I don’t think it’s much of a stretch to claim that what follows is a continuation of ‘Yesterday’s Troubles’ and I will provide a photograph as indirect evidence: Below, left is a selfie I did the ‘night before yesterday,’ and what I’m watching as the dank fog rolls in was the inspiration behind one of my as yet unmentioned ‘horrors’ of the following day, i.e., the bad wake up involving RV women, Lou’s comment, and Joe’s unwarranted and unwanted incoming email, among other things. (If you’re not following me here, press on anyway; I should get rolling in a minute; I’m just asking you to buy the synchronicities I perceive.) What I’m trying to do is work our way still deeper in our examination of cognitive dissonance and how it is in fact the vital element, the prime mover, in HTWRW.
Addendum: No one will ever do this better than Orwell in 1984. Although ‘doublethink’ is outright defined, brilliantly so, the nature of fiction is that it was best to ‘show,’ not ‘tell.’ Besides, a little updating with specific examples might be illuminating.
So look at the photo for a beat or two, maybe click it to see it full-sized. Can you make out what I’m watching on the laptop?… No, it’s blown out, but trust me it was an episode of the TV series ’24,’ and I think a couple posts ago I mentioned that ‘24’ and its creator has something to do with the worst aspect of that ‘Yesterday’ wake up. Remember? So far, so good?
Be advised that my contempt for ‘24’ is on two levels; I’ll just briefly touch on level one to get it out of the way. Level one is the story-telling level and has nothing to do with the more important level of TV as ‘culture creation’ and, indeed, outright mind control. The easiest way to say it: The needle on my contempt meter rises congruent with the level of contempt shown by the story-tellers for my intelligence.
I’ll be as brief as possible in giving an example of the above: Season six of ‘24’ — an episode of which I’m viewing there in the fog – rests on the following premise: The hero (and holy shit is he heroic!) of the series, Jack Bauer, has just spent two years being tortured in a Chinese concentration camp, after single-handedly saving the United States from nuclear annihilation, by (what else?) crazed Muslim terrorists. Then, suddenly, the U.S. government makes a prisoner swap deal to get Jack back from the hell hole. In about the first ten minutes we learn why: ‘Osama’s’ brother (I’m short-handing) tells our anti-terror forces that he will reveal his bro’s whereabouts if they hand over Jack so he can torture and kill him (this is actually made clear) as revenge for Jack’s having tortured to death his other brother.
That’s why Jack’s PTB got Jack sprung from the Chinese. Jack steps off the boat not knowing this. He must’ve figured the PTB’d merely dragged their feet (in making the trade) for the past two years. I remember addressing the screen as the scene unfolded: ‘Hey, Jack, we have good news and bad news! You’re back from Chinese torture but in a few minutes will be tortured then killed by the Arabs.’ This is what you get for saving the western world. Talk about good deeds going unpunished!
Jack, always the trooper, shrugs and says, ‘Okay. But can I shave first?’ (I’m not kidding!)
At one point, one of Jack’s buddies, as they prepare to hand Jack over to Osama’s brother, voices what I’d been wondering too: ‘I hope Osama’s brother tells us the truth about where Osama is, after they torture and kill Jack.’
Jack, hearing the bad news, only wants a shave first. Really!
Or how about this, which happens two or even three times per episode: The Muslim fanatic knows where the nuke is that’s about to go off and kill thousands. He won’t talk. Jack enters, shoots him in the leg; the bad guy instantly spills the address where the bomb is, to stop Jack from shooting his other leg. Jack runs out. The torture ends.
Why not give Jack a phony address?
This is what I mean by ‘insulting the viewers’ intelligence.’ ‘24’ utterly depends on your not being offended. (This is unrelated to the concept of ‘suspension of disbelief,’ which is fine, even in preposterous premises. Hey, you can have people interacting with cartoon characters (Who Killed Roger Rabbit) and all is well with ‘suspension of disbelief’, if you don’t violate the logic of the story. ‘24’ violates the logic of its story multiple times per episode, and in more ways than I thought existed.
It also takes to new heights the concept that high-tech/totalitarian surveillance on all of us is not only a very good thing, but has become the go-to solution when still another story-telling deus ex machina is needed. [For our purposes defined as: ‘…a person or thing (as in fiction or drama) that appears or is introduced suddenly and unexpectedly and provides a contrived solution to an apparently insoluble difficulty.’ (my emphasis)
And worse, of course, is how ‘24’’s very premise is a perversion of reality itself (TV series as ‘soft’ mind-control is a subject too daunting to more than just touch on here). This is Joe’s ‘my truth is different from yours’ horse shit to some nth power that I won’t try to estimate.
Claire Danes of Homeland, reacting to an episode of ’24’.
But what about my ‘horror,’ and why it is related to this Joel Surnow fellow, the creator of ’24’? And what was I blabbing about when I voiced the fear that I could have become him? Why fear a past that didn’t happen? And anyway, the dude is apparently worth like 80 million bucks! There could be worse guys to ‘have become’!
But hold on. We need some dreaded backstory before dealing with that issue, the bedrock of… of not only ‘recent crapola,’ but the whole HTWRW magilla. Back in 1984 (an appropriate date), and I think it was early fall, I got a call from Michael Mann, who had optioned my first screenplay and with whom I’d collaborated on a science fiction story Michael was developing. He knew me as a writer and a person; my past as a high-flying pot smuggler appealed to him. (He’s well-known for working with real-life cops and crooks.) I’d written a script for Bob Chartoff (the Rocky franchise, Raging Bull, The Right Stuff, etc., etc.) that was in production; all was amazingly well at the time.
So Michael calls me with an emergency: An episode of his new series had just started production but which was halted when someone realized the script was unshootable; it was that bad. Michael knew of my disinterest in TV but persuaded me to fly down to Miami to ‘write it on the set.’ Normally, TV writers (as least for ‘location’ shows) don’t go anywhere near the actual production.
Joel, for ‘Cigar Aficionado.’
This sounded like fun so I went. And holy shit, it was fun! I’m tempted to describe the week I spent in Miami on the ‘Vice’ rewrite but the only anecdote relevant to our discussion is the following, the details of which I got from an unimpeachable source: After the wrap and I went home, the episode’s producer called Michael and told him I was useless and did not contribute anything to ‘Glades’ (which was about pot smuggling); I had run amok at the hotel, drunk and high on cocaine for the week I was there.
This didn’t sound right so Michael called the director, with whom I’d actually worked; I’d spent almost no time with the producer. The director told him that I’d ‘saved the episode’ and should be put on staff immediately. (Vanity Fair referred to ‘Glades’ as ‘…the best hour of TV so far this season.’ Plus, I had done a ‘page one’ rewrite while they were shooting. Not easy!)
But what was going on here and why is it relevant to our interests? What was going on was the producer had the hots for a production assistant who, as was immediately evident, preferred me. So he lied to Michael out of… spite? Okay, he’s a scumbag, but so what?
H-wood is a small and incestuous place (literally, come to think…), and had Michael not made the second call, what might have happened to me, career-wise?
There are turning points in one’s life, and in one’s career, and often we are not even aware of them as they blow by. My example is not perfect (it was early in my career and I had allies like Chartoff) but had a similar incident happened to someone like, say, Joel Surnow, and at one of those turning points… a show like ‘24’, not to mention Joel’s $80 million, very well might never have materialized.
Humility. Know what I mean? We all could use a little more. (Yeah, this anecdote was a bit of a sidebar.)
The upshot, though, was that Michael persuaded me to go on the ‘Vice’ staff (and for his following series, ‘Crime Story,’ as well), which is how I got to know Joel Surnow, another writer for the show. (According to his cv, ‘Vice’ was his breakthrough as a writer.)
Jack in a reunion with his on-screen brother. Still another disfunctional family in prime time.
We got along well and kept in close touch after ‘Vice.’ Close enough that when Joel got a deal to feature-produce a story he’d come up with he called me and proposed that I do the screenplay. During the few months of the write, we would hang out, have some fun, on one coast or the other. I’d bought a house at Montauk and at one point Joel came out and stayed with me; how many days I don’t recall but I did show him Montauk (as seen in the flick I linked) and, with my connections with the locals, introduced him to a babe he had a wild night with.
Okay, Allan, you may be thinking, we stuck with you for a lot of backstory. What’s the payoff?
Now, nearly 30 years later, Joel is one of the H-wood ‘elite’ and is apparently worth some $80 million. I’m wandering the countryside in an RV, no family and not even a home base to return to. Yet I’ve said, regarding Joel, words to the effect of ‘There but for the grace of God, go I.’
What kind of nonsense payoff is that?
The payoff is that the Joel Surnow I knew back in the 1980s is not the same human being that you will find living the elite life as the creator of the blockbuster TV series called ’24’; further, the ‘new’ Joel Surnow, I submit, is an example of the warping of reality humans do in order to remain whatever their version is of ‘a stand up guy.’ It’s my nightmare that I could be like that.
’24’ is coming back! Holy shit!
Specifics! I harp again and again on them, so let’s get specific. Although for those who harbor sufficient interest I recommend some Net searches (‘Joel Surnow’ will do), I’ll quote briefly from an interview in ‘Cigar Aficionado’:
‘Surnow is known more for talking about his conservative politics than his golf game. He is a good friend of Rush Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich and Roger Ailes, the head of Fox News. Surnow once sarcastically described himself as a “right-wing nut job,” and the phrase, however inaccurate, was eagerly picked up by the media.’ (end quote)
I assure you that a ‘right-wing nut job’ is not the Joel Surnow I partied with at Montauk in the mid 80s and collaborated with on a failed movie project. In truth, and you can look into this via quote mining, the Joel Surnow I knew underwent a major change and it’s my hypothesis that it came about for the same reason that… Joe doesn’t ‘remember’ the $5k or Lou can ramble the crapola in his comment or the RV women could turn away from me or Walter could flip-flop on clear issues of visual fakery.
I’ll tell you something that’s key: ‘Success,’ however one defines it but mainly of the financial/power sort, is the issue upon which hinges the degree to which a person can lie to him/herself. Look at Walter, a tremendously successful photographer; and be advised that photography is competitive. When someone is as successful as Walter he does not want to hear that the arena, the very culture, within which he has become successful, is rotten, from the top down at least, or, more likely, to its very core.
And Surnow! Think about this: ‘24’ came out in 2002, right? Although given the relentless ‘9/11 Official Story’ propaganda it spews tempts one to judge it an up front ‘part of the plan,’ I’ll not go there. I’ll assume that Surnow, in his pitch to Fox, merely took advantage of the over all zeitgeist in capitalizing on the horror/fear the attacks generated, in getting the show’s green light. And I’ll assume that that Joel Surnow was the same guy I knew in the ‘80s. An okay guy and fun to hang with. Not ‘a right-wing nut job’ and elite propagandist.
But then what? Allow me the latitude of a little wandering here, in my desire to find some deeper truth. Okay?
To ‘get’ this one, please view the Homeland clip below.
In wondering how to explain myself over the past two days I watched all of Season 6 of the TV show called ‘Homeland.’ I did this partially because, in terms of story-telling, the show is as good as TV gets, but mostly I was curious about the ‘homework’ done by those behind the show; see, one of the creators of Homeland, Howard Gordon, was a co-creator (under Surnow) of ’24.’ On the surface it was hard to accept this, given the difference in the quality of the story-telling, but there you have it.
Point being, though, is that these writers, whether on a good show like ‘Homeland’ or a junk one like ’24,’ are professionals. And aside from fine-tuning their characters, general plot-lines, and so forth, they all do their homework.
This is the ‘boiler room’ referred to in the Homeland video. View it!
Addendum: For an example of homework, check out this little clip I mined from Season 6 of Homeland. Classic limited hangout! I love the line, ‘I’ve heard of it in China and Russia but never here. [Hah!] If this is (CIA or NSA, etc.) they’re breaking about ten federal statutes.’ Pu-lease! This is NSA at its ‘best,’ as anyone who’s gone even one click deeper than CNN well knows. Even better, at some point in the show someone says that the clandestine boiler room is called the ‘OPC,’ but ‘no one seems to know what that means.’ Double hah!! Homework! Do a search for ‘Office of Policy Coordination’ to get the in-joke.
And as you all might remember, I’ve met one of the guys from the ‘pictured boiler room’ and who bragged that he had 300 Facebook identities. Talk about the tip of the ‘berg!
Addendum: In the above episode the ‘President Elect of the United States’ points out that it is ‘impossible for a Youtube video to get a million hits in the first 5 minutes after it appears.’ Bingo! Yes, the writers have done their homework all right. A few details are just… sorta… left out… it’s called ‘culture creation,’ and their show is part of it.
These writers indeed – and just like you and I — have done their homework. They… know… what we know… about HTWRW. Or do they? As Orwell so eloquently put it… ‘to know and not to know… to forget whatever was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again when it was needed… and to promptly forget it again.’
Addendum: Please take a look at this: My interview with a ‘counter-terrorism expert’ I met in Mexico while making Water Time and which didn’t make the cut. What you see in this clip must be what goes on with the makers of shows like ‘24’ and ‘Homeland.’ Either that or they are consciously ‘part of the plan.’ I’d love to know which.
The writers of the shows in question, and remember that Joel Surnow is one of them, surely looked deeply into ‘The War on Terror’, and into 9/11 itself, as backstory. They ‘know’ it as well as Steve, from the video. But again, do they really know it? And if so, how do they live with themselves? Click here and let Georgie O explain.
But what bothered me the day of ‘Yesterday’s Troubles’ and what bothers me still, is this: Had my career as an H-wood writer gone a little different, could I have become one of those writers? I don’t well enough recall who I was twenty years ago, and how easily I might have been swayed by… the sort of success Joel Surnow et al. ‘enjoy.’ Thinking about it, I toss and turn and have bad wake ups.
The untruths go quite deep. All you need do is look.
‘What happened?’ is my question. Whence came the ‘moment’ of my turning in the direction I took? Joel certainly had his, and to remain his version of ‘a stand up guy’ he is now a ‘right-wing nutcase,’ a cigar puffing best friend of evil motherfuckers, and, let’s face it, a psychopathic liar who sees no problem in the perversion of history and the creation of a culture based upon it. Nope, not the Joel I knew. He reinvented himself so he could live with himself.
Am I the person I know, or think I know?
Let me wind this up with a quote I used in a recent post, and which is worth repeating:
“We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality – judiciously, as you will – we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.” (Ron Suskind, NYTimes Magazine, Oct. 17, 2004, quoting Karl Rove).
Allan
I struggle to make you understand. How to better explain myself?
One of the books I’m currently reading is titled The Higgs Fake; How Particle Physicists Fooled the Nobel Committee. The author, Alexander Unzicker, is not a ‘successful’ physicist, not in the same sense as the winners of The Prize — for ‘discovering’ the Higgs boson, the so-called ‘God Particle.’ The latter are ‘the elite’ of physics, while Alexander is all but unknown. Yet if I were offered to ‘be’ a physicist, and given the choice of Nobel Winner or Alexander, I’d chose Alexander in a heartbeat. See, Alexander knows something profound about the underlying nature of reality, even if that ‘something’ is what is not true.
The book’s sub-title is somewhat misleading, in my opinion, and as a book writer myself (who has had conflicts with publishers) I’d bet Alexander had argued for a correctly nuanced one. See, the point of his book is not so much that the Nobel Committee was fooled, but that the Prize Winners had fooled themselves; a crucial difference (and likewise the point in contention in my analysis of the above H-wood writers).
There is no such ‘thing’ as the Higgs boson; the physicists/Nobel Committee are all in the same ‘doublethink’ swamped boat, so to speak. The same can be said of the whole general relativity/big bang/expanding space/black holes/etc. paradigm that has frozen mainstream physics/cosmology in ignorance for the past century. That the true PTB know this, there is no doubt. It’s a part of the ‘dumbing down’ of us ‘useless eaters’ and is reflected in the educational and ‘higher’ academic systems. ‘Real’ physics, the sort of physics that could give us zero point (free) energy and possibly allow us to fly to the stars, is and has been hidden from us all, and is a major source of the power held over us.
That I know this stuff is important to me, much more so than money or ‘success’ as culturally defined. If I have any ‘claim to fame,’ this is it. If my story can nudge you in the same direction… I’ll be pleased.
Okay, some light in the dark – a quick link showing that some folks
have doubts (perhaps even without reasons), will entertain views with open minds,
and will admit ideas completely at odds with the media/majority.
http://www.peterdavidorr.com/reader-pics–reviews.html
And a bit more – pretty tough to deny, but try to deny if inclined, or even if not inclined:
http://www.losttreasuresmovie.com/true-story
an easy video, near the end.
Allan, here’s something that might make you ROFLYAO:
http://pluto.jhuapl.edu/News-Center/News-Article.php?page=20180828
Especially this bit:
“The image field is extremely rich with background stars, which makes it difficult to detect faint objects,” said Hal Weaver
🙂
I stumbled across this, and sent it off to a friend who never replied, An interesting article on
‘brainwashing’ in early Red Middle Kingdom. Enjoy, and make of it what you will.
http://www.bbk.ac.uk/hiddenpersuaders/blog/hunter-origins-of-brainwashing/
Figure it fits the thread theme of perceiving/denying realities.
This clip from Water Time keeps coming to mind as I have read Allan’s recent posts and the wonderful discussions here in the comments: https://youtu.be/zaEsFr99nqY
Right! I forgot about that one. It’s better than the other one I use.
Allan,
Season 6 of Homeland…….. the ‘massive propaganda machine’. Could that be Tavistock?
Logan, that clip from Water Time is a perfect rendition of Lou’s response to Allan and the rest of us. I consider my copy of Water Time to be one of my cherished possessions of which I’m willing to share with all who are willing to watch with an open mind. Trouble is, there aren’t many in my immediate ‘sphere of influence’ to watch it with …… just one. It can be lonely here. The alternative is not an option for me. I’d rather be alone and in the Truth, than be surrounded by people and in the Lie.
Hi Allan,
Nice post. Thanks. Read it to the end, and am feeling the same way.
This means the source of all suffering is… me. So I gotta be good, be infinitely humble,
selfless, welcome the true divine until there is no more me. Starting yet again today,
every day. Ain’t easy, ain’t fun, but there’s no other way.
On the one hand, pray for enemies. On the other, eyes open to HTWRW.
Ain’t easy. Always sad.
Hi Duncan~ Well said! Yes, we gotta do what you say here. Every. Single. Day. To be in the world but not of it……..
And no, it isn’t easy and the road is narrow – not many people on it. On the other hand, doing ‘this’ any other way would be to take the wide road where most of the people are…. they don’t want the Truth.
Kind regards,
~Kimberlie
Hiya Kimberlie,
Thank you! I have a hunch that Truth, Mind, Spirit is (sic) the answer, and that you may be on a similar path. I’ll give links if you welcome them, as we play along on Allan’s
forum-blog here. And have a lovely day!
Hiya Duncan~ my response was not to you, “Green Duncan”, but to the other Duncan who wrote the following:
Duncan
September 2, 2018 at 10:15 pm
Hi Allan,
Nice post. Thanks. Read it to the end, and am feeling the same way.
This means the source of all suffering is… me. So I gotta be good, be infinitely humble,
selfless, welcome the true divine until there is no more me. Starting yet again today,
every day. Ain’t easy, ain’t fun, but there’s no other way.
On the one hand, pray for enemies. On the other, eyes open to HTWRW.
Ain’t easy. Always sad.
*******
My response to this Duncan was/is:
Kimberlie
September 3, 2018 at 7:37 pm
Hi Duncan~ Well said! Yes, we gotta do what you say here. Every. Single. Day. To be in the world but not of it……..
And no, it isn’t easy and the road is narrow – not many people on it. On the other hand, doing ‘this’ any other way would be to take the wide road where most of the people are…. they don’t want the Truth.
Kind regards,
~Kimberlie
***********
You, Green Duncan, reply to me:
Duncan
September 5, 2018 at 6:41 am
Hiya Kimberlie,
Thank you! I have a hunch that Truth, Mind, Spirit is (sic) the answer, and that you may be on a similar path. I’ll give links if you welcome them, as we play along on Allan’s
forum-blog here. And have a lovely day!
******************
We are now in the present moment and my reply to you, Green Duncan, is:
Thank you for your interest, Green Duncan.
You have a hunch that Truth, Mind, Spirit is the answer, and that you and I may be on a similar path? Oh, contraire!, Pay attention: the ONLY Truth I know is Jesus Christ. The ONLY Mind I know is that which is of Christ Jesus. The ONLY Spirit I know is that of the Holy Spirit who indwells me. For you to show me any other ‘path’ would be a waste of your time – mine too.
We’re playing here on Allan’s forum-blog? Perhaps your mommy was mistaken when she dropped you off here – thinking it was to help you learn your ABC’s whilst playing in the sandbox of your mind. You may be playing, Green Duncan, however, I’m not – I’m very serious. The other Commenters here are serious too. What the rest of us are sharing/discussing here is an attempt to uncover the who-what-when-where and how of the ubiquitous (another word would be catholic – NOT capital “C “) deceitfulness of the PTB (Evil).
***********
Prayerfully, and with kind regards to you,
~Kimberlie
Ahhh yes…. later recognize and accept the deception……
jnan, unlike Walter, who recognised, yet rejected the deception.
I think there is a fine line in the journey of revelations and truth seeking….let the whole house of cards fall down? Or cling to the fuckery/fackery.
I realized recently, the only way to frame the big picture is that we were sold a total fantasy, that we live in the land of freedom/good nation/good fight/righteous people. The only way to understand the land we live in (US of A) is that everything we are told and sold (in the history books, science books, the media ramblings) is 180 degrees opposite the truth.
SO, we thought we were in the land of the free! We are in the land of the oppressor, the beast itself!
If you doubt this – check out https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxIke-3LOKc (at 40 mins into this audio, we get to the experience of the truth seeker/speaker)
I find this from another HTWRW site. The writer is either really close to being who he says- a minion of the ruling class- or a very good and brave impersonator. My bet is he actually is ^^^ A good blog for how the ruling A-holes (he uses the very same term) make the masses who they are. He writes below the true 10 commandments along with an 11th for us pea shooters. You can apply the below to entire parking lots- Nordstroms for example.
You can also use this site to counter NeonR. Below is regens supin or other. Sup Exu=$
As directed by the proper ruling class authorities:
1) By whatever name thou shalt call Him, thou shalt serve none other than the
Supreme Executive of the Ruling Class
2) Thou shalt obey the Ruling Class as guardians of the Supreme Executive
3) Thou shalt misidentify the interests of the Ruling Class as your own
4) Thou shalt value labels and categories above substance
5) Thou shalt honor Property and Contracts
6) Thou shalt forsake thy neighbors according to the Ruling Class agenda
7) Thou shalt seek self-respect in material things and popular opinion
8) Thou shalt seek to keep up with the Joneses
9) Thou shalt look away from things unfavorable to the Ruling Class
10) Thou shalt never seek blame in the Ruling Class but among its minions, factions
or masses
(The Unspoken 11th Commandment: Challenge the Ruling Class for its own good)
https://therulingclassobserver.com/2017/08/08/the-ten-commandments-of-the-supreme-executive/
Lou were all in this together. Forgive me. But here let another speak on how this may have came to be. No experts here just 50 50 and maybe 60 40 batters. In the beginning:
https://therulingclassobserver.com/2016/08/19/the-individual-among-us-part-ii/
Fix were=we’re Not that it really matters, at least not in my world.
drud, hey, thank you for the site:
“the ruling class, its masses and democracy — preserving our way of life >>>
The Individual Among Us, Part II”.
Very astute observation! I like to think all of us here fit comfortably into the People category and not the Herd or Apathetic category. However, in all honesty, those in the People category will sometimes ‘visit’ the Herd and/or Apathetic category but not the other way around. Those in the Herd and Apathetic category are unable to ‘visit’ the People category simply because their neural pathways prevent it.
To Allan and to your choir, to whom you preach:
You so quickly react with annoyance when someone dares to challenge your radical views. You then salve yourselves with a notion of being the only ones to have uncovered superior deep knowledge that we ignorant masses are too sheep-like to ascertain. If not for your small band of fringe truth seekers, the world would be totally blinded to the never named cabal of puppeteers who pull all the strings. This unspecified, secret league of evil conjurers has managed not only to pull the wool over the eyes of the bourgeois masses who are too busy fretting about their miserable existence to have any energy left to discern what is really going on, but also to hoodwink those honest, intelligent experts in various scientific fields. There are physicists, some of whom, are the smartest humans on this planet, and who conceivably are not part of the clandestine evildoers, who have also purportedly been duped to believe that all of modern physics is fabricated. There are experts in the field of photography and film in the hundreds of thousands I would venture to guess, again, who are not part of the underground machinery that is manipulating all the shenanigans, they too are hoodwinked with poor quality film editing. The twin towers collapse, supposedly caused to occur not by two airliners crashing into them but by explosives placed there by the same wicked cloak-and-dagger sect, it is not challenged by the thousands of truthful and above board expert engineers that work and have studied these types of structures all of their lives. Rocket scientists, all of the thousands of NASA employees, astronomers, and brilliant particle physicists; there are many more examples to cite but you get my point. No, only people like Alex Jones and Allan Weisbecker, and other similar amateur sleuths and perhaps a sprinkling of accredited experts have been able to ferret out the truth and exposed the deception being executed on us all.
Why is it that these theories are always relegated to the fringe of the population or even to the margins of the respective community of experts? How can so many eyewitnesses be silenced or impersonated at the scene of mass destruction or widely viewed events? Why is it that no credible, conventional expert from the world outside conspiracy theories is ever convinced of these claims and comes forward? How can all media investigators be muffled and/or fooled? Wouldn’t there be some who either for moral reasons or monetary gain or career advancement stumble on and report the truth? Who are these conspirators? Why aren’t they ever named? If you are so good at discerning the ploy, why are you completely empty on naming the people behind the crimes other than naming large amorphous institutions?
Don’t give me your typical reaction of arrogant indignation. Don’t console yourselves by feelings of superiority believing you have inside knowledge that I just don’t get. Answer the questions and turn your discerning critical-thinking eye upon your own perspectives and behavior.
BTW, it’s nothing personal, it’s just business (of a discursive exchange of thoughts).
I just don’t understand why you so firmly believe that “if the vast majority of people believe it, then it MUST be true”, and you don’t even bother to deeply consider evidence. Lou, I think Allan is wrong about some things. I am not afraid to say that, even in comments to his own blog. I feel that the theme here is keeping an open mind and following the facts. You claim some kind of exceptionalism for us that we think we are special and only we understand certain things. I don’t think I am special Lou. If there is any exceptionalism here, it is on your side. Your beliefs are the blind ones, you are the one who finds yourself superior for holding your beliefs, and you have already admitted a distain for alternative points of view. You have already been quite clear that you will blindly believe something as long as it is the popular opinion and you have no interest in even looking at evidence to the contrary. In short, you are not telling us anything new and you have no purpose to being here. Unless you actually feel like going point-by-point, arguing the facts, and engaging in an actual debate, you really would be better off elsewhere. I reiterate, if your best argument is that the popular opinion must be the correct opinion, then you really are just not a critically thinking person and this is not the place for you.
I would love for you to actually put forth a credible argument on why certain things on this blog are incorrect. My position is not to blindly follow the fringe, but to follow the evidence and the facts. This is a position you do not share. You feel that the popular opinion must be the correct one, and you feel this entitles you to not even have to look at the evidence. This is weakness of mind Lou. Allan has actually already laid out a very credible argument for why those many experts you talked about would simply follow the party line. It would be horribly detrimental to their careers to actually become some kind of an alternative critic. You have shown yourself how quickly you are willing to fall in with the popular opinion. Imagine your job depended on it. I don’t think you would really want to look too deeply into facts that did not fit into party line. Ultimately, your argument is one of a weak-minded fool and I really think you would be better off elsewhere.
I disagree, Eric. Let him rant. Someone ‘on the fence’ might stumble across this exchange and see the utter vacuity in Lou’s words and… the ‘choir’ will have increased by one.
It is also possible that someone living “on the razor’s edge” (not me) will read this stuff and share that the concepts of “we” and “they” are the perfectly opposed yet inseparable manifestation of the “I am”.
There is a vantage point where the preacher, the choir and their target audience (the unenlightened) ALL merge into “ONE”… where “right” and “wrong”, “truth” and “lie”, “we” and “they”… dance together to the music of the spheres.
Thanks again for opening comments on this blog. Pretend I said something wise and at the same time wise-ass, about opening a can of worms or a box full of pandoras.
Lou is so mercifully free of the ravages of intelligence.
Actual intelligence.
I knew a songwriter years ago who wrote a song entitled, “What’s it like to be you?”
Must be really great to be as intellectually-endowed as Lou.
Oh yeah, I’m with you on this Alan let the dog out, let it run, press the right button and watch the show, best test of all. Agonizing drivel from a witless hobbit. I love the moralistic screed. reminds me of my 10th grade home school teacher. And the classic “it’s just business” yeah sure… So he puts you right up there with AJ, what a dork, ha,ha,ha,ha,ha……… Say what you want about AJ, he’s entertaining as hell, but he ain’t going to go near Weisbecker territory.
Very clear and well-written, Eric. A pleasure to read in one go and retain.
Wiped away Lou’s mesmerizing emptiness.
And I have encountered folks with exactly the same view (majority must be right, ’cause
the majority’s ‘reality’ is the only one that allows for easy mutual discussion). It’s for folks who write for newspapers, media, or wish to be involved in some way. They have to keep abreast of topics, trends, mass beliefs, the lot – and accept them as foundation at any time – until they shift, and accept whatever comes new.
Oh boy. Here we go again. ‘Answer the questions’ you demand. You have asked no questions!
Between myself and others here, I’ll repeat for… what?… the tenth time? ‘Explain the anomalies in the video interview I did with Walter.’
That you just continually ignore this issue, not even mentioning it in your painfully ignorant and utterly cliched rants… If anyone’s sanity needs questioning, my old ‘friend,’ it’s YOURS.
I’ll tell you something else… in a past comment I recalled the time at your house when you and Walter could not make a leap of logic about football odds… (why no mention of that, come to think of it? I guess I described that moment accurately…. I’d bet you STILL don’t know what I was talking about.)
I remember yelling into your face about critical thinking and — even now, years later — I clearly recall thinking to myself as I looked into your eyes, ‘The lights are on but nobody’s home.’ It was a shocking moment – right out of the old Body Snatchers’ movie — my high volume shout a direct reaction to that ‘a-ha!’ moment. You are, in your written comments, proving to ‘the world’ (by making it public) how right I was. And, of course, you don’t know it, never will.
Hi Lou,
Have you ever heard of the “Anthropoc Principle” ? It’s a theoretical physics term or theory. Anyway if not maybe check it out. I think it’s interesting. I don’t present this as an argument so much but you’re comment just made me Think of it. Anyway it is no answer to the line you’re taking here but maybe it could be thought of in conjunction or in tandem with you’re comment. It’s just an angle.
M,
It may not be how you think that the Anthropic Principal applies to these conversations but I think it does have an application and here is why: In short the AP states that the universe was created and continues to evolve in a very specific way in order to support life and our sentient awareness exists only because of that fact. We along with our human consciousness could not exist if any one of the many elements that make up the universe were ever so slightly modified. We are cognizant of this particular universe because it allows us to exist and there may be multiple universes that exist according to string theory for instance, but we are not aware of them because they are slightly different in ways that preempt our ability to exist on them.
As to how this principal applies to the debate on this blog, I postulate that Allan and his choir live in an universe where its constitutional elements allow only his ilk to exist. His form of life exists on and is conscious of his particular universe and therefore everything that he expounds is a description of his awareness of this precise universe. His universe does not sustain my species, nor does mine, his. I am not aware of what Allan is aware. We are from two alien universes.
I am not being cute here. There is a psychological element to all of this that other than people calling each other insane has not been explored. Our brains are marvelous machines with what they can conjure. I leave you with a line from Hamlet to contemplate, indicating where I’m going with this: “There is neither good or bad, thinking makes it so”
No, Lou, the problem is that we DO NOT live in different universes. The problem is that you are both ignorant (lacking information) and stupid (knowing what to do with information) as to how our common universe works. A past commenter suggested you look at this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sALa-E56Zms&feature=youtu.be
The presenter is someone I know and have corresponded with. If you check her background you will find she was an insider in the Reagan/H.W. Bush administration. Remember them? In this universe?
The above facts and implications thereof (in the video) are inarguable. Here again – as with my request that you say SOMETHING about the Walter-video — I ask for your view of the above.
Let’s see how it goes. Let’s see if you can say something that has any relevance to life in this universe.
Just finished watching “Behind the Smoke”. Irrefutable. Lou is one of the Walking Dead who thinks he’s doing a fine job in his role as a Zombie. And indeed he is!
Who was it who said, “Never let a crisis go to waste”?, one of Odummer’s czars, Rahm Emanuel, I think.
Yep. All the world’s a stage. I prefer to watch rather than be part of it. All we can do here is share what we observe, what we know to be Truth, and stay away from the acceptance of any lie – whether it be small or great.
Kind regards to all – including Lou,
~Kimberlie
Allan, Have you read the Popular Mechanics report that debunks all of the 9/11 conspiracy theories? I’ve read some of the synopses online and they seem to provide credible answers to all of your questions.
Lou, what do u make of Allan’s Walter video or Honegger’s Behind the curtain video?
Couldn’t find a reply box to Lou’s latest comment:
“Allan, Have you read the Popular Mechanics report that debunks all of the 9/11 conspiracy theories? I’ve read some of the synopses online and they seem to provide credible answers to all of your questions.”
I can’t answer for Allan but I did read both Popular Mechanics lame efforts to “debunk” (i.e. total swamp gas) and the NIST Report which in my opinion should have won a Hugo Award.
But hey Lou if you want to believe in speculative fiction and fantasy you go right ahead.
As far as I’m concerned I’ll stick with physics. Not computer simulated perversions of it.
Take your time but find me one high-rise steel building other than WTCs 1,2 & 7 that have collapsed due to fires. Before or since 9/11.
Go on. I dare ya to.
This is for Lou who states,
” I leave you with a line from Hamlet to contemplate, indicating where I’m going with this: “There is neither good or bad, thinking makes it so”
here’s my reply to Lou:
WHAT? Oh, dear Lou, you ought not utter such words as to be your own! Of course there is good and bad! Yes, there is GOOD and EVIL, and evil IS BAD! You really want to tempt the Devil? Sounds as if you don’t have to because he already has you. The time will come…. you will have to choose: good or evil (what you call ‘bad’). They BOTH exist.
The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. ~Psalm 14:1
Lou, the PTB (minions of the Devil) have blinded you to the Truth. I’ve never heard such gobbledegook, poppycock, gibberish, balderdash, rubbish, and nonsense – except that which comes from main stream media and their ‘experts’!
All of us here are doing all we can to help open your eyes to the Truth. You act like a stubborn child with your hands pressed tightly over your eyes, thumbs in your ears, and your “blankie” (all the lies you’ve been brainwashed to believe) nearby to rescue you when an inkling of Truth threatens to enter your consciousness. Wake up, Lou! It is time to Wake Up! The Truth won’t hurt you…. The Truth will release you from the bondage you are in.
Most sincerely,
~Kimberlie
Alan~ I’m watching the 3 hour video you suggested Lou watch…………….
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sALa-E56Zms&feature=youtu.be
………….this is facts on steroids (is that possible?)! I fast forwarded to 1:01 mark. The info given here is inarguable! I doubt Lou has the guts to watch and listen, let alone “hear” what is indeed irrefutable facts concerning 9-11.
….. gotta go, I want to watch the full video!
Thank you Allan!
~Kimberlie
It does boggle the mind, doesn’t Lou?
https://youtu.be/sALa-E56Zms
Wow.
You are truly insane sir.
There is an organization of Architects and Engineers, thousands that have done exactly that.
There are few, if any true scientists, architects or engineers that can show evidence why the world trade center, one of the most structurally sound buildings ever created not only fell straight down, which by itself is ridiculous yet it occurred twice. Yet no that is not what occurred.
The buildings were turned to dust.
Please explain scientifically how a building disappears after a 2 hour hey fuel fire? Not hot enough to melt anything. Never has anyone stood up to any questions after the obvious questions are asked.
Yet even a group of complete morons if they worked with building demolition crews and watched the work and then result would recognize only some similarities because it requires a little more oommpph to make dust.
Any conversation is plain stupid. They fell straight down. That never happens. Never. 3 times it happened.
Do you have any idea how rare it is for a high rise to fall from fire? How many have you seen? I would assume a comparison with I guess the 100s of other building fires that led to them falling.
How many fell over and how many straight down?
Or has it never occurred where a steel structure built high rise falls from fire.
Yet people are crazy to question our Dust bowl scenario? And Pull It Building 7. People with prior knowledge of Building 7 falling.
How about the cars that appear like a fire breathing dragon flew by and ignited them all.
These are all just nutty conspiracy theories.
Funny I am a VP of Engineering for my job. Those buildings did not fall from an airplane hitting and burning. I base my career on it.
Doug,
How WTCs 1,2 & 7 were destroyed is explained here:
http://impiousdigest.com/9-11/
Also if you read John McPhee’s The Curve of Binding Energy.
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1973/12/03/i-the-curve-of-binding-energy
You will see that Ted Taylor uses the World Trade Center as an example of how a small nuclear device i.e. a Davy Crockett:
https://youtu.be/eiM-RzPHyGs
could be used.
Also there have been various byproducts of a Nuclear Device left behind:
https://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/06/02/vt-nuclear-education-undeniable-proof-of-911-as-a-nuclear-event/
Lou, why do you keep commenting here in the first place. Is it curiosity or are you on a mission? If we all here are nuts, why does a sane mind like yours care so much? For centuries if not for millenniums the majority of people believed in a carpenter who died for our sins on a cross and went to heaven. To this day people study and graduate in theology pretending to take this story for real. On 911 we watched some sort of bad made “Independence Day” all day, while two (actually three) dilapidated and empty skyscrapers got demolished bypassing all regulations, saving their owners lots of time and money. But you may prefer the story that 19 bandits from the hills of Afghanistan outsmarted the entire USA and gave them the reason to start an absurd worldwide war on terror. Not a new story by the way. All world wars started that way.
Lou,
In grade school we learned to answer a question by using part of the question to both help us learn to stay on point and also to help us start to formulate our thoughts. So when someone asks, “What do you think of the Walter Video?”… and you respond a few times…even after asking for time to think about it so it wouldn’t sound like a conflict of sorts…with nothing close to an answer to the question….yet you have decided how we all think about you and things in general…lumped us into a group now called a ‘choir’ etc. All the while not dealing with the question admitting you won’t look into any of this on your own.
An exchange of thoughts is what you do when you show respect for each other and actually consider the points of view presented. A great exchange of thoughts should be like great love making. An embracing exchange. What appears to be happening is avoiding the relationship…denying the heart, mind, and soul of any nourishment. We are a choir of humans demanding nourishment for ourselves…sometimes it tastes like shit and others it’s amazing….yet it is always satiating… Good Luck.
” Am I the person I know, or think I know?”
and from few posts back:
” …for it is my belief that no man ever understands his own artful dodges to escape from the grim shadow of self-knowledge.’ Joseph Conrad, from Lord Jim.”
are thoughts that take an individual and species from adolescence into maturity. It is easy to point the finger at others and fun to pick apart the lies cast upon us yet only when we are brave enough to truly turn our focus inward on our triggers, how we lie to ourselves and repeatedly give away our personal power will the the grip of the control grid truly begin to slip. This system runs on our consent and it cannot and will not hold against a people standing in the power of integrity and self responsibility.
Important shift in these last few blog posts, well done.
I recall reading Catch 22 in my early 20’s and the thing that stuck with me ever since was “you got flies in your eyes Appleby”. (may not be an acccurate quote. )
I see these states of mental blindness daily on very basic levels to much deeper levels.
Most media is currently aimed at putting as many flies in your eyes as possible and I agree they start it very young with tv. I have 2 grandsons of 4 and the crap they are soaking up keep me alert to how much all media I see is cloaked in a layer of crap to the point where it’s accepted as the norm now and to raise a question amongst most is to annoy as though you are a barking dog disturbing their sleep!!!
I have questioned and unlocked understandings, felt like I’d broken through the hateful limitations of my thinking processes, worse in some situations than others. Felt relived when I came across someone else who had gone as far and delighted when finding someone who had gone further.
Back to my point in this comment if you got flies in your eyes you can’t see. Cognisant dissonance, in my view is the ‘flies in the eyes’ .
I too feel happier knowing about the flies in the eyes, about being ok with knowing what a shitheap this exsistance can be, how it remains a game to be played daily and keeping the resilience to question, share findings and question again.
And to sit and watch a sunrise or set and fill yourself with whatever that gives you. It helps me keep on keeping on!
A few thoughts about cognitive dissonance:
My first thought is that it’s a euphemism. As the Mer-Webster definition goes, it’s a ‘psychological conflict resulting from incongruous beliefs and attitudes held simultaneously’. A good definition as far as it goes, but it fails to convey the torment that accompanies the kind of dissonance experienced over conflicts of scale. There is excruciating dissonance when immersed in the reality of warfare and what becomes in it’s wake, a tragic memory of peace. One soldier in a foxhole says to another nearby, “OMG I am so cognitively dissonant today over all this carnage”. This is sarcasm or mockery but toward some target other than you. (maybe my godam High School). 9/11 was an act of war and the conflicting elements are numerous in a full scale investigation; but what causes agony is prior conditioning that teaches us to accommodate the conflict at the expense of resolution. However, Paralytic Conflict Acceptance and Resolution Denial Conditioning is not so handy.
BTW, it isn’t so much having flies in our eyes as much as having Huple’s cat lying on our face.
Catch-22. Oh, good. This suddenly reminds me of the question of all questions
(from my 20’s, too). Why was Orr’s prostitute hitting him over the head?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orr_(Catch-22)#Incident_with_prostitute
An ‘ah-ha!’ moment from long ago, when the doors of perception opened.
We are apparently all Catch-22 lovers here. I haven’t read the book in at least a decade but both of these anecdotes: flies in the eyes and Orr’s prostitute, are reminding me how terrific the novel is. Thank you both.
My favorite is Nately’s old man. I wish I could quote his entire section, like where he says that America will not outlive the Frog, but I will go with this…
“You put so much stock in winning wars,” the grubby iniquitous old man scoffed. “The real trick lies in losing wars, in knowing which wars can be lost. Italy has been losing wars for centuries, and just see how splendidly we’ve done nonetheless. France wins wars and is in a continual state of crises. Germany loses and prospers. Look at our own recent history. Italy won a war in Ethiopia and promptly stumbled into serious trouble. Victory gave us such insane delusions of grandeur that we helped start a world war we hadn’t a chance of winning. But now that we are losing again, everything has taken a turn for the better, and we certainly will come up on top again if we succeed in being defeated.”
Was Joel Surnow the Miami Vice writer whom had screwed up the script you were brought in to fix?
Despite his prescient efforts, Orwell may have been CIA and a limited hangout. No solutions.
Pigs are more equal than other animals.
No.
Orwell. The line between ‘a warning’ like 1984 and ‘predictive programming’ (or ‘revelation of the method’) is drawn in the heart of the writer, so to speak. Aldous Huxley and his Brave New World were undoubtedly the latter; I tend to see Orwell as a true visionary, his book a warning to us all, in spite of how it’s been promoted by the PTB. This is always a red flag, but not a decisive tell, IMO. Take The Catcher in the Rye. Same promo and given its use in black op assassinations, one would think Salinger must be one of ‘them.’ I tend to doubt it, for reasons I give in my debate with Atwill. https://postflaviana.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Atwill-Debate-05-27-16.mp3.
It would have been MI6, not CIA, maybe a distinction w/o a difference, but FYI.
Atwell tricky and deceptive. But I think Kesey and Bear w grateful dead and the musical groups out of topanga canyon were cia ops. The Manson murders, real or false flag killed the peace movement.
Grateful Dead and virtually all the bands back then were ops, see Dave McGowan’s (RIP)
The Dead and the other bands, yes, dirty as hell (what did it for me is Weir’s YT bragging about ‘war stories’ he shared at Bohemian Grove with a top spook). Mcgowan’s work (RIP) etc. Kesey may have been an unwitting participant, unlike the rest. No real evidence that stands up, but who knows.
The Manson murders exposé by Miles Mathis were what hooked me into believing, for a while, that he was the real thing. I found my own evidence that the trial was theater: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c36wuHNFAik
No real lawyer would behave that way, i.e, if the trial was a fraud, so were the murders, 90% probability. It the Manson case happened today, it would be seen as another Sandy Hook or Aurora or (fill in the blank).
Allan showing some crazy patience during this interview. Kesey, Hunter, Stanley all are very open about their participation in LSD gov’t tests. The Grateful Dead are famous for saying that they were able to keep secrets by not having any. Bob Weir continues to enjoy relationships with generals to Hell’s Angels…The best minds of that generation did not go into politics and making the world a better place….today’s world is enough evidence.
Just watched the new premier of Jack Ryan on Amazon. Same as 24 and Homeland, lots of muslim propaganda and Pig Shit.
Hi Allan,
what you are describing is JP Sartre’s ‘Bad Faith’.
Every human can lie, but not to themselves. This is why awakening is so frightening to some as they have to eject the carefully constructed cocoon that protects them from the horrors of truth. This is what TPTB rely on and why they know that their paper thin ‘official’ stories will be woven into this protective front, and not only adopted but promoted as true. It is also why they get angry when you show them the real truth that they already know deep down because it accelerates the processes of this scary demolition. People think they won’t be rumbled and when they are basically accused of lying to themselves they react defensively, just like children who have been caught out with their hand in the cookie jar and still profusely deny it.
The whole world’s a stage.
Keep it up please, this is what we always thought we were signing up for.
Regards,
Jon
Thank you for this comment. I have always had an interest in Sartre, but I have never had the chance to truly do a deep dive. Perhaps this will give me the chance.
Good stuff Alan,
I guess I would relate it to my outrage of a false historical narrative for eternity (regarding 9-11) and my apathy in doing anything to rectify it no matter how small . Hard to feel like a stand up guy when something as serious as that is happening right in front of you. Nihilism would be my only defense if only I could fully commit to it. Makes me really appreciate guys like Richard Gage,Steve Jones etc. and now you .
I may not agree with no planes etc but I admire your search for truth at the expense of commercial success.
Your experience on that path has to be much more
rewarding than anything material advantage could provide?
Great quote from someone
“My time is much to valuable to waste it making
money”
Mmmmm. Another interesting one. I’ve mentioned a fellow named ‘Henry Hansteen’ who has emailed me many many times denigrating ‘no planes’ and who I theorized might be the ‘Hank’ who recently did the same here in comments (two different email addresses). Now we have ‘Robert Hansteen’ ‘agreeing’ with me EXCEPT in the matter of planes or no planes and comparing me to Richard Gage and Steven Jones… (Two ‘scientists’ who would have the same trouble viewing my Walter video as any of the ‘Hansteens/Hanks’ and either denigrate or avoid the issue of ‘no planes.’)
All I can say re Robert is We’ll see if future comments keep bringing up this issue. Recall that in my reply to ‘Hank’ i asked him to explain why there was fabricated imagery (as seen in the Walter vid) if actual planes hit the WTC? No reply.
Look…. I would agree with those who say the ‘no planes’ issue is there to divide us, etc., except for what it directly implies, which is the BIG one, almost never mentioned by any of the alt media — the DIRECT collusion of the media in 9/11. Not just the ‘cover up’, but in the op itself. IMO, the media were the most important aspect in the creation of the event and the fabricated imagery proves this. The very label is clever in its misdirection: ‘no planes.’ It should be ‘Media collusion’ or some such. (Reminds me of ‘Did Oswald act alone?’ The question itself implies Oswald was a shooter, which he (almost) certainly was not. More NLP to wade through.)
First time I saw the video of the first plane, what struck me was how similar it was to a graphite pencil sketch. That was the first doubt, the first clue. Soon after, was on movie sets, with tinfoil sword blades, crappy cloth costumes and etc. that looked great on film.
Somewhere, couldn’t even begin to swallow the promoted story, not even bite, nibble.
Like a dish in a restaurant you don’t want to eat. Passed it by (but didn’t think much about it either, am ashamed to admit).
Personally I find the “no planes theory” more plausible than the false idea that aluminum planes could penetrate the plated steel grid of the WTC Towers which were designed to withstand the impact of a 707 which is about the same size and is actually slightly heavier than a 767 since it used DU as ballast.
“No planes” doesn’t necessarily mean that nothing hit the WTCs 1 & 2. Like the Pentagon there is the possibility that they were both hit by a missile of some kind and the media has conspired in some way to cover this up.
Take a look at any video showing a “plane” hitting the South Tower. They are about as bad as some of the videos and images taken “proving” the existence of big foot or the Lock Ness monster.
In other words none of them prove conclusively that a UA 175 hit the South Tower.
See Skygate:
https://youtu.be/k3NyFX9ZJsQ
And Intercepted:
https://youtu.be/-Laaq44SDgg
By Pilots for 911 Truth.
They don’t say what hit the WTC towers but they definitely do say that it wasn’t a civilian aircraft.
Beyond that there is only speculation but that said. The “no planes” theory is more practical than magical planes that can pierce tall tempered steel structures in a single bound.
I’d like to add that one can reject the Naudet film showing the “first plane” hitting the North Tower as propaganda since it was released sometime after the well recorded “second plane” hit.
One can ask: Why they waited so long to release the video? Unless there was some effort to doctor the image in some way before presenting it.
See Jules Naudet’s 9/11 Film was Staged:
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/naudet/raphael.htm
If one watches the original video one will see how pixellated the image was when first recorded and also how it contradicted witness reports of what actually hit the North Tower:
http://www.911conspiracy.tv/1st_hit.html
http://www.septemberclues.info/faq_4.shtml
Allan~ you state above
“There is no such ‘thing’ as the Higgs boson; the physicists/Nobel Committee are all in the same ‘doublethink’ swamped boat, so to speak. The same can be said of the whole general relativity/big bang/expanding space/black holes/etc. paradigm that has frozen mainstream physics/cosmology in ignorance for the past century. That the true PTB know this, there is no doubt. It’s a part of the ‘dumbing down’ of us ‘useless eaters’ and is reflected in the educational and ‘higher’ academic systems. ‘Real’ physics, the sort of physics that could give us zero point (free) energy and possibly allow us to fly to the stars, is and has been hidden from us all, and is a major source of the power held over us.”
This is exactly one of the many things Nikola Tesla was working on and developed: Free Energy for all mankind. The PTB got wind of it and the rest is history. The PTB give Mr. Tesla his due credit and the population of the world free energy by fake launching a Tesla vehicle into space. HA! What an insult to a truly great man.
Good point: the subtle irony in naming a fake satellite after a great thinker.
Allan — global warming. There are some more people who have fooled themselves. It’s child’s play to show that CO2 does not cause atmospheric warming; there are probably some bad apples but most of them are, I believe, sincere in their passionate belief that we will cook ourselves. I don’t know how they got that way.
99.44% of the time, people seem to have one of two reactions to new information:
1) Denial: We a) don’t even register it, or b) reject it out-of-hand;
or
2) We glom onto it as if it were The Answer to everything from poverty to teenage acne.
Once the glomming has happened to an idea, then the rejection happens to anything that contradicts the glommed-onto concept.
This isn’t new to our day, though. I suppose every age thinks, “Ah, now we’ve got it!” And then gets frustrated when our contemporaries act just like those old-time people of yesteryear — you know, the ones who refused to even look through the telescope. Surely we are better than that *nowadays*.
Aren’t we?
The whole global warming thing makes me laugh as a big geology buff. When you study geologic time, you see that there were times on Earth with CO2 levels far in excess of today where life was thriving. There is certainly not a direct link even if there may be the slightest of impacts. We must remember that we are still technically in an ice age. It is tremendous folly to make it seem like it is a direct 100% relationship between the CO2 levels and temperatures. With the global warming folks, you kind of have to walk the tightrope in saying that sure there may be some effects from higher CO2 levels but the Earth’s climate is an incredibly complex self-regulating system and it is definitely not just CO2 levels determining temperatures. I think of the Milankovitch cycles and things like that. The climate change science scare show is quite insidious.
After a private email conversation, my friend Allan asked I share this one publicly,
Analysis of the dethroning of Alex Jones
https://youtu.be/97bhy2K7HL8
Whoa!, yes Stone, Thank you for sharing the YouTube on the possible/probable cause of Alex Jones being dethroned. Watching it, I was immediately reminded of Patti Hearst being a subject of the Stockholm Syndrome.
Also, the Stanford Experiment proved ANYONE can be duped….. or coerced/brainwashed/compelled/corralled into/out of their roles. And when the PTB have reached their goal for the reasonable use of said ‘actor’, Poof!, Osta-la-bagel… out they go, either vertically or horizontally.
Personally I think one can twist their logic into pretzels thinking that some of us are the ‘controlled opposition” or whatever. In my opinion it is just another form of snitch jacketing:
https://nopoliticalrepression.wordpress.com/2012/10/02/in-regards-to-snitchjacketing/
I can’t say that I’m completely innocent as I’ve done it myself to others because I disagreed with their point of view.
Alex Jones?
I can take him or leave him but the important thing here is that he is being censored whether one agrees with him or not or thinks he’s a mole working for the Mossad or whatever. It just ain’t right.
Nothing can justify or rationalize Goolag’s screw tube deplatforming him.
I couldn’t agree more but there are two separate subjects here; we should avoid mixing them up.
Yeah I know. Like I said I take anything Alex Jones posts with a grain of salt. That said it should be my right to do so and not some omnipotent corporate mocking bird assclown at Alphabet making that decision for me.
Just saying.
Viewed the video about Alex Jones. Thanks for sharing, it goes to the heart of the matter….
Given the oceans, seas, rivers and streams of propaganda, dis-information and outright lies we must navigate on a daily basis I am amazed sometimes that a clear thought is ever able to find it’s way to the surface. In part the quote from Carl Rove….what actors, what play/movie are we watching today? I think some days, we all have flies in our eyes.
A side note: I spent a lot of my day, yesterday looking up books to send my grandchildren. One of those books was… Alexander and the terrible, horrible, no good, very bad day.
What a coincidence ….
Something that stands out to me here because it is a point I have frequently made myself is that there is a huge difference between “suspension of disbelief” and outright violation of any semblance of logic. A person close to me, God bless them, really likes the new Marvel comic book movies. I have seen far too many for my own liking. My complaint with these movies is exactly what you stated Allan. I point out many horrible violations of logic in the story, and the response is that I am just refusing to suspend my belief. Not so, I would say! The writers of this Marvel movie were free to write whatever the heck they wanted and they could have done any crazy thing they wanted as long as it was written logically into the story. However, they fail to do so. The movies just blatantly take turns that make absolutely no sense to anyone who is actually paying close attention and trying to follow any kind of story.
You are right Allan and I think this is an intentional thing. The public-at-large is being spoon-fed things like this so that they get to the point where they don’t even question it when the reality in front of them does not make any sense whatsoever. People are literally being programmed from birth to be unquestioning and accepting of whatever reality is put in front of them, no matter how much it does not make sense.
Eric~ I came to the same conclusion concerning the “Programming of the Masses”. This is most convenient to the PTB since the younger the audience within any given time period henceforth, will always be dummer until there is no longer any question or need to know such things as to what is truth. Those who are being spoon fed this truth at this point in time will pass on to their offspring this same truth at conception…. it will be in their DNA so to speak. This has all been accomplished through TV, Movies, ‘Schooling’, and Music. IMHO.
Something that gives me pause is something that isn’t even intentional. Goes like this:
We communicate nonverbally to a huge extent. People who are aphasic can’t speak or understand spoken language but they are sooo good at nonverbal communication that trying to test for true aphasia is difficult: the tester has to (try to) use a monotone, and/or be hidden from the subject’s view, kind of thing. The rest of us aren’t that good at it, but it’s still part of our mental toolkit.
Now rent an old silent movie, or one of the early talkies. These were made when stage acting was the norm, before we’d really learned what the film format could do, and it shows: the acting is way over the top — as it needed to be, on a stage.
Now look at a modern movie or tv show. The actors are really good at, well, acting *as if*, acting normally, not “over the top” — and everything happening in a movie is, of course, a lie: the actor isn’t *really* in love, or grieving, or outraged. As I understand it, aphasics see what the actor is *really* thinking/feeling during filming, while the rest of us . . . .
The rest of us are spending hours getting our ability to read nonverbal cues seriously frakked up.
Mellryn, good, good. In this part of the world, communication is with the eyes, the face, what is not done when expected, or done silently. It’s almost a sixth sense, and language is for deception. Business folks have to know this; every day is a poker game.
Absolutely. The banishment of logic from our daily lives is the most vital single aspect of ‘The Agenda.’
Allan, it can be perceived as a dumbing-down agenda, but then shouldn’t you observe that it’s not working on you?
I suggest it’s better regarded as a means of sorting the wheat from the chaff.
Those inclined to ’emotional intelligence’ as opposed to logical, critical thinking may well be the majority, and so may be seduced by the conditioning that reinforces their cognitive comfort, but this does not imply that the intelligent, logically inclined minority, are also seduced by appeals against logic – instead of repulsed by them, and given resolve to sharpen their mental acuity.
Just because something appears to affect the majority, this should not be inferred as being intended to affect those it does not – or as a failure in that respect.
Similarly, deceptions in the media (911, Boston Bombing, Sandy Hook, Charlie Hebdo etc) are not necessarily intended to deceive 100% of the audience. Indeed, it may well be that there is no motive or intention to have any psychological/behavioural affect upon those who are deceived (aside from continuing to appreciate their government). It could be that for the masses to remain largely unaffected is the intention. The motive could be to have an affect (sooner or later) upon those who are undeceived (or who later recognise and accept the deception).
I almost view what you described as an ancillary benefit to the whole thing. “They” may not be able to fake events to the level that it is totally convincing to all people, so at the very least they use this problem as a tool to identify the people who are not feeding into the force-fed reality.
You imply that they are intentionally doing a bad job in faking the events to gain this benefit. I am not sure yet that I can totally jump on board with that hypothesis, but we definitely agree on the ultimate benefit that is gained…being able to identify those who do not believe.
Eric, what is the point of a deception if everyone believes it? Everyone goes about their lives oblivious to the fact they’ve been deceived. So, you may as well have not performed the deception in the first place.
Perhaps you think they’re just trying to practice, to improve their ability to deceive? Perhaps for some later, grand deception?
The thing is, they don’t need to. They already control everything in any case.
Individuals who’ve recognised deception (to varying degrees) is the end result of the deceptions – and the intended outcome – individuals mobilised/motivated to enlighten themselves, to uncover all deceptions, new and old. This is also known as the apocalypse. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apocalypse
What good does it do to identify those who become undeceived – at varying levels?
Are they going to ethnically cleanse the population of all the intelligent individuals, able to detect/recognise deceptions?
In some ways it may be best to put this analysis on hold, until you’ve understood the whole shebang, then you can see that it’s not about eliminating the non-compliant, to be left with a population of docile sheep – even if there have been rumours of this, deliberately seeded.
Hey X,
In response to a few of your questions, why pull off the deception at all if it is possible to deceive everyone? I guess I don’t see these two things as related. There may be some kind of underlying reason why the deception is required for them, and if that is the case then deceiving 100% of the people (whom it is possible to deceive) would be optimal. So I don’t agree that “if you are capable of deceiving everyone, there is no point to the deception in the first place”. This ignores the idea that the deception may have a very specific purpose. Take the NASA case and the visibility of stars or travel beyond low-earth orbit that Allan talks about. The slip-ups there do not appear to be intentional. It is just the difficulty of keeping an elaborate lie.
All I meant to say with regard to your original point was that I do not believe they are intentionally doing a shabby job in order to identify people, as you described separating the wheat from the chaff as the MAIN purpose. All I said was that identifying people was an ancillary benefit as opposed to the direct purpose. I do not think this is a very large point of disagreement. I do believe that there are calling cards and things like that. But ultimately I can’t say that I believe the entire point to these calling cards is to separate the wheat from the chaff as you say.
As for the whole comment about putting this on hold until I’ve “understood the whole shebang”, I worry this falls into the stereotyping that Lou did in his comment where he called Allan’s readers entitled people who think they are special and only they understand something. We should be able to have minor points of disagreement without telling the other person that they just completely don’t “get it”.
I know Eric, it’s not fair that I say ‘wait till you grok it, before you knock it’, but we can only progress at a certain pace. :-/
X, the point of deception is a controlling mechanism. Problem > Reaction > Solution. Scare the masses into the hands of the controlling PTB.
Until further proof is presented, I don’t see them already controlling everything as you state, “The thing is, they don’t need to. They already control everything in any case.”
Can you clarify?
X…
I was ABLE TO recognize a deception, therefore that WAS A goal and was intended?
From your quote, “Individuals who’ve recognised deception (to varying degrees) is the end result of the deceptions – and the intended outcome – individuals mobilised/motivated to enlighten themselves, to uncover all deceptions, new and old. This is also known as the apocalypse. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apocalypse”
Please explain.
I will add, Eric, that some deceptions are necessary to avoid boondoggles/pork barrels from unravelling, thus Apollo/NASA have to maintain their revenue by perpetuating their already established deceptions. Stars aren’t visible in space (except in very noisy/grainy lo res B&W images). No photos exist of Earth from beyond low Earth orbit.
The 911 deception was multi-tiered, in that it served as a false-flag, constituted an occult signal, and so began the subsequent stream of apocalyptic* ‘terrorist/psycho’ attacks.
The more deceptions you uncover (and I mean pre-911/ongoing), the more you begin to understand their purpose. And it ain’t obvious.
However, most post-911 staged events, such as the Woolwich beheading, are entirely designed to wake up the Miss Marples and Sherlock Holmes among us.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/woolwich-attack-horrified-witnesses-tell-1904602
Things like Elon Musk are just late-in-the-game money-grabbing schemes (cv Ponzi).
* ‘apocalyptic’ in the literal sense of triggering individuals to undergo revelation – as a consequence of their own investigations.
X,
I am very concerned that you keep pushing this hypothesis, that fake events are staged 100% for the purpose of identifying non-believers, as pure fact over and over again without any evidence. You have named events and stated outright that their purpose was to identify the non-believing people. You stated this outright as pure fact, but that is about it. I am not going to disagree with you outright…I claimed that identifying non-believers was an ancillary benefit. But I am really worried the degree to which you are pushing this hypothesis as pure fact without any specific evidence or reasoning, and then attacking me for disagreeing with you as someone who just doesn’t understand anything. You said I shouldn’t be able to speak with you about this unless I have looked at the evidence, but I have yet to see you give any evidence beyond your statements as pure fact that what you are saying is true. It feels to me an incredibly selfish perspective that the fake events only relate to the non-believers, and have nothing at all to do with keeping the believers in a perpetual state of fear. You really believe fake events have nothing to do with the regular folks? It’s all about identifying the non-believers? Do you have any evidence to support that? It is clear that you personally believe this very firmly, but you shouldn’t attack people who are simply seeking the truth like you and always look for evidence and reasoning before they would begin to follow a line of thinking.
Eric, I’m unaware of anything I’ve written that could be construed as attacking you (ad hominem). Please quote my offending words.
NB I never said that the staged events were intended to identify anyone, e.g. those who recognised that they were staged.
If anything, I challenged your suggestion that identification was the objective, when I asked “What good does it do to identify those who become undeceived – at varying levels?”
You may have said that we “definitely agree” about “being able to identify those who do not believe”, but this doesn’t actually constitute me agreeing wtih you.
Complicated, yes. I recommend Michael Hoffman’s book: ‘Secret Societies and Psychological Warfare’….
https://www.amazon.com/Societies-Psychological-Warfare-Michael-Hoffman/dp/0970378416/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1535992215&sr=1-2&keywords=michael+hoffman+books
Allan, Hoffman will no doubt introduce you to things you need to be introduced to, but his ‘big picture’ is by no means the correct one.
There are limited hangouts and ‘pundits with incomplete/incorrect data’ throughout the rabbit warren, so beware and keep your discernment hat on.
As with LHs, if you read enough of them, you can collect all their nuggets of truth together, but it’s tricky and fraught with peril.
Eventually, the correct ‘big picture’ coalesces into coherence – and you will know it’s the right one (not just one that sort of works if you squint).
Todd, as you research further, you begin to appreciate just how much of humanity is subject to total control of TPTB. Just as sheep may imagine they have complete liberty to wander the hills, they remain subject to their shepherd.
Democracy is a TV ‘reality’ show glued on top of a shadow technocracy.
So, the idea that the masses might rise up and jeopardise TPTB unless they are continually psyopped via problem/reaction/solution* events is laughable, especially when such events are so inept (deliberately).
* http://www.propagandamatrix.com/diocletian.html
That is likely presented as an excuse, to those who should not be privy to the ulterior motive.
As for ‘please explain’, nope, you’re going to have to do some research.
X,
Many people here have asked you direct questions. You’ve yet to answer any of them directly, rather skirting the questions or coming up with what I refer to as ‘monkey fluff’- unimportant to the issue(s) at hand but making a big deal out of it as if it were…
Please take no offense to my question; it is not meant to offend. Rather, a simple question to sate my (our) curiosity:
Are you a troll?
Kind regards,
~Kimberlie
X,
The links you offered for http://www.propagandamatrix and woolwich are simply another distillation for Operation Gladio A, B and C. Nothing new. Manufactured false-flag-terrorism supporting problem > reaction > solution.
I don’t mind further research, but you still didn’t directly answer my questions to help guide me or anyone else anywhere.
Todd, there is a paradim shift between A & B:
A) Staged terrorist/psycho attacks are merely problem/reaction/solution, with the minority of undeceived being insignificant/impotent, the primary intent being to have those deceived accept ever greater totalitarian rule.
B) Staged terrorist/psycho attacks are deliberately ineptly/imperfectly executed in order to rouse the percipient to investigate the world beyond their immediate concerns, whilst leaving the remainder appropriately repressed.
And ‘A’ is an excuse for those who should remain unaware of ‘B’.
Yes, it’s an unsupported assertion. Yes, you can ignore it as monkey fluff from a troll (blue pill style).
Once you’ve done the respective paradigm shift, you know it’s ‘B’. Prior to that, ‘A’ remains the only candidate explanation. The paradigm shift occurs after more research.
I thought it was worth broaching in a comment. After all, I’m not really here to evangelise/convert, but to find others on the same page. And encouraging you to move along in your research doesn’t hurt. 🙂
Thank you X for the brief on Diocletian and Constantine.
Aaah, good ole democracy to the rescue of every problem/reaction/solution! This is the dynamic of Evil at war with Good. Granted, the PTB ‘create’ these events with a flair of deliberate ineptness, however, they are aware of the masses – both those who are awake and those who are asleep. They use this psyop as a deterrent/distraction the see how close the hounds are on their trail. The usual pulse test to see who’s alive.
X, I commend you! You’re good, clever – a real Craftsman! You have traveled deep, very deep into the Rabbit Hole. I like they way you think – I like the way you help me to sift the Truth from the Lie; the monkey fluff from that which is worth looking into…. including the monkey fluff!
Since Allan opened Comments, I’ve imbibed much more than I thought possible in a such a short period of time. (BRAVO, Allan!) Actually, I want to thank everyone here for their sharing!
Kind regards,
~Kimberlie
Exactly! Also the banishment of basic physics as well based on the fact that NIST can get away with publishing Science Fiction actually more like Fantasy as fact and people like Lou swallow it.