Post by Wayne Hall on Feb 18, 2011 3:15:35 GMT -5
9/11
The fundamental teaching of 9/11 is not that the real 9/11 terrorists were the well oiled team of experts, featuring top-notch engineers, who demolished the twin towers with shock, awe, and 2,000+ civilians. It is not even the cover and protection the U.S. government provided these terrorists by ignoring abundant clues pointing to their activities and distracting the gullible public with the elaborate story of hijacks inspired by Osama bin Laden. It is the amazing censorship of the above by literally tens of thousands of leaders and organizations whose missions would call them to denounce it: liberal groups, European socialists, peace groups, Amnesty International, Muslim outfits, Hugo Chávez, unions, professional associations, universities, etc. This censorship is global, enduring, self-healing, and cuts across all traditional intra-human divisions such as geography, language, legality, religion, class, lifestyle, etc.
Conversely, just as the twin towers’ demolition engineers and their support staff were unlikely to accept the job without prior guarantees of a cover-up, Bush and his accomplices were unlikely to provide that cover without prior guarantees that it would be censored. Consequently, the above-mentioned censors are agents of 9/11. Contrary to conventional 9/11 wisdom, 9/11 was not really a neocon job or an inside job. It has rather been a liberal/socialist/Muslim/peace job.
The 9/11 censorship is, in final analysis, a blessing for the human community, by its size, its efficiency, and its irrefutability. It gives “us the people of the world” no choice but to accept it as a fact, and a problem worthy not of our ignorance, not of our anger, but of our objective analysis.
Because of 9/11’s global nature, the U.S. constitution is only one in many important rules that 9/11 has subverted. Many of the foreign governments who joined the 9/11 censorship did so in violation of their own rules, and all of them did so in violation of the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Many U.S. truth-seekers swear by the U.S. constitution because 9/11 and the evil policies it justified violated important aspects of it. However, the fact that the U.S. government was able to subvert its constitution as badly as it did may provide a call to correct it so as to prevent a repeat.
The same goes for democracy as Westerners know it. If it can be subverted as badly and as universally as it has been regarding 9/11, something could be wrong with it.
Some 9/11 truth-seekers dismiss such remarks by stating that the U.S. constitution and the idea of democracy are just fine and that the solution is for “the people” to be vigilant. Their assertion may be correct, but it is a premature jump to conclusions, for the fundamental problem 9/11 is a symptom of has not even been well identified yet.
Many 9/11 truth-seekers view 9/11 Truth—with some reason—as primarily a struggle against specific enemies. This is unfortunate, because:
· As pointed above, the fundamental 9/11 problem is epistemological, not military or economic: it is an evil system that distorts the information “we the people of the world” receive.
· These enemies—the chief epistemological distorters or Platonic Masters—are not obvious, as attested by the diverse targets that different 9/11 groups or leaders have accused of being responsible for 9/11 and other evil, from the neocons to the corporate Borg to the Illuminati to “the Jews” to reptilians to etc. All of them are poorly defined. Targeting enemies under such conditions can only lead to scattered and poorly effective actions.
· Short of being able to effectively hit whatever entity is ultimately responsible for 9/11, many truth-seekers still keep targeting the U.S. executive and legislative branches, plus the media. By now, it is painfully obvious that these efforts have been fruitless and that instead 9/11 truth-seekers ought to inventory the 9/11 censors closer to home and ally with local leaders who are receptive to 9/11 Truth. Instead of targeting their members of Congress and their TV stations, U.S. truth-seekers ought to try to approach their mayors, their fire chiefs, their ACLU members, their pastors, and sort between those who accept 9/11 Truth and those who won’t. Similarly and instead of waiting for the USA to solve its 9/11 problem, foreign truth-seekers ought to be aware that their national leaders are 9/11 criminals through their participation in its censorship (see above) and accordingly lobby their own local leaders. Since the 9/11 censorship has come top-down, any reasonable approach to 9/11 Truth ought to go bottom-up.
· The idea of settling problems through oppositional behavior is often a consequence of hasty judgment. Unlike the neocons who embrace war as a first resort—at least in public—truth-seekers would be well advised to look for other ways to solve 9/11. Contrary to Egypt, the USA allows 9/11 truth-seekers plenty of operational freedom. Once truth-seekers have identified a local 9/11 censor, they can always denounce her/him as such and invite her/his followers to ignore her/him. This involves lots of one-to-one teaching, but it can work on the 80% or so of people who are psychologically normal.
· Maybe a good course of action along these lines would be some grassroots action to ask local leaders how they plan to commemorate 9/11’s 10th anniversary and offer them information they ought to be aware of as they firm up their plans.
· On this topic, I invite you to look at the latest 9/11 crash course of the local group I happen to organize, starting with an ambitious title: www.meetup.com/OC-911-Truth/. It gives newcomers a crash course on the above-mentioned censorship and frames 9/11 as the epistemological problem that it is.
In a final touch of irony, there are reasons to believe that the so-called “elite” many 9/11 truth-seekers view as our ultimate enemy differ from “us” primarily because of some severe hereditary psychopathologies, which would make them mentally inferior to “us” and afraid of “us:” global-platonic-theater.com/glob ... tm#heading 6.8. Should this be correct, it would be immoral and counterproductive to fight or punish them. Instead, “we” ought to study and understand their pathologies, and consequently devise systems to contain these people’ urges to hurt us while preserving their dignity.
Dan Noel
The fundamental teaching of 9/11 is not that the real 9/11 terrorists were the well oiled team of experts, featuring top-notch engineers, who demolished the twin towers with shock, awe, and 2,000+ civilians. It is not even the cover and protection the U.S. government provided these terrorists by ignoring abundant clues pointing to their activities and distracting the gullible public with the elaborate story of hijacks inspired by Osama bin Laden. It is the amazing censorship of the above by literally tens of thousands of leaders and organizations whose missions would call them to denounce it: liberal groups, European socialists, peace groups, Amnesty International, Muslim outfits, Hugo Chávez, unions, professional associations, universities, etc. This censorship is global, enduring, self-healing, and cuts across all traditional intra-human divisions such as geography, language, legality, religion, class, lifestyle, etc.
Conversely, just as the twin towers’ demolition engineers and their support staff were unlikely to accept the job without prior guarantees of a cover-up, Bush and his accomplices were unlikely to provide that cover without prior guarantees that it would be censored. Consequently, the above-mentioned censors are agents of 9/11. Contrary to conventional 9/11 wisdom, 9/11 was not really a neocon job or an inside job. It has rather been a liberal/socialist/Muslim/peace job.
The 9/11 censorship is, in final analysis, a blessing for the human community, by its size, its efficiency, and its irrefutability. It gives “us the people of the world” no choice but to accept it as a fact, and a problem worthy not of our ignorance, not of our anger, but of our objective analysis.
Because of 9/11’s global nature, the U.S. constitution is only one in many important rules that 9/11 has subverted. Many of the foreign governments who joined the 9/11 censorship did so in violation of their own rules, and all of them did so in violation of the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Many U.S. truth-seekers swear by the U.S. constitution because 9/11 and the evil policies it justified violated important aspects of it. However, the fact that the U.S. government was able to subvert its constitution as badly as it did may provide a call to correct it so as to prevent a repeat.
The same goes for democracy as Westerners know it. If it can be subverted as badly and as universally as it has been regarding 9/11, something could be wrong with it.
Some 9/11 truth-seekers dismiss such remarks by stating that the U.S. constitution and the idea of democracy are just fine and that the solution is for “the people” to be vigilant. Their assertion may be correct, but it is a premature jump to conclusions, for the fundamental problem 9/11 is a symptom of has not even been well identified yet.
Many 9/11 truth-seekers view 9/11 Truth—with some reason—as primarily a struggle against specific enemies. This is unfortunate, because:
· As pointed above, the fundamental 9/11 problem is epistemological, not military or economic: it is an evil system that distorts the information “we the people of the world” receive.
· These enemies—the chief epistemological distorters or Platonic Masters—are not obvious, as attested by the diverse targets that different 9/11 groups or leaders have accused of being responsible for 9/11 and other evil, from the neocons to the corporate Borg to the Illuminati to “the Jews” to reptilians to etc. All of them are poorly defined. Targeting enemies under such conditions can only lead to scattered and poorly effective actions.
· Short of being able to effectively hit whatever entity is ultimately responsible for 9/11, many truth-seekers still keep targeting the U.S. executive and legislative branches, plus the media. By now, it is painfully obvious that these efforts have been fruitless and that instead 9/11 truth-seekers ought to inventory the 9/11 censors closer to home and ally with local leaders who are receptive to 9/11 Truth. Instead of targeting their members of Congress and their TV stations, U.S. truth-seekers ought to try to approach their mayors, their fire chiefs, their ACLU members, their pastors, and sort between those who accept 9/11 Truth and those who won’t. Similarly and instead of waiting for the USA to solve its 9/11 problem, foreign truth-seekers ought to be aware that their national leaders are 9/11 criminals through their participation in its censorship (see above) and accordingly lobby their own local leaders. Since the 9/11 censorship has come top-down, any reasonable approach to 9/11 Truth ought to go bottom-up.
· The idea of settling problems through oppositional behavior is often a consequence of hasty judgment. Unlike the neocons who embrace war as a first resort—at least in public—truth-seekers would be well advised to look for other ways to solve 9/11. Contrary to Egypt, the USA allows 9/11 truth-seekers plenty of operational freedom. Once truth-seekers have identified a local 9/11 censor, they can always denounce her/him as such and invite her/his followers to ignore her/him. This involves lots of one-to-one teaching, but it can work on the 80% or so of people who are psychologically normal.
· Maybe a good course of action along these lines would be some grassroots action to ask local leaders how they plan to commemorate 9/11’s 10th anniversary and offer them information they ought to be aware of as they firm up their plans.
· On this topic, I invite you to look at the latest 9/11 crash course of the local group I happen to organize, starting with an ambitious title: www.meetup.com/OC-911-Truth/. It gives newcomers a crash course on the above-mentioned censorship and frames 9/11 as the epistemological problem that it is.
In a final touch of irony, there are reasons to believe that the so-called “elite” many 9/11 truth-seekers view as our ultimate enemy differ from “us” primarily because of some severe hereditary psychopathologies, which would make them mentally inferior to “us” and afraid of “us:” global-platonic-theater.com/glob ... tm#heading 6.8. Should this be correct, it would be immoral and counterproductive to fight or punish them. Instead, “we” ought to study and understand their pathologies, and consequently devise systems to contain these people’ urges to hurt us while preserving their dignity.
Dan Noel