oucheh wrote:

tommydski wrote:Once you read that book, read some sources that debunk those theories and see if you feel the same way.

I couldn't give a damn either way but I'm familiar with the sensation of being so into a book that it clouds your judgement.

Have you actually read the book he is talking about? Have you followed up on these sources? For someone who claims to be apathetic about 9/11, you're very 'well informed.'


-Jeremy

No. I don't remember what I was going for with that post, it was a rushjob whilst at work this morning. I think the point was that sometimes when I read books, I get carried away with the premise and I forget to look at things objectively. I'll bet it's happened to most people at some point. Thus, the subject of the book could have been literally anything. I know absolutely dick about 9/11.

Sorry Jeremy.

I think the only way this country will shake itself loose from this cycle is through massive unemployment. I'm not advocating this, but if you look back through our history, the major social changes came after changes to the labor market. When people are hungry and out of work, they are more open to changing their current situation. When everyone can go home and tune out the world with some mindless reality TV, there is no incentive to seek change.

galanter wrote:
As for the petro-dollars argument...so what? Osama had tons of motive to pull this off, but somehow you don't find that compelling evidence that he did it. Again, arguments from motive alone just don't mean that much.

I won't go into the details of Steven Jones's argument, because I'm not well-versed in his stuff.

Actually, I think that al-Qaeda collaborated with the CIA. Osama was indeed behind it, but I think that he had significant help.

Rick Reuben wrote:

El Protoolio wrote:Fear is a tool used to keep people divided and in line. It is a tool used to enrich those who capitalize on that fear. Greed is the shadow of fear.

The only way to combat this is to allow full freedom of speech, and let every individual decide for themselves if they are being given good information or having their 'fear' button pushed. If people are reporting on advancing totalitarianism and synthetic terrism, it is very hard to present that in a way that will not induce fear. It *should* induce fear. If you let referees with accusations of 'fear mongering' push out unpopular views from the public square, then you consign the audience to lives behind walls guarded by gatekeepers. Of course, conspiracy theorists will accuse those who fight their message of being gatekeepers, but similarly, gatekeepers will never admit that they are filtering according to their bias- they present themselves as objective authorities.

I somewhat agree but in my opinion the only way to combat fear is to be as fearless as you can be. That starts with the individual. Fear is the mindkiller. There are people on both extreme ends of the spectrum who would use fear to their advantage. That is irrefutable. Gloom and doom props up any prohpet wether they are talking about the threat of terrorism, of global warming, of Mexicans, of offensive lyrics, of fascist totalitarianism or gorey video games.

I do not fear this advancing American Fascism™ because I do not believe it to be inevitable. I will not fear what has not yet happened and when something happens I will act as best as I can and not be paralyized by my fear. I will fight any encroachment on my liberty to the death. I will arm myself with as much knowledge as I can but I cannot tell the future and neither can anyone else.

FDR was right. We have nothing to fear but fear itself. Yoda was also right. Fear is the path to the darkside.

Hey Rick,

I know you're new here and all...

...but no more than 2 posts in a row, eh?

Bob, your performance art has hit a new high. I was wrong about you. You're actually a pretty fair comedian despite your all-too-predictable retreat into name calling (which is hardly an effective way to change people's opinions). I'll dispense with the blow-by-blow rebuttal and get to the nuts and bolts.

1) My paragraph reads much better. Fear is more powerful than lies in getting people to act the way you want them to. Try this on any kid. Tell them not to eat a cookie and they will eat that cookie. Tell them the cookie is made with poison and they probably won't. Of course, this theory gets shot full of holes when you throw sex into the mix.

2) You misunderstood my critique of the fearmongers on the left and right. I generally think of myself as a common sense liberal, in that I tend to follow a progressive approach to politics but don't fall for the knee-jerk liberal positions. I read and listen to the commentaries and critiques. I vote. I get involved in political discussions with friends, family and online. I give to charities. I'm not a defeatist, just a realist. You miss my point.

Your solution seems to be to post messages under cover of anonymity on the EAF and berate those who disagree with you. That's a sure fire way to change the world. What, you convinced 100 people of your views? The revolution is in high gear.

And it's too bad, because I often agree with much of the substance you write about. You unfortunately have a habit of undercutting your arguments by boorish behavior, thus playing into the hands of those who want to marginalize you. Or is that part of your performance art?

3) The only real solution is get people to stop giving in to fear. You take away fear and you take away the power. Stop believing Mexicans are bad or that every black dude is gonna rape and kill you. Stop believing every Arab is gonna blow us up. When people lose these distractions -- which is really what fear is all about -- then they will be able to tackle the problems of the military industrial complex, global banking powers, the Queen of England selling cheese smack, etc.

OK, maybe another pie-in-the-sky solution would be to change the legal definition of corporations and the parameters within which they exist to make them more accountable.

Gotta run. I'm playing hoops tonight. We can pick this discussion up another time.

NerblyBear wrote:Actually, I think that al-Qaeda collaborated with the CIA. Osama was indeed behind it, but I think that he had significant help.

And the evidence behind this belief is ... ?

(And if Al Qaeda and the CIA are on the same side...whose side are they on relative to, say, Israel, Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria, and Iran? Can you really connect all these dots in a non-self-contradictory manner?)

Rick Reuben wrote:

galanter wrote:

You're the person who believes that the Bush administration didn't have Iraq and Afghanistan on its radar before 9/11.

I don't recall saying that. "Regime change" in Iraq was certainly in the neo-con playbook well before 9/11. Not so sure about Afghanistan, but perhaps.

Huh?? You're willing to accept an established desire for an invasion pre-2000 as a motive for the later invasion, but you are unable to accept a fantasy by the same people for a 'Pearl Harbor-type event' as a motive for the eventual pretext for two wars, 9/11?

Very selective application of your opposition to this, isn't it?

galanter wrote: 'Jumping from motivation to accusation ("X could gain by it, therefore X did it") is never a terribly strong argument.

We are permitted to connect the dots from PNAC to Iraq but not from PNAC to 9/11, according to Galanter?

This is only a paradox in your world, not mine.

The neo-cons are similar to most Americans to the extent that they want the US safe, free, and happy. I'm not a neo-con, but I just don't think that they think 9/11 made Americans safe, free, and happy.

I'm sure you can concoct some Rube-Goldbergesque chain of causality that might vaguely connect the one to the other. But like Rube Goldberg's inventions, such machinations are notable for their absurdity not their utility.

And how exactly is Rick Rueben different than Clocker Bob? Spelling?

By the way, if no one else has said it yet, welcome back, Galanter. How was the art tour, or whatever it was that you left to concentrate on?

Hey thanks for that, and thanks to Mr. Earwicker and others as well.

I wish I could say I was away for really good fun reasons. Life isn't always that kind.

But for better or worse...here I am again.