do have an internal logic and consistency even if their advocates get some facts wrong. Fetzer is a master at this sort of nonsense... creating narratives which sound great but are usually made up out of whole cloth... and are absent scientific and engineering grounding. He's managed to learn how to write academic papers... footnotes, end notes and so forth... But he produces lots of smoke and mirrors signifying nothing. Is this evil that lurks before me?
And this brings me back to the topic of video fakery. Obviously everything we see these days is digital... unless we are real time eyewitness to the event. And even in that case we are plagued by memory problems as well as our level of training as observers. People who are not trained observers will not understand what they are seeing. That doesn't mean that they can't describe what they see... it simply means that their description is naive and incorrect.
Ask the ancients about the celestial bodies and they believed that the rose from the East horizon up into the sky and then set in the West. This was the prevailing wisdom and understanding of *astronomy* for millennium. It happened to be completely wrong although it was an accurate description of the observations.
What we have seen with 911 is a sort of middle age thinking in many cases... with respect to the understanding of what we all saw by everyman, by professionals, but NIST and most certainly by the *truth community*. And not only that, we have the notion that the media can create reality for the public. We've been subject to the idea of suspension of disbelief since the first actors stepped onto a stage. It is well accepted that we now live in a media managed and manipulated world. What is real and what is memorex?
I don't know if deep state means that the deep state is back there pulling the strings driving history... or if it can mean that the deep state is a cunning vulture who can use events to its advantage at the peril of the people. It matters not what the definition is. We can see how the PTB have seized on 911 to advance their agenda. FACT. The case for the PTB having conspired to carry out 911 has not been made. Take of your special *seeing the world with my world vision* glasses...
Now there is some murky gray area as the national security state is clearly in bed with non state terrorists and uses terrorism as a tactic in advancing their agenda. The CIA is not JUST gathering data... They are engaged in black ops... assassination and so forth. FACT So it is conceivable that the 911 tragedy could have been a black op of mega proportions. And it is conceivable that intel was aware of non state terror plots (blow back) in the making.... and may have even facilitated them so that there would then be a cause to respond heavy handed and achieve the sort of policies that a democracy would not normally enact. Why would a democracy enact the USAPATRIOT Act unless their was a *just cause* for example? They wouldn't of course. It's conceivable that they saw it coming, even helped a bit and let it happen because regardless of whether the towers fell or not... TPB would get what it wanted.... and they did.
It seems just as likely that players such as Silverstein simply took advantage of what happened as opposed to being in on a conspiracy. The likes of Guiliani are simply suck up opportunists who want to be in with the PTB... their henchmen, lap dogs who get petted for good behavior (and make out financially as well) to keep their mouths clamped.
I hardly think that *they* needed to create this massive Hollywood show with thousands of unrehearsed actors using the most advanced media techniques to put one over on the people. I also don't believe they have the competence to do it. Ever notice how incompetent the MIC or DOD is at getting the job done? Failed in Vietnam, failed in Iraq, failed in Afghanistan, failed in Katrina, failed in the BP oil spill... The MIC's strength is total destruction. If they don't do that... blow back comes back even worse. The MIC is a bureacracy... they are like cancers gobbling up their host.
Video fakery? You are watching too many Hollywood movies and believing your lying eyes.
Jan Klimkowski Wrote:Charles Drago Wrote:All intelligence operations have at least two objectives.
One of the 9-11 objectives is observed on this thread.
And that is precisely why I am insisting that those who propose the "video fakery proves no planes hit the Twin Towers" hypothesis produce some credible evidence to support their claims.
Otherwise, it is just diversionary garbage which can be used by the ruling elites to discredit deep political analysis of 9/11.
My point exactly.
Jan Klimkowski Wrote:Ed - as usual, I see a lot of scattergun noise and a lack of any critical evaluation from you.
Once again, which of these hypotheses - the use of computer generated images (CGI), the use of video compositing (VC), or the use of holograms - do you consider credible in the WTC context?
Jan, the argument goes like this. Since these are the only three possibilities, and since real, live, non-hologram witnesses saw planes crash into the buildings, obviously, one is obliged to choose option three. What a crock.
Jan Klimkowski Wrote:Ed - as usual, I see a lot of scattergun noise and a lack of any critical evaluation from you.
Once again, which of these hypotheses - the use of computer generated images (CGI), the use of video compositing (VC), or the use of holograms - do you consider credible in the WTC context?
The critical evaluation, as a start, was to re-watch the videos and pull out the issues (with references to times within the tape, in some cases) that, in my mind, require explanation or further investigation.
As to your three questions, I repeat again -- perhaps we can fill up a thread with the nonsense and scattergun noise of each of us asking questions of the other that never go answered or acknowledged -- that I am not obligated to answer your questions if you aren't obligated to respond to me. You are theoretically a top-notch researcher, so it should not be difficult for you to find the questions on the site on whose 'executive committee' you sit. I also wrote an e-mail to the administrator here some time back which I asked her to disseminate to all members of the execurive committee, but I never received a response.
To quote [
http://summonthemagic.blogspot.com/2012/...blues.html ]-- you know I am fond of quoting -- , Harvard's well-published social psychologist on the topics of mindlessness
, mindfulness, and possibility :
"... mistakes arise from mindlessness. If our interactions with others are not individual in nature, they risk unfolding in a mindless manner. Role-to-role behavior is rule-bound and normative; that is, a typical pattern of behavior is likely to be repeated."
" When we communicate with each other using impersonal, absolute language we are led into a naïve realism where we come to think that there is a single reality that we all share."
"Language is shorthand; individual experiences the full text."
**
Dialogue is a two-way street. I have an old quote from Nick Negroponte of MIT's studies program from within the world of media interactivity I can pull out too... but it's probably already posted here somewhere.
Jan Klimkowski Wrote:Charles Drago Wrote:All intelligence operations have at least two objectives.
One of the 9-11 objectives is observed on this thread.
And that is precisely why I am insisting that those who propose the "video fakery proves no planes hit the Twin Towers" hypothesis produce some credible evidence to support their claims.
Otherwise, it is just diversionary garbage which can be used by the ruling elites to discredit deep political analysis of 9/11.
And here you are having a discussion with another member of the executive group with whom you undoubtedly share alignment and agreement on mission in which you use the same dismissive language of "diversionary garbage" and then offer some pablum like "the ruling elite" without specificity. (It's roughly akin to Orling's TPB.)
You know that I read a lot, and having called Kris Millegan to inquire as to the publication date and content leanings of the soon-to-arrive book by Mark Gaffney called "Black 9/11", he suggested I read Kevin Fenton's "Disconnecting The Dots". It just arrived. Here's the last paragraph from the author's foreword:
"Finally, I would like to highlight the fact that this book contains almost no original reporting. With a very few minor exceptions, I did not speak any officials or sources, either on or off the record. Nearly everything you read here has been in the public record, mostly for several years, and comes from those very government reports, from publicly available court documents, and from the mainstream media. All the information here could have been put together by others, including media and government agencies, with resources dwarfing those of a solitary author.
Why they have not done so as another important question deserving of an answer."
In discussing "the ruling elite" and 'intelligence operations', it is easy (and erroneous) to see that the great unwashed mass inside the Beltway speaks with one voice, one directive, one philosophy. But of course this is not the case. Although I am signatory as a member of "Medical Professionals", I have no -- and never did -- any connection whatsoever with any intelligence agency, or arm of the government, that has not been publicly disclosed. [The only exception that can be found is likely a short stint I did as a consultant under a DARPA project that was in the center of the bull's-eye of a previous career path and on which I am published.]
Yet the thrust of Fenton's book -- drawn from sources widely available for up to a decade -- is that major US governmental agencies -- themselves overseen and compartmentalized by neo-conservative Zionists with close ties to the militaries and intelligence agencies of Israel "helped enable 9/11 and evaded government investigations".
The same can be said of many of the prime characters inside the events, and of the media outlets acting in a supportive, fascist manner to "pre-sell", obfuscate, and function as a platform for those very same interests.
Why the leadership and members of a discussion board devoted to deep political analysis have not engaged in "a coordinated assault" into the nature of what is described as arguably the most important event that drives foreign and domestic policy across the globe is equally an important question deserving of an answer.
Lauren Johnson Wrote:Jan Klimkowski Wrote:Ed - as usual, I see a lot of scattergun noise and a lack of any critical evaluation from you.
Once again, which of these hypotheses - the use of computer generated images (CGI), the use of video compositing (VC), or the use of holograms - do you consider credible in the WTC context?
Jan, the argument goes like this. Since these are the only three possibilities, and since real, live, non-hologram witnesses saw planes crash into the buildings, obviously, one is obliged to choose option three. What a crock.
You have their names, addresses, affidavits, testimony, links, attributed sources, and assurance/assistance to the fact that they are open to counter-inquiry and cross-examination, I assume.
Ed Jewett Wrote:Jan Klimkowski Wrote:Charles Drago Wrote:All intelligence operations have at least two objectives.
One of the 9-11 objectives is observed on this thread.
And that is precisely why I am insisting that those who propose the "video fakery proves no planes hit the Twin Towers" hypothesis produce some credible evidence to support their claims.
Otherwise, it is just diversionary garbage which can be used by the ruling elites to discredit deep political analysis of 9/11.
And here you are having a discussion with another member of the executive group with whom you undoubtedly share alignment and agreement on mission in which you use the same dismissive language of "diversionary garbage" and then offer some pablum like "the ruling elite" without specificity. (It's roughly akin to Orling's TPB.)
Ed,
Have you lost control of your senses?
"Executive group"???
"Undoubtedly share alignment"???
What's happened to you?
Charles
Charles
Mr. Orling, rather than use up valuable bandwidth, I have not copied your post #23, but I do have it open in front of me in a separate window and will dictate a response as I read it.
"Take Katrina for example..." Here in the 2nd paragraph, you're already off topic and off target. But let's take Katrina for example; it's a subject I've studied and it lies in the heart of my personal and professional interests and I've published on the topic. That does not make me an expert, I wasn't in New Orleans at any time, and I won't follow your lead to divert this examination of 9/11, except to say that to say "no one claimed it was a planned act" suggests that you are either incompletely informed, have rejected those species entirely, or perhaps are engaged in further diversion.
The 3rd paragraph is an apology for the failed conspiracy theory as espoused by the United States government in a slapstick fashion. It continues to suggest that some people opposed to the abuses of the United States and of a Muslim derivation were principally the actors (or perhaps at the "mechanic" stage), this despite reams of evidence and information (all archived and in continual dissemination despite efforts by many at suppression) of the role of Israeli intelligence acting in various modes of deception and or through the offices of the United States government, its intelligence agencies, its military, the software used by those agencies, surveillance of the operation at every stage, and more. You and others can continue to ignore this information at your pleasure and leisure; you cannot, however, brush away the mounting evidence and analysis done by many with a long 20-paragraph essay.
The 3rd paragraph is mirrored in the 9th paragraph and its discussion of "gross negligence and incompetence", neatly sidestepping any possibility of exploring intent or parallel histories with an argument that has been destroyed several times over in the years past. [Try to catch up, Jeffrey.] As is said on the back cover of the aforementioned "Disconnecting the Dots", "there is a pattern to these events". For example, we could examine the history of Israel using explosives in false flag events, or its use of masquerade identities and the natural and inherent ability of its agents to look something like a Middle Easterner.
But I appreciate the effort, Jeffrey. It's just that I'm not going to waste any more time trying to digest it, though it surely has some nutritious value somewhere for someone.