News & Analysis
Peter King's Terror Hearings Take Over
A controversial congressional hearing Thursday on the radicalization of Muslim Americans touched on sensitive questions involving terrorism and tolerance a decade after the 9/11 attacks. At times emotional and theatrical, the four-hour session of the House Homeland Security Committee included calls from moderate Muslims for support in overcoming extremists seeking to indoctrinate their children, as well as protests from Democratic legislators who complained the hearing unfairly implicated all Muslims for the criminal acts of a small minority. In the end, committee Chairman Peter King (left), R-New York, said the hearing that generated widespread media coverage "actually went a lot easier than it could have." He ... promised additional hearings in coming months, with the next perhaps focusing on the radicalization of Muslims in U.S. prisons. – CNN
Dominant Social Theme: Don't trust the Muslims.
Free-Market Analysis: Yesterday's hearing on radicalization of Muslim Americans brings up a larger perspective regarding what is going on in America and a close look into Western-style democracy. The incessant harping on "terrorist Islam" as presented in these US congressional hearings (see above article excerpt) does seem to indicate a trend regarding America's – in fact the entire West's – descent into authoritarianism, driven by hysteria over a religion that many of its worshippers (ironically) conflate with "peace."
Peter King is promising more hearings on Islamic terror and one has no reason to doubt they will occur. King has come under attack for these hearings, which some believe are deliberately whipping up hysteria against Muslims, but he has branded such accusations as false and baseless. In fact, ever since 9/11, King has been voicing concerns about Muslim fundamentalism and even wrote a novel about an Al Qaeda penetration in Long Island that resulted in a string of bombings. The protagonist of the book, a blunt, Irish congressman investigates and eventually exposes the plot.
There is about King – and certainly about the larger military industrial complex – a sense that they are manufacturing an industry as much as they are responding to legitimate threats. One has to go all the way back to 9/11 to piece together the genesis is what is taking place today. In this article we shall try.
9/11 is widely held to be the product of a band of Islamic terrorists who flew large planes into the World Trade Towers. But certain members of the 9/11 Commission itself have virtually disavowed the official narrative. The Commission's lead counsel, Rutgers's Law Dean John Farmer even wrote a book, The Ground Truth: The Untold Story of America Under Attack on 9/11 that accused the Washington intelligence and military establishment along with the Bush administration of lying serially to the commission about many aspects of 9/11.
There are so many anomalies and questions about the attacks that it is difficult to know where to begin. Three obvious – clear-cut – issues stand out. The first has to do with the calls made from the planes. Initially, the FBI said the calls were made from cell phones but it eventually emerged that the cell phone technology of the day was not viable from the altitudes at which the calls were supposedly made. The FBI then explained that the calls were made from phones installed within the planes themselves. Unfortunately, more research eventually showed that the planes in question did not have the phone technology. To date, there is no good explanation how passenger phone calls – widely reported at the time – took place. Neither cell phones nor in-plane phones were used.
Then there is the issue of the Afghanistan cave "bunkers" from where Bin Laden is said to have plotted and carried out the attacks of 9/11. Donald Rumsfeld conducted several interviews on national TV networks in which he provided colorful schematics of six-story caves complete with elaborate technology communication's gear and even various high-tech vehicles stored in subterranean garages. Videos of these presentations were on Youtube.com, though they appear to have been taken down. More importantly, not a single one of these elaborate cave bunkers were ever discovered despite months of searches by US soldiers in Afghanistan. Apparently, they never existed.
Finally, the FBI provided descriptions of the terrorists as well as their names but it later turned out that many of the identifications were incorrect. Individuals living in Europe and the Middle East came forward to complain that they had been incorrectly identified. The FBI admitted as much but it is still not clear who the terrorists actually were given the confusion about their IDs and the initial misinformation. Photos of the terrorists that were released showed them boarding a plane, but it later turned out that the plane being boarded was in Maine, not Boston, which was a later connection.
These three issues are only a fragment of hundreds of anomalies – questionable information and misinformation – that continue to plague the "official" 9/11 narrative. It has been reported that up to 70 percent of American adults would be in favor of a new commission – a non partisan one – that would attempt to clarify what was obviously a botched job so that some real closure an be achieved about the 9/11 narrative.
It us unfortunate that 9/11, in all its confusion, remains at the heart of the changes that have taken in place in the United States. Even though the narrative as it is currently constituted, has been disavowed by members of the commission themselves, the conclusions have been used to justify the virtual erection of a police state in America that has suspended civil rights and created a burgeoning intelligence-industry complex dedicated to spying on American citizens.
Since the 9/11 narrative itself remains unclear, everything that has flowed from it including the endless Afghanistan war and even Homeland Security, must be seen as built on a shifting foundation of unreconciled facts and even misinformation. Rather than seeking to clarify issues that should be made clear for historical purposes as well as policy ones, federal legislators like Peter King march further afield with investigations into "Islamic terrorism."
King's point is that the Muslim community is not engaging forcefully enough with the FBI and other policing agencies that are trying to keep citizens safe from a growing Islamic threat. But here too we would argue that the points on which he seeks clarity are not the ones that need to be clarified initially. There is still a good deal of confusion about what Al Qaeda is and where it came from. It has been argued that it was an initial creation of the CIA during the Afghanistan fight against USSR occupation and that the name simply means "the list." Bin Laden himself is said to have denied involvement in 9/11 and to this day he has not formally been accused of involvement in 9/11 by US law enforcement.
With so much confusion over basic facts surrounding 9/11 and additional questions about the fundamentalist group that supposedly sponsored the attacks, it is no wonder that King's hearing on Thursday spawned a sharp backlash. What was unspoken in many of the complaints was the bottom-line distrust in the central narrative of 9/11 itself.
If the official story is riddled with logical inconsistencies, then one would believe that King might use some of the Congressional resources at his disposal to clarify some of the remaining questions regarding that fateful day and those behind it. Instead, he treats the narrative as a given – using it as a template and touchstone on which to launch his larger concerns about Muslim fundamentalist violence.
Conclusion: Without taking steps to clarify the initial narrative, King runs the risk of looking exploitative rather than genuinely concerned. This is probably the way that some in the Muslim community see it and an unspoken reason as to why the hearings caused such a public furor. There still is no clarity to aspects of the official story and everything that has come thereafter must be seen as questionable if not suspect as well. This is the type of democracy King wants the Islamic community to embrace?
l 
|
You must be a site member to submit suggested edits or post feedback. In addition to submitting edit suggestions and posting feedback, your Free Membership to The Daily Bell gives you access to our Member Zone where you will discover a plethora of other member benefits. Want to learn more? click here |
|||||
|
|
||||
 |
Posted by Bud Bromley on 03/23/11 12:15 PM
@DB,
I don't approve any of those things and never said that I did. Again, you are attacking me, your poster, and the attack is unwarranted and wrong. You continue to make sophomoric assumptions about your posters which degrades your credibility.
My endorsement of humane profiling of Muslims to help identify violent Muslims within their community is to protect Americans including Muslim Americans and give them a place to reform.
This does not imply my endorsement of the continuing unconstitutional behavior of the U.S. government.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Sure it does.
|
Posted by Bud Bromley on 03/22/11 10:42 PM
Dear OneBorn,
It's simple. Being libertarian and anti-authoritarian does not require leaving good judgment, experience and knowledge at the door.
A libertarian and anti-authoritarian would be free to cut off his son's hand for stealing, but the good judgment, experience and knowledge of the parent and possibly the government would prevent such action. I wouldn't rely on the government though.
We don't need to guess or ignore who the terrorist group is. Many violent Muslims have self-identified. Several Muslims (including Muslims testifying in the King hearing) have testified that recruitment of jihadis is occurring in their group and some have identified radical jihadi individuals within their group. Some peaceful Muslims testified in King's hearing, but many more are documented. I have provided some example references above.
DB and Muslim apologists on this thread have not read or watched the King hearings.
I am not endorsing government, or more government, far from it. Less but wiser government is needed. As a suggested outcome of the King hearings, I am endorsing using good judgment, experience and knowledge to profile the Muslim population under a policy of 'innocent until proven guilty' in order to build a safe place where Muslims can reform their religion/culture. Profiling can be much easier and friendlier than, for example entering Saudi Arabia or Iran. Muslims cannot reform Islam in the west under the present environment of fear and doubled standard tolerance.
If Christians, Hindi, blacks, grandmas, British...i.e. any identifiable group were behaving as do jihadist Muslims today, then I would propose the same action toward that group even if it were my own group.
Profiling whether by government at airports etc and more importantly the acceptance of profiling by individuals on the street both within and outside the profiled group will enormously increase the profiled group's security. Today we have the opposite. Today, someone even appearing to profile is labelled a racist. But idealistic political correctness, tolerance of the intolerable, moral relativity and multiculturalism as practiced in the west ... are not practiced by non-western Muslims. Islamic jihadi strategy is successfully (so far) using western tolerance as a weapon against the west as the Trojans used a horse.
King's hearings are past due and much needed. The moderators at Daily Bell had best extract their dhimmi heads from the sand before they lose them. Ironically, I received an email from DB encouraging me to post on DB, that was the day before they encouraged me in this thread to go elsewhere.
Does DB's left hand know what the right hand is doing? They certainly don't heed their own guidance: "...please note that any posts containing harassment, vulgarity, personal attacks or those which are deemed to be of a violent nature are not welcomed and will either not appear or be removed." Several DB posts in this thread would be removed or never posted by any fair minded moderator.
Reply from The Daily Bell
"If Christians, Hindi, blacks, grandmas, British...i.e. any identifiable group were behaving as do jihadist Muslims today, then I would propose the same action toward that group even if it were my own group."
Let's see:
Israel/Palestine
Korea
Egypt
Vietnam
Cambodia
Uruguay
Somalia
Grenada
Iran
El Salvador
Honduras
Chile
Argentina
Various "color" revolutions
Serbia
Iraq
Afghanistsn
Libya
These are but a few (there are surely many, many more) of the locals/regions subject to confrontations/aggressions of US (and British) military power and "black ops" over the past 50 years. It is one serial aggression after another. Congressman Ron Paul has pointed out that if the US was not so consistently "over there," various groups would not seek to attack or undermine America and its allies.
You can blather about "dhimmitude," the "King hearings" and radical Islam all that you wish to, but much of the aggression and destabilization going on in the world involves US military forces, CIA "black ops" and contract killings launched with depressing regularity from 1,000 US military and intelligence bases around the world.
At this point, given the regular lack of Congressional declarations of war, such actions are blatantly unconstitutional in addition to being highly provocative, unaccountable to voters and unbearably, ruinously costly.
After decades of such unaccountability, the trillion-dollar workings of the military industrial and intelligence-industrial complex are well on their way to destabilizing the US economy and turning the remnants of the Republic into a full-fledged police state, complete with illicit domestic spying and wiretapping, renditions and torture abroad and regulated and restricted travel at home via patdowns, radioactive scans, invasive bio-mechanical IDs administered by an illegal Homeland security apparatus, enforced by a corrupted judiciary and supported by a supine mainstream media that literally applauds each emergent authoritarian trend.
Again, this is the activity you apparently endorse, the evolution of which you seemingly approve and the ongoing escalation (hostility, paranoia, etc.) that you surely celebrate. There are plenty of websites that would celebrate along with you the demise of what is left of the bleeding carcass of US republic. And that is why we have suggested that you enrich those entities with your "commentary."
You can surely find in the blogosphere websites that will endorse your enthusiastic, confrontational paranoia, your approval of the militant progression of US foreign policy, and, generally, your support for the most invasive aspects of the so-called "war on terror" at home and abroad.
These websites will celebrate Peter King as do you, endorse Congress' inaction regarding military matters as suitable and the bankruptcy of the US as necessary within the context of the trillions-per-year that are spent by forces increasingly hostile to the shreds of freedom that remain in the US.
Seek out these like-minded folk! You will doubtless feel happier and less disgruntled about your submissions and their eventually reception. Perhaps you can all get together and build a mini-Eastern Europe in a receptive Midwestern state or two complete with full-fledged internal checkpoints, a supine state-run media and a military-backed political process. Perhaps you can prevail upon Peter King to be an advisor.
|
Posted by Onebbornfreeatyahoodotcom on 03/17/11 10:24 AM
Bud Bromley said: " I am anti-authoritarian and conservative libertarian my entire life."
As far as I can see, there is nothing "anti-authoritarian" or "libertarian" in the view that all members of a particular religion be singled out for specific scrutiny by a government for the safety of the rest of the population, nor in the assumption that when that vaunted government scrutiny occurs, that it actually does accomplish the goal of increasing security for the individual and society in general.
Wake up, the government has zero interest in yours or mine or anyone elses security, only in its own, and even if it did have a genuine interest in the general populations security from Muslims [or anyone else], the fact of the matter is that the government is _incapable_ of providing that security- all that it can [perhaps]effectively provide is the illusion of security, and in the age of the internet, even that illusion is becoming harder and harder for it to maintain. Regards,onebornfree.
|
Posted by Onebornfreeatyahoodotcom on 03/17/11 09:05 AM
DB said: "You have no decency, Sir. "
This is a good example of the "Pot calling the kettle black". Some Daily Bell moderators like to resort to the "argument from authority" B.S. tactic, tied with an invoking of the supposedly magic "we" word. Predicable, sad, but true.Regards,onebornfree
|
Posted by Bud Bromley on 03/16/11 09:36 PM
@DB,
You have no idea what you are talking about. Just one example, I am anti-authoritarian and conservative libertarian my entire life. You assume and proclaim much about me yet you know nothing about me, and what you assume and proclaim is in fact totally wrong. Therefore, why should any reader or poster to your site give any credibility to anything you say? I am not the only writer you abuse.
DB, you continue to attack your posters. You do not stay on the subject of your own editorial on your own site.
I encourage readers to delete this site and I encourage Dr. Tibor Machan to post on a better site. Daily Bell is not about free and independent thinking, far from it.
Reply from The Daily Bell
We encourage you to go elsewhere.
|
Posted by Bud Bromley on 03/16/11 04:21 PM
The subject of Congressman Peter King's hearing and this Daily Bell post and string was ""The Extent of Radicalization in the American Muslim Community and that Community's Response."
The subject was not:
* Comparative religions
* Another 9-11 investigation
If a U.S. Congressman cannot hold such a hearing without abuse in a country that espouses free speech, then why would a peaceful Muslim take the risk to report a violent member of the Muslim community?
To do so would require extraordinary bravery and literally risking their life. Multiple people testified in the hearing that the Muslim community is being internally terrorized and recruiting of terrorists is underway. What is peaceful about any of this? Meanwhile, supposedly peaceful Muslim organizations like CAIR protest. Peaceful Muslims are living in fear of other Muslims.
The extent of this Islamic terrorism within western countries must be investigated so that appropriate actions can be taken to stop it. Congressman King is trying to do that. He should be congratulated not attacked. Listen to his words and those testifying at the hearings. So far, this is not a witch hunt.
As well as the links in my previous posts in this Daily Bell string, you might also consider the following video by this brave young ex-Muslim, a son of a Hamas leader.
Click to view link
In this video is one hopeful, optimistic thought, "Islam is collapsing ...within 10 years Islam is going to be over."
I agree with Tibor above, "Why is it that inquiring about the meaning and implications of a religion constitutes some kind of prejudice or hostility toward it?" Why shoot the messenger?
I say again, the reality in America and western Europe is that we must find a humanitarian way to profile and screen Muslims in order to uncover the violent and jihadists among them.
The Muslim community is currently too terrorized to turn over the radicals among the community. Violent Muslims are counting on us to be tolerant and politically correct, that is their strategy for penetrating western societies. Given the facts about violence by Muslims, it would be foolish to not protect ourselves as well as peaceful Muslims.
Profiling and screening does not have to be the rough methods of a authoritarian or fascist state. It could be no more terse than today's border screening upon entering Switzerland. However, it is counterproductive to continue screening for things like bombs and knives instead of screening Muslims for the enemy withing their group.
There can be no reform of Islam by Muslims until the fear of Muslim on Muslim violence is removed from the Muslim community. Essentially that is also the message of many brave Muslims and ex-Muslims such as the young man in the video above, Ayaan Hirsi Ali
Click to view link
Bat Y'or at
Click to view link
We have to protect these and other brave people, including the people testifying at King's hearing.
Around the world violence by Muslims is being committed, most frequently against other Muslims and often against women. Free people of the world must condemn such behavior and punish the perpetrators.
Headline: Thousands of girls reportedly being subjected to honour-related violence in Finland, Saturday, 12 March 2011
Thousands of girls in Finland, particularly in immigrant families with a Muslim background are reportedly afraid of their immediate relatives, while being subjected to physical or mental violence.
www.hs.fi/english/articleThousands of girls reportedly being subjected to honour-related violence in Finland/1135264150586
Reply from The Daily Bell
There is considerable question over what happened on 9/11. The FBI identified the wrong perpetrators and many of them protested from overseas, until the FBI admitted the mis-identifications.
Bin Laden denied strongly he was involved. The Taliban asked for evidence and the Bush administration declined to give it. To this day, Bin Laden is not accused of planning 9/11 by the FBI. They never found the six-story, high-tech caves in which he was supposedly hiding.
Most of the so-called terror attacks you refer to have some sort of FBI or MI6 entrapment. This is amply documented. In some cases the FBI apparently helped purchase the bomb-making material, or offered to. The FBI is complicit in deepening the hysteria over the so-called war on terror in order to support the US's creeping authoritarianism, which you so willingly endorse.
Al Qaeda itself is also known as "the list" - and was apparently compiled by the CIA as part of an effort to combat the USSR's invasion of Afghanistan. In other words, the CIA and other Western intel helped INVENT Al Qaeda.
These are facts. Leaving aside 9/11 it is obvious that the US is manufacturing an enemy, or at least exaggerating it - radical Muslim fundamentalism - and that Peter King is complicit in this program.
You are obviously content with the American system as it is now, the grope-downs and increasing exposure to X-Ray technology at airports, train-stations, etc. You are content with an expanding police state. You are like a blind man, guided by authoritarian promotions; you willingly endorse them and support them; you are not interested in free speech, only in buttressing a flawed and false narrative with your jabber about Muslim fundamentalism.
Are you interested in protecting your country, your children, your family from America's evident and obvious creeping fascism? Then turn the energy and enthusiasm you have for slandering the Muslim community and its spirituality and begin to scrutinize the lies you are being told - which you endorse - and the misinformation you willingly regurgitate.
The US, in your name, has irradiated vast amounts of Afghan and Iraqi soil; it has slaughtered women and children with drones, and continues too. It is pursuing a failed war for some ten years now to capture what it admits are 100 Al Qaeda still remaining on Afghan soil. Where are the rest? Some 70 percent of Americans want the war to be discontinued and are highly unhappy with the slaughter that continues in their name, with their tax dollars.
But people like you natter on about non-existent Muslim fundamentalism and the dangers to "free-speech." Look to the US government for free-speech dangers, for the abrogation of habeas corpus, for the renditions, the torture, the rapid, steady decline of civil liberties in the US and the West generally. The illicit wiretapping and the intimidation of Congress. All this concerns you little if at all.
You are more concerned with supporting and endorsing the rabid authoritarianism represented by the King hearings. He ought to be investigating the decline and fall of the American Republic and the purposeful intimidation of its citizen and media; you wish him to direct his attention to Finland. You have no decency, Sir.
|
Posted by Onebornfreeatyahoodotcom on 03/15/11 10:17 PM
Daily Bell said:
"You are really a piece of work." Why, thank you :-) !
"We lost three friends there."
Name them or link to their names in the memorials, please. Also where they worked would be good, and where they died.
[Also, because some died does _not_ mean that all of the claimed victims were real-is that what you are saying?]
" The towers fell down." I never claimed they didn't.
" We were there" .
Again with the "we". " We were there",""We " know" ,"we saw this" "we know that" etc. etc.
But so far the big "we" at the "all as one" Daily Bell, after more than once being politely asked,[which is more than I can say for the tone of your reply here], has refused to say exactly what they saw, other than vaque generalizations. Now the big "we" claims that they also lost friends.
"One questions why you continue to spread this crap."
The only "crap" I'm seeing right now is in your somewhat revealing response. Regards,onebornfree
|
Posted by Onebornfreeatyahoodotcom on 03/15/11 08:32 PM
Puck T. smith said: "it is the Truthers' argument that it was a false flag that I regard as irrelevant. As you say much evil has flowed from it, but whether it was staged or genuinely a terrorist attack doesn't really make much difference.
The evils you catalog are simply an outgrowth of policies that have been in place for at least a hundred years. An empire in its death throes will act as the West is acting regardless. As I see it, in the grand scheme of things, if it hadn't been 9/11 it would have been something else. A dying beast strikes out at anything in its reach whether it is a threat or not."
I agree with every word of that.
For myself, the only real significance of the alleged events of 9/11 for the individual interested in maximizing their own freedom, is to help them to reach an understanding of just how far "the dying beast" is prepared to go to extend its own life.
If what I claim is true [fake "airliner through building" videos , plus fake tower collapse sequence videos-all on "live"national TV], the state was/is prepared to fake imagery on network TV in order to further its agenda, which means, for the freedom-seeking individual, that the rabbit hole is a whole lot deeper than they might otherwise have assumed.
As to the 3,000 victims assumed by the Daily Bell moderators and many others, evidence continues to gather that tends to show that the towers were mostly, if not completely unoccupied at the time they were deliberately demolished, and that many of the victims never existed; their images mostly created via photo-morphing software, and their attendant personal histories also pre-fabricated, while their names may have also been manufactured using various computer algorythms. See:
Click to view link
Reply from The Daily Bell
You are really a piece of work. We lost three friends there. The towers fell down. We were there. One questions why you continue to spread this crap.
|
Posted by Abul-husayn on 03/15/11 08:20 PM
The links in my previous post have been broken by the posting software ~ you'll need to click on the link and then eliminate the ending "/br" that's been added, and the links will take your browser to the correct page.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Should be OK now.
|
Posted by Abul-husayn on 03/15/11 08:15 PM
"Infidels and Jews are directly named in their sacred book and they are to be exterminated."
That's an outright lie. There is no word in Arabic that can be accurately translated as "infidel," Jews are named as protected people in the Qur'an, and NO ONE is to be "exterminated" according to the Qur'an.
"Think about the 21 arrest in the last two and a half years ..."
Think about the 25 years from 1980 to 2005:
Click to view link
Think about the study released in January 2010 by researchers at Duke University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill:
Click to view link
Find out about terrorism in Europe from Europol:
Click to view link
Your golem is scaring fewer and fewer people. But keep up the hysterics, it makes people curious to find our for themselves ...
|
Posted by Abul-husayn on 03/15/11 07:40 PM
[i]What other "religion" has identified the murder of non-believers as its ultimate "worship?"[/i]
Read Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy.
Islam certainly does NOT allow murder of "non-believers."
|
Posted by Abul-husayn on 03/15/11 07:36 PM
iNo such thing as a Muslim-American. One is either an American, or he is something other. Hard-line Muslims put their political religion ahead of any loyalty to the USA./i
My loyalty to God requires that I be loyal to people and to their communities. I was born American and will be American until I'm buried in the ground. How much "loyalty to the USA" anyone has depends on their beliefs and principles, and their adherence to their beliefs and principles, not on their agreement or disagreement with what other people are doing.
|
Posted by Puck T. Smith on 03/15/11 02:49 PM
DB: You are welcome to believe it irrelevant.
I don't regard 9/11 as irrelevant, it is the Truthers' argument that it was a false flag that I regard as irrelevant. As you say much evil has flowed from it, but whether it was staged or genuinely a terrorist attack doesn't really make much difference.
The evils you catalog are simply an outgrowth of policies that have been in place for at least a hundred years. An empire in its death throes will act as the West is acting regardless. As I see it, in the grand scheme of things, if it hadn't been 9/11 it would have been something else. A dying beast strikes out at anything in its reach whether it is a threat or not.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Nonsense. It matters how 3,000 people died.
|
Posted by Bud Bromley on 03/15/11 01:46 PM
"Islam: What the West Needs to Know." Full length
Click to view link
|
Posted by Puck T. Smith on 03/15/11 11:54 AM
DB: You are satisfied, then, with the 9/11 narrative as it stands?
No. I think there are plenty of unanswered questions. My critique was directed more at the commenters, not at the original article.
I tend to agree with Stephan Molyneux. I think 9/11 Truth is sort of irrelevant.
Click to view link
Reply from The Daily Bell
9/11 seems in some sense the seminal issue of the 21st century, from whence all else flows, Homeland Security, two wars, NATO's expansion, America's continued militaristic stance; increased authoritarianism domestically; ever-expanding EU "security;" endless applications of video-technology in Britain and increasingly Europe and America; biometric IDs; vast growth in various domestic spying apparatuses; the list is is endless and growing. You are welcome to believe it irrelevant. Others might consider such a statement less than accurate.
 |
Posted by Himagain on 03/15/11 03:10 AM
Well, I for one am saved many thousands of keystrokes just by coming here.
What a spectrum of interests/views! What a well-managed Site it seems to me.
Of course, for old warhorses like me, there is the constant amazement of the power of belief which can overcome almost anything (vis martyrs).
What is most difficult for me to grasp even after 70 summers of study, is the number of people of apparent lucidity and intelligence who espouse *any* of the 4 major religions: Christianity, Islam, "Science" (big bang) and that Other One.
Although over the years, as more than one Person Of Note has confirmed to me, their fear of speaking out,which has made sense in their aspirations, or sometimes, survival.
Magicians use the term "prestidigitation" in their craft, meaning to distract the subject with one hand while the other does the trick.
It is also called "politics".
Religion beats even real science hands down. I don't mean the Religion of Science, like the discredited Big Bang Theory, but real science, in which facts and evidence count for nothing against a Belief.
It is hard to beat the promise of "you don't have to do much except follow instructions and you will go to Heaven and live forever with all the goodies you've missed out on in this life. If you don't, you will be going to Hell, where you will be tortured for ever."
It is unfortunate that the extra bit usually involves going and killing those rotten, no-good .......... who eat children" (fill in the dots).
|
Posted by Puck T. Smith on 03/14/11 10:19 PM
I got through about three comments and threw up my hands. It appears the options presented are: Muslims are bad M'kay? 9/11 was an inside job, it's all the Jesuits' fault. Is it even possible to talk about this stuff without having every predigested narrative jammed down one's throat?
I apologize if the level of discourse improved further down the thread, but it just didn't seem worth it to expend the time to find out.
This is not up to the standards I have come to expect among the feedback here.
Reply from The Daily Bell
You are satisfied, then, with the 9/11 narrative as it stands?
 |
Posted by Reader on 03/14/11 10:08 AM
A face from the Spanish Inquisition.
Back from the dead into the 21st century.
|
Posted by Onebornfreeatyahoodotcom on 03/14/11 07:30 AM
Zenbillionaire said:
"You got me thinking about the bottom up thing."
That's the important thing.
From my point of view:
1] You have ridiculous speed of collapses,close to or at real world free-fall speed, which mean little or no resistance from floors below [or from air].
2] You have collapse sequences in complete reverse order of standard demolition procedure [therefor leaving the strongest part of the buildings their base intact when the process starts [contradicting [1]
3]you have a picture perfect [literally:-) ] collapse of 1300 ft tall buildings into their own footprints that still somehow manage to occur in opposition to both the laws of physics and standard procedures for demolition.
As Elaine said to Jerry[Seinfeld]"Fake,fake,fake." Regards,onebornfree.
|
|
