Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Radical Extremists For Rule Of Law":
I have a request for you, FSK. How albout putting some of your considerable analytical/anti-bullshit skills toward the 9/11 story? You live in New York, right? The 10 year anniversary is nearly upon us and that's probably the one topic I have never seen you address. What are your thoughts?Oh, boy. Not this subject again.
I have addressed this before.
My conclusions are "More likely than not, I believe the official explanation. I'm not completely sure."
Basically, "9/11 was an inside job!" requires too much cognitive dissonance, for an intelligent-but-deluded State insider. Most State evil occurs by deluded people with good intentions.
In contrast, "Pat Tillman was assassinated!" is a much more likely conspiracy theory than "9/11 was an inside job!" Pat Tillman's murder could have been accomplished by one or two people with a gun. The "9/11 conspiracies" require the active complicity of *MANY* people.
Would a psychopath like Bernard Madoff or Chuck Schumer organize a terrorist attack, if they thought they could profit and get away with it? Absolutely. However, they couldn't actually pull it off unless they had some intelligent-but-deluded people assisting them.
By themselves, psychopaths can't accomplish anything. The key mechanism of State evil is intelligent-but-deluded people, with psychopaths giving orders and pulling the strings. You couldn't convince an intelligent-but-deluded person to organize a large false flag terrorist attack. State evil occurs, because the intelligent-but-deluded people think they're the good guys.
Any "coverup" is probably actually a coverup of the gross negligence by State police who are supposed to prevent that sort of thing. I sometimes wonder if State spies intentionally promote the 9/11 conspiracies as a distraction from other things. For example, the mortgage bubble and bailout was a *MUCH MORE DAMAGING* and *MUCH MORE OBVIOUS* "inside job" than 9/11. I'm much more interested in discussing bankster conspiracies/facts, than the 9/11 conspiracies.
Politicians did exploit 9/11, to pass many severe liberty-restricting laws. These laws were planned, but had previously encountered resistance. Just because politicians exploited 9/11 to take away freedom, doesn't mean they organized it on purpose.
Some people get very angry, when I say "I mostly believe the official explanation of 9/11." The conclusions, that the authority of government is not legitimate, is valid whether you believe the official 9/11 story or not.
Even if you disagree with my analysis of 9/11, that does not invalidate the other points I make.
12 comments:
I think 9/11 was more likely allowed to happen than created from within, though I find the collapse of building 7 very interesting. If an inside job is ever proven, it will probably be via investigation of building 7.
Thanks for addressing this topic again, FSK. Since I am the anonymous poster who originally requested your input on 9/11, I'll address your points individually if space permits it:
YOU: "Basically, "9/11 was an inside job!" requires too much cognitive dissonance, for an intelligent-but-deluded State insider. Most State evil occurs by deluded people with good intentions."
ME: It's notable that you used the word 'most' in the above portion of your response. I take this to mean that you wouldn't necessarily disagree with the notion that *some* State evil therefore occurs by non-deluded people with very bad intentions. In other words, because of the far-reaching importance of the 9/11 operation, State insiders likely would have left the planning and carrying out of the operation to the most ruthless psychopaths among them to ensure the greatest success.
YOU: "In contrast, "Pat Tillman was assassinated!" is a much more likely conspiracy theory than "9/11 was an inside job!" Pat Tillman's murder could have been accomplished by one or two people with a gun. The "9/11 conspiracies" require the active complicity of *MANY* people."
ME: I don't disagree. As the size and scope of a given conspiracy grows, the potential for information-leak grows. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean that a conspiracy must be compromised. Our government has proved itself very adept at keeping long-running secrets throughout history. The most notable that come to mind are the Manhattan Project, MK-ULTRA, Operation Northwoods, Project SHAD, etc... These secrets all involved many people and endured long enough so that their objectives could be carried out or to prevent those involved from facing public or legal scrutiny.
YOU: "Would a psychopath like Bernard Madoff or Chuck Schumer organize a terrorist attack, if they thought they could profit and get away with it? Absolutely. However, they couldn't actually pull it off unless they had some intelligent-but-deluded people assisting them."
ME: And what if Bernard Madoff or Chuck Schumer gathered nothing but other psychopaths to assist them? Statistically speaking, psychopaths make up a large enough percentage of the population that it's not too difficult to assemble a sizable collection of psychopaths to carry out a plan.
YOU: "By themselves, psychopaths can't accomplish anything. The key mechanism of State evil is intelligent-but-deluded people, with psychopaths giving orders and pulling the strings. You couldn't convince an intelligent-but-deluded person to organize a large false flag terrorist attack. State evil occurs, because the intelligent-but-deluded people think they're the good guys."
ME: I believe you are looking at this all wrong. The wholesale farming of human beings via the State exploitation scam is a completely different animal than the much more limited 9/11 scam we are discussing. The inner circle of a 9/11 conspiracy would need not have involved a bunch deluded people with good intentions to be carried out with the way our highly compartmentalized government and military functions. The State bureaucracy is set up in such a clever way that thousands of people can take part in a plan or project without any one of them having any understanding what the sum of those individual parts adds up to.
My point is that psychopaths can accomplish very little on their own.
A group of 100% psychopaths wouldn't be able to accomplish much.
Psychopaths need intelligent-but-deluded people to do the work for them.
A competent intelligent-but-deluded person wouldn't organize a mass-murder.
Continued...
YOU: "Any "coverup" is probably actually a coverup of the gross negligence by State police who are supposed to prevent that sort of thing."
ME: I honestly find it incredible how many intelligent people are able to convince themselves of this. Didn't you watch the video footage of the WTC-7 collapse? Didn't you notice the profound symmetry? Your eyes weren't lying to and neither should your common sense. Steel frame skyscrapers don't collapse in such a way due to asymmetrical fires and external damage. That's all you really need to know that there was a coverup of some kind, and once you accept that, the door opens to a much larger coverup.
YOU: "I sometimes wonder if State spies intentionally promote the 9/11 conspiracies as a distraction from other things. For example, the mortgage bubble and bailout was a *MUCH MORE DAMAGING* and *MUCH MORE OBVIOUS* "inside job" than 9/11. I'm much more interested in discussing bankster conspiracies/facts, than the 9/11 conspiracies."
ME: This is rather unfortunate, because it was the events of 9/11 that were responsible for waking so many people up in the first place.
By comparison, money and banking are not very easy for the average American to understand. You'll wake far fewer people up to the evils of the State by focusing on those aspects.
YOU: "Politicians did exploit 9/11, to pass many severe liberty-restricting laws. These laws were planned, but had previously encountered resistance. Just because politicians exploited 9/11 to take away freedom, doesn't mean they organized it on purpose."
ME: So you figure it was all just a coincidence that the highly suspicious attacks of 9/11 occurred a short time after pro-Zionist PNAC's call for a catalyzing "new Pearl Harbor" event?
YOU: "Some people get very angry, when I say "I mostly believe the official explanation of 9/11." The conclusions, that the authority of government is not legitimate, is valid whether you believe the official 9/11 story or not."
ME: True enough, but without an understanding of what really took on 9/11, seeing the grand geopolitical chessboard and what's really taking place around the world is far more difficult.
YOU: "My point is that psychopaths can accomplish very little on their own."
ME: And why is that? You've acknowledged many times that psychopaths can assume positions of immense power. If that is the case, what is it that would prevent them from appointing other like-minded psychopaths to positions (Joint Chiefs, Director of FBI, CIA black ops, etc...) that would help them accomplish their plans?
YOU: "A group of 100% psychopaths wouldn't be able to accomplish much."
ME: This statement defies basic logic. What prevents a psychopath from doing anything a non-psychopath can do?
YOU: "Psychopaths need intelligent-but-deluded people to do the work for them."
ME: In many cases, sure, but not in all cases. When a psychopathic killer goes on a planned killing spree, he doesn't always need to convince intelligent-but-deluded people to do it for him. Sometimes he just does it himself.
YOU: "A competent intelligent-but-deluded person wouldn't organize a mass-murder."
ME: Sure they would with the proper brainwashing and/or mind control tricks employed. Just look at the numerous examples of the State and the aggressive wars (essentially just mass murders) it fights under the various fabricated guises of preemption, patriotism, humanitarian concerns, making the world "safe for democracy", etc... A non-psychopathic military planner or general can easily be induced to organize a mass murder if it's presented to him in the right way.
9/11 was no different.
Go to You Tube, search for the following videos, watch carefully, and understand:
- Architects & Engineers - Solving the Mystery of WTC 7
- Jonathan Cole - 9/11: Thermate Debate
- Jonathan Cole - 9/11: Mysterious Eutectic Steel
The answer should become pretty clear.
Watch the following You Tube video as well and pay special attention right around the 5:00 mark as the witness describes a string of explosions going down the side of one of the World Trade Center towers right before it collapsed:
- 9/11: WTC witness - NIST Release #25 - 42A0106 - G25D16
All three towers were brought down with controlled demolition.
Hey agorist!
Could you visit us sometime on 4eiruntyxxbgfv7o.onion?
-m.
I briefly experimented with Tor and gave up.
Tor is ****ing slow.
Once I realized that the NSA controls most Tor nodes, it seemed pretty pointless.
You can do better with an invitation-only regular website, plus some custom encryption code, than with Tor.
An excellent new 9/11 video from James Corbett was posted yesterday. Go to You Tube and search for:
9/11: A Conspiracy Theory
FSK, how can you possibly watch this video and still be able to delude yourself by believing in the official 9/11 conspiracy theory? What kind of cognitive dissonance is involved in your thinking?
I'll try to look at it, but I don't have time now.
Why does it upset you so much that I disagree with you?
I don't say "I'm absolutely sure that 9/11 was an insider job." I don't say "I'm absolutely sure that it wasn't an inside job." I'm leaning towards believing the official explanation, but I'm not 100% convinced either way.
The energy that goes towards the 9/11 Truth Movement could be more efficiently spent on other things.
The conclusion, "The authority of government is not legitimate.", is valid whether you believe the official 9/11 story or not.
Even if I don't agree with your analysis of 9/11, that doesn't invalidate the other points I make.
It doesn't upset me at all. I'd call it curiosity more than anything else.
I just don't understand how somebody with your analytical skills, with your ability to see through the complex charade of the Federal Reserve System and pick it apart so effortlessly, can be fooled enough by the official government/media conspiracy theory surrounding the events of 9/11 into "leaning" toward believing it. It really doesn't make a lot of sense, to be honest with you.
I guess the most likely explanation for this is you haven't researched at all certain aspects of history (Northwoods, Lavon Affair, U.S.S. Liberty, Israeli-U.S. political relations, Zionism, etc...) as much as you've researched the financial/economic aspects, which is a bit unusual.
Post a Comment