12-06-2012, 03:18 PM
Jeffrey Orling Wrote:So does this mean that 9/11 was or wasn't an inside job?
And here, in the form of a question, we reach a critical teaching moment in Deep Political Science:
"Inside" what, exactly?
12-06-2012, 03:18 PM
12-06-2012, 04:16 PM
Quote:"Inside" what, exactly?
First, the question of inside. Is there a boundary between the inside and the outside? Everywhere.
Second the what? Is there or isn't there a something other than The Unspeakable? Yes.
Exactly? Definitely, maybe.
And this is from someone who is distressed over Orling's agnosticism and the document that he espouses. The agnosticism ends when it comes to the use of explosives. And that is saying I believe that Orling is sincere and is telling the truth as he sees it. But then what exactly is seen? There is always that which arrests the gaze and that which, or the who, that does the arresting. Both are fascinating.
Edit: change "agnosticism" to "confused skepticism"
12-06-2012, 05:19 PM
This discussion is becoming very esoteric. I believe the term *inside job* refers to people who are well ensconced inside the establishment, in high places in government or the so called MIC (military industrial complex) who were the conspirators... planning and executing and lying about 9/11... a massive crime and a massive deception by the already powerful who somehow felt constrained enough by democracy to have to resort to extra legal activities to achieve some objective which appears to be wars, endless funding for the MIC and a clamping down on the democracy which might allow their activities and profiteering to be reigned in. Ike warned us about this cabal and it turns out he was correct. JFK probably was terminated because he was trying to cut them down. The DOD and the MIC have indeed become too powerful and like the guys who run the show and the democracy is window dressing which is there for PR and to fool everyone.
From my perspective... they don't have to stage these horrors... they can and always will turn them into lemonaide every time.
So how much of our Truman show is managed and how much are we in control of? We live on the information age of manufactured news of infotainment of PR in a society that has been dumbed down for decades... and turned into wage slaves... but a public that is political naive and embracing the nonsense of organized religion as their source for virtually everything.
There's money to be maid in Hollywood!
From my perspective... they don't have to stage these horrors... they can and always will turn them into lemonaide every time.
So how much of our Truman show is managed and how much are we in control of? We live on the information age of manufactured news of infotainment of PR in a society that has been dumbed down for decades... and turned into wage slaves... but a public that is political naive and embracing the nonsense of organized religion as their source for virtually everything.
There's money to be maid in Hollywood!
12-06-2012, 05:43 PM
Jeffrey Orling Wrote:... the already powerful who somehow felt constrained enough by democracy to have to resort to extra legal activities to achieve some objective which appears to be wars, endless funding for the MIC and a clamping down on the democracy which might allow their activities and profiteering to be reigned in.
For the "insiders," the illusion of democracy is anything BUT a constraint. It is the central lie -- the sine qua non -- that facilitates control of the many by the few.
True democracy was clamped down and eliminated a very long time ago.
12-06-2012, 06:00 PM
True democracy never existed. We had some shadow of it and a collection of rights in the constitution. That's all gone and just a shadow... We've not changed technically... we have elections and all.. but practically we have a fascist society run by corporations which are not democratic. Most probably can't face the reality of this or can't identify or name it.. it's not communism.... we don't have a dictator... we can vote... and publish things...
It's the Truman show!
It's the Truman show!
13-06-2012, 01:07 AM
Jeffrey Orling Wrote:True democracy never existed. We had some shadow of it and a collection of rights in the constitution. That's all gone and just a shadow... We've not changed technically... we have elections and all.. but practically we have a fascist society run by corporations which are not democratic. Most probably can't face the reality of this or can't identify or name it.. it's not communism.... we don't have a dictator... we can vote... and publish things...
It's the Truman show!
Now you're cookin' with gas!
13-06-2012, 01:50 AM
Charles,
The view expressed about the state of affairs we have today is hardly much different than I have felt for most of my life. I lost my innocence on Nov 22, 1963 and remember attending a talk by Mark Lane and listening to Mae Burssel about how these SOBs operate.
However as much as they would have likes to orchestrate 9/11 I think it was not and could not have been as completely controlled as many declare it to be. I have no doubt in my mind that they were stage managing the show but like didn't know the precise outcome... but they sure did know what the audience response would be. That they were able to control because they are the media! The Big Brother. I think it is more likely that the intel guys knew, suggested and even sort of assisted the dupes but I don't believe they blew the towers up. I don't see the actual evidence of this though there is plenty of circumstantial evidence.
I do know that what many see as slam dunk evidence of CD is simply not... those observations could be from a non assisted collapse. No the planes did not destroy the towers.. no the fires did not destroy the towers... no the low FOS of the steel did not destroy the towers nor the trusses or the flimsy slabs or even the jet fuel fires.. The towers fell because there were several factors which added up to what it took to break the towers and they fell on their own. They wouldn't fall without the plane strikes, without the fuel fires, the weak slabs, the flimsy trusses and the column free long span design the FOS and so forth... All of these were required to make them come down. But I don't think anyone would have suspected this before it happened. And why so many engineers etc. believe it could not happen because none of the factors alone was sufficient.
Some one could have sketched out the convergence of factors and predicted it... but this is so outside the norm no one bothered to... why should they... And what about the MIC /intel guys... did they expect the towers to fall? Did they want the towers to fall and felt they would make sure they did? Did they not really care if the towers fell if they were hit by commercial jets in perceived hijackings and terrorist attacks? I can't answer any of these questions. And neither can any of us out here. We can only speculate on this. And some insist they HAD to have intended to and actually did engineer the destruction. But there remains enough ambiguity in the collapse that we can't rule out either possibility nor can we rule one in with certainty. We need more evidence.
I've not followed the JFK investigation for years but aren't people still engaged in trying to nail the evidence to prove what happened?
We've seen the same behavior from these thugs who capitalized on confusion... it works every time... distraction and chaff and you can pull of whatever you want will everyone's head is spinning. When people are in shock and afraid they are less than rational and will easily be swayed by authority figures who take command. And I still have not received a good answer as to why the WTC had to be completely destroyed to achieve the wars and the GWOT.
just sayin'
Jeffrey
The view expressed about the state of affairs we have today is hardly much different than I have felt for most of my life. I lost my innocence on Nov 22, 1963 and remember attending a talk by Mark Lane and listening to Mae Burssel about how these SOBs operate.
However as much as they would have likes to orchestrate 9/11 I think it was not and could not have been as completely controlled as many declare it to be. I have no doubt in my mind that they were stage managing the show but like didn't know the precise outcome... but they sure did know what the audience response would be. That they were able to control because they are the media! The Big Brother. I think it is more likely that the intel guys knew, suggested and even sort of assisted the dupes but I don't believe they blew the towers up. I don't see the actual evidence of this though there is plenty of circumstantial evidence.
I do know that what many see as slam dunk evidence of CD is simply not... those observations could be from a non assisted collapse. No the planes did not destroy the towers.. no the fires did not destroy the towers... no the low FOS of the steel did not destroy the towers nor the trusses or the flimsy slabs or even the jet fuel fires.. The towers fell because there were several factors which added up to what it took to break the towers and they fell on their own. They wouldn't fall without the plane strikes, without the fuel fires, the weak slabs, the flimsy trusses and the column free long span design the FOS and so forth... All of these were required to make them come down. But I don't think anyone would have suspected this before it happened. And why so many engineers etc. believe it could not happen because none of the factors alone was sufficient.
Some one could have sketched out the convergence of factors and predicted it... but this is so outside the norm no one bothered to... why should they... And what about the MIC /intel guys... did they expect the towers to fall? Did they want the towers to fall and felt they would make sure they did? Did they not really care if the towers fell if they were hit by commercial jets in perceived hijackings and terrorist attacks? I can't answer any of these questions. And neither can any of us out here. We can only speculate on this. And some insist they HAD to have intended to and actually did engineer the destruction. But there remains enough ambiguity in the collapse that we can't rule out either possibility nor can we rule one in with certainty. We need more evidence.
I've not followed the JFK investigation for years but aren't people still engaged in trying to nail the evidence to prove what happened?
We've seen the same behavior from these thugs who capitalized on confusion... it works every time... distraction and chaff and you can pull of whatever you want will everyone's head is spinning. When people are in shock and afraid they are less than rational and will easily be swayed by authority figures who take command. And I still have not received a good answer as to why the WTC had to be completely destroyed to achieve the wars and the GWOT.
just sayin'
Jeffrey
19-06-2012, 10:01 AM
Tom has posted this interesting comment (my bold):
".....it is time to begin the 4th and final part of the smart idiots thread.
In the third part I constructed a "book" which now appears on my website. I am now happy with the overall structure, and in this 4th and final part I will try to refine and finalize the book. I want to take this opportunity to explain why I wrote each part as I did and how this book can be used as a tool on many levels.
........................
I chose the thesis carefully. The common approach to a book or paper on this subject is to write around the following thesis:
The buildings were demoed because...
or
The buildings were not demoed because...
Both approaches assume a level of certainty to which the claimant does not have access in reality. Premature efforts in these directions are sure to end in failure, since neither can be claimed without a comprehensive understanding of what we are looking at. What I have found from experience is that nobody I have observed had a real understanding of what they were looking at, including me.
Over time I've watched people on all levels make incorrect claims, sometimes quite blatantly about global attributes of each collapse. There can be no doubt that those with PhDs and higher levels of technical education have made some bone-headed blunders, often in a state of fixed certainty. We have watched this for some time.
in retrospect, the single biggest obstacle for many participants within the discussions, including mathematicians, physicists, chemists, engineers, computer programmers and journalists, was their own head-strong vanity which led to premature states of false certainty. The evidence for this is everywhere we look within years of recorded posting histories, published papers and articles written about the collapses. It became quite obvious that the less humility one has when approaching these issues, the more certain that individual was to post blatantly untrue information and defend it to the point of absurdity.
This pattern still continues today. It will probably never end with respect to these events.
But while observing the contradiction and confusion, I, poor Major_Tom, began to understand why this is the case. As a result I do not blame people for being so confused, or rather I blame some for their extreme stubbornness but not for their confusion.
I came to understand that each individual was left to guess on their own as they had no common pool of technical information from which to draw understanding. This is because we were never given an intelligible description of what we were looking at.
This, to me, is the fundamental starting point from which one can begin to understand the objects being observed as well as the reactions of those observing them. This is why the specific thesis was chosen and the book was written around it."
".....it is time to begin the 4th and final part of the smart idiots thread.
In the third part I constructed a "book" which now appears on my website. I am now happy with the overall structure, and in this 4th and final part I will try to refine and finalize the book. I want to take this opportunity to explain why I wrote each part as I did and how this book can be used as a tool on many levels.
........................
I chose the thesis carefully. The common approach to a book or paper on this subject is to write around the following thesis:
The buildings were demoed because...
or
The buildings were not demoed because...
Both approaches assume a level of certainty to which the claimant does not have access in reality. Premature efforts in these directions are sure to end in failure, since neither can be claimed without a comprehensive understanding of what we are looking at. What I have found from experience is that nobody I have observed had a real understanding of what they were looking at, including me.
Over time I've watched people on all levels make incorrect claims, sometimes quite blatantly about global attributes of each collapse. There can be no doubt that those with PhDs and higher levels of technical education have made some bone-headed blunders, often in a state of fixed certainty. We have watched this for some time.
in retrospect, the single biggest obstacle for many participants within the discussions, including mathematicians, physicists, chemists, engineers, computer programmers and journalists, was their own head-strong vanity which led to premature states of false certainty. The evidence for this is everywhere we look within years of recorded posting histories, published papers and articles written about the collapses. It became quite obvious that the less humility one has when approaching these issues, the more certain that individual was to post blatantly untrue information and defend it to the point of absurdity.
This pattern still continues today. It will probably never end with respect to these events.
But while observing the contradiction and confusion, I, poor Major_Tom, began to understand why this is the case. As a result I do not blame people for being so confused, or rather I blame some for their extreme stubbornness but not for their confusion.
I came to understand that each individual was left to guess on their own as they had no common pool of technical information from which to draw understanding. This is because we were never given an intelligible description of what we were looking at.
This, to me, is the fundamental starting point from which one can begin to understand the objects being observed as well as the reactions of those observing them. This is why the specific thesis was chosen and the book was written around it."
21-06-2012, 01:18 AM
The recent document dump looks like 9/11 was more of a LIHOP than a MIHOP. They saw it coming and it was like Christmas in September... their new Pearl Harbor was going to come true... All they had to do was wait, do nothing and then rake in the dough.. they got their wars and a hands off from congress.
They got it...all right.
They got it...all right.
Bob Gaebler
23-09-2012, 08:40 PM
GW Bush had contact, with the bin Ladens and Hamid Karzai, due to an Afghan pipeline project. GW should be suspected, of seditious conspircy, 18 U.S.C. 2384, not just cutesy MIHOP or LIHOP, when GW wanted an Afghan war, BEFORE 911, per Condi testimony, after Condi and everybody blew off all kinds of intel, from all kinds of places, and GW suppressed investigations, sufficient to conspiracy to obstruct justice, 18 U.S.C. 1505.
But by now, all kinds of lousy politicians and assorted government trashers have violated some conspiracy statute.
NYT reporter Kurt Eichenwald got on TV, 9/11/12, to push his article, and he embellished, on my TV screen, saying GW wanted a final war, between Christians and Muslims. I sure wish Obamney would investigate this, instead of hassling whistleblowers and pot clubs, with that USDOJ and Holder.
GW and company all did LIHOP duty, and then, per Op.Curveball, GW and company pitched lies, to Congress and in all directions, to get an Iraq war, to privatize Iraq's oil.
Not content, the GW WH initiated a neo-con admiral, to sail three carriers, into the Persian Gulf, unannounced, in 2007, to try to provoke war, with Iran.
US debt is $16 trillion, when it was $6 trillion, in September 2001. Profiteering has been off the hook. Smells like MIHOP, to me. Of course, LIHOP in a conspiracy, with MIHOP co-conspirators is a MIHOP, anyway.
So I wonder why President Obamney can't see fit, to prioritize climate change? Does he think we aren't headed into Mass Extinction Event 6 or a depression? He sure is having trouble, getting to the internet and finding out what GW did, to start wars.
But by now, all kinds of lousy politicians and assorted government trashers have violated some conspiracy statute.
NYT reporter Kurt Eichenwald got on TV, 9/11/12, to push his article, and he embellished, on my TV screen, saying GW wanted a final war, between Christians and Muslims. I sure wish Obamney would investigate this, instead of hassling whistleblowers and pot clubs, with that USDOJ and Holder.
GW and company all did LIHOP duty, and then, per Op.Curveball, GW and company pitched lies, to Congress and in all directions, to get an Iraq war, to privatize Iraq's oil.
Not content, the GW WH initiated a neo-con admiral, to sail three carriers, into the Persian Gulf, unannounced, in 2007, to try to provoke war, with Iran.
US debt is $16 trillion, when it was $6 trillion, in September 2001. Profiteering has been off the hook. Smells like MIHOP, to me. Of course, LIHOP in a conspiracy, with MIHOP co-conspirators is a MIHOP, anyway.
So I wonder why President Obamney can't see fit, to prioritize climate change? Does he think we aren't headed into Mass Extinction Event 6 or a depression? He sure is having trouble, getting to the internet and finding out what GW did, to start wars.