Posted by: graemebird | September 14, 2011

Blaming The Arabs: 9/11 Idiots-Short Of A Theory.

Those few idiots who still believe that Arab kids brought the buildings down have no scientific evidence to back their theory. So its global warming all over again. The whole fraudulent point of view based on never coming up with any evidence and faux-Popper-falsification based on stray things the rational side of the debate say.

No-one purporting to take a scientific approach to the blame-the-Arabs story, who is also a professional scientist, will sign their name to anything they write. Because they have no extant theory as to how the buildings came down. Even the American Government does not support the “pancaking” theory anymore. Since the pancaking theory requires pancaking and there is no pancaking to be found in the footage of the towers falling.

Pancaking implies continual RADICAL DECELERATION from free-fall acceleration rates. And this the Clarke Cabal, could not possibly engineer without being caught.

The requirements of the Clarke Cabal are not hard to infer. So I’ll put them out there just so you can grasp clearly what is going on.

The buildings had to fall in the following way or the (stand down) false flag (denial, and deception) operation would fail.

1. The buildings had to fall as fast as possible.  So as close to free-fall as they could contrive the fall to be. Since free-fall was the maximum possible speed, something close to free-fall was the best they could aim for.

2. The buildings had to fall symmetrically, sequentially, and straight downwards.

3. The Clarke Cabal was to try and get rid of as much as the evidence during the actual fall.  Since the crime scene had to be cleared free of evidence under the nose, or with the connivance of Mayor Juliani, what evidence you could turn to dust in mid-air, you didn’t need to sneak out later.

4. Such explosives as had to be used, had to be as small as possible and as far from the outside windows as they could be contrived to be. Which is not to say there weren’t huge explosions. There were huge explosions, but obviously the use of very large explosions had to be kept to a minimum.

It was not possible to fulfill these stipulations to the required degree with any one method. Which is why explosions, thermate, and directed energy were all used.

With this in mind lets look at one of the disinformation sites supporting the blame-the-Arabs paradigm. Currency Lad, being just as idiotic as he wants to be, when matters are close to his heart, linked this disinformation site approvingly.

http://www.debunking911.com/moltensteel.htm

The first thing you notice is that the article is unsigned. Since “science” is the new in-vogue tool of misinformation no screed that purports to speak for an organization, or that is unsigned, ought to be taken seriously. Or rather all such productions ought to be viewed as highly suspect, since we have had almost the entirety of the scientific organisations roll over for the global warming fraud, and we now see how this sort of thing works.  Stupid scientists who have no reasoning capacity outside their narrowly defined specialty may often speak for stupid and wrong ideas on their own behalf. But in 2011, official statements of scientific organisations are usually lies.

But lets put aside these very useful prejudices and lets have a look at what this morally bankrupt idiot-cunt has to say.

” Let’s forget for a moment that thermite doesn’t explode so the claims of hearing explosions become meaningless. The argument that there was thermite and explosives seems to be rationalization of this dilemma. Why would they use thermite which cuts steel without announcing it, then switch to explosives? To tip people off? ”

We’ll break this up a bit:

“Let’s forget for a moment that thermite doesn’t explode so the claims of hearing explosions become meaningless.”

In what sense does this cunt claim that the explosions were meaningless? Lets say this fellow tries to tell one of the girls who was hospitalized by one of the explosions … “Listen honey. The explosion that hospitalized you means nothing?”

It may mean nothing to this moral degenerate. But to the people killed, injured or hospitalized by the explosions themselves, or by the building materials falling on them, I’d say that the explosions had some meaning in their lives. We are talking about mass murder here. So every aspect of how the mass-murder was carried out is meaningful to the forensic analysis of the crime.

Can you imagine some crime investigations show, where a main character kept on breaking out into fits of nihilism every so often? “Yes Mrs Jones. That your daughter was raped before and after she was murdered, is a meaningless detail. ”

No detail is meaningless when you are sorting out what happened. Would this degenerate murder-loving freak prefer it if we said “Only thermate was used”? Would he find the case of the rational side of the argument stronger if they all agreed to say that only thermate was used?  How would that make the case stronger? Would it make this cunt any happier?

Well the thing is the rational side of the argument isn’t going to say that explosions weren’t used to bring the building down. Because we already know for a fact, that explosions were used.  We know that from the witness testimony, which includes people hospitalized by the explosions. We know it from the footage which shows the explosions. We know it from the sound of the explosions. Video, audio and witness testimony. The contrary point of view can produce no evidence that there weren’t explosions. So we already know there were explosions.  That there were explosions, is a fact.

“Why would they use thermite which cuts steel without announcing it, then switch to explosives? ”

How stupid is this fellow? We already know that there was explosions. But just imagine if they had tried to bring that building down with JUST EXPLOSIVES.  How is that going to work? If you don’t cut the girders first, diagonally and just short of being sliced entirely, then how powerful will the explosions have to be to make the building fall? Very fucking powerful. And not only that they have to go all the way out to the inside edge of the building. They need to be very big explosions, and some of them would need to be very close to the windows. Fucking hell this fellow is so stupid you would want to vomit on him.

Well how about just using the thermate?  So that would mean every last girder has to be cut all the way through, and that you need to start cutting them at different times but finish cutting them all at the same time. Or else the building will fall when it feels like falling, it won’t fall symmetrically, and in any case there is no way to use thermate alone and fulfill the rather obvious requirement that the two buildings that were hit with planes, would fall clearly in a sequential way, from top to bottom.

How can you make the buildings fall in this sequential way with thermate alone? Obviously it cannot be done.  Supposing we relax the sequential top-to-bottom requirement? Well we still could not get the building to fall symmetrically,  merely by completing the diagonal cutting of all girders at the same time. Because each girder needs to slip.  Clearly the Silverstein gang needed a range of techniques to get the job done, as is usual with any job. How did this dumb cunt conjure the idea that they had to use only one tool? When we know that all undertakings need more than one tool to be completed well? Can anyone name one undertaking that needs one tool alone to do well? Thats why we have a knife AND fork. Or some pistols, a rifle, a shotgun, a getaway car, balaclava’s and all sorts of other clobber.  So apparently this dumb cunt has it that the bigger the crime is the less tools you need to commit that crime well?  Obviously the contrary is the case.  The bigger the crime WITH A COVERT ASPECT TO IT, the more extensive your tool-box has to be.

The alleged debunking site is an evidence-free-zone. That is to say the disinformation crew running this site do not bring evidence or argument to bear for their own hypothesis.  Always this has to set alarm bells ringing. I’m not talking about requiring every fucker to reference some journal or other. No-one not getting paid is going to waste time on that. Anyone interested in what really happened, does not need to be directed to the authentication of well-known facts.  If you were interested you could go to the journal of 9/11 studies to have the basic facts authenticated, showing you where the source material is referenced. And you could back that up with your own eyes viewing some of the video evidence on youtube.

Lets look at the four stipulations, that the Juliani boys had to work to, again.

But as an aside how culpable is Rudi Juliani? Well he may have been duped like so many of the rest of us. Clearly he had an exemplary record in the New York police. I don’t know how a shadow government could “turn” a heretofore righteous person like this, and get his co-operation. But the thing is we have to assume that these guys have extreme expertise in entrapping people into going along with their schemes.  Some people cannot be threatened. Some people cannot be bribed. But almost no-one cannot be prevailed upon by a combination of threats, bribes, and flattery.  Some single men may be able to hold out against that combination. I cannot imagine holding out in the face of such an onslaught, since there are girls in my new family. I try and hold my head up high and be socially brave now, knowing that I may have to pull my horns in at a later date so that I’m not shifting the requirement of physical bravery onto others who did not bring anything upon themselves.

To be fair I’m not saying the case against Juliani approaches the strength of the case against Richard Clarke or Silverstein. But the crime scene was destroyed under his watch. And therefore its a case he has to answer.

So what were the four stipulations the Silverstein Crew had to work to?

1. The building had to fall as fast as possible.  So as close to free-fall as they could contrive the fall to be. Since free-fall was the maximum possible speed, something close to free-fall was the best they could aim for.

2. The buildings had to fall symmetrically, sequentially, and straight downwards.

3. The Clarke Cabal was to try and get rid of as much as the evidence during the actual fall.  Since the crime scene had to be cleared free of evidence under the nose, or with the connivance of Mayor Juliani ……… THEREFORE ………..  what evidence you could turn to dust in mid-air, you didn’t need to sneak out later.

4. Such explosives as had to be used, had to be as small as possible and as far from the outside windows as they could be contrived to be.

Okay so why the need for speed? Well that’s just the illusionist sleight of hand. The hand is quicker than the eye. If the building came down slowly it would be easy to see what was going on. But then there is no capacity to bring down buildings slow-and-symmetrical. This they could not do.

Well how about this need to bring the buildings down sequentially? Clearly if the buildings didn”t fall from the top to the bottom there was no possibility of blaming the fall on the planes.

Well how about the stipulation that the buildings had to be brought down SYMMETRICALLY:

To be able to clear away all the evidence that could not be dustified during the fall the Clarke Cabal had to contrive events such that any remaining evidence HAD TO FALL ON THE PROPERTY OF SILVERSTEIN.  Should the building tip as it fell, then the possibility was for evidence to fall on a string of other properties, sparking off parallel insurance and crime-scene investigations on all of those properties.  So there was a total requirement for the evidence to fall straight down so it could be cleared away without sparking off national standards for crime scenes and for engineering failures.

If the Clarke Cabal had not managed to clear off all the evidence with such great dispatch then a lot of regulations may have been triggered. Regulations to do with insurance, engineering failure just for example. So the operation to clear the evidence had to be on a hair-trigger prior to the false flag operation being carried out.

“3. The Clarke Cabal was to try and get rid of as much as the evidence during the actual fall.”

You can see how vital the directed energy weapons were to this requirement. Whereas there ought to have been 13 or so stories worth of rubble on the ground, at the end of the fall, there were only three. They managed to dissolve 10 or so COMPACTED-stories worth of evidence during the fall.  Also the directed energy weapons meant that the explosions could be placed further inside the building than otherwise.  As well by cutting down the mass of evidence from 13 stories to 3, and by bringing the explosions further to the center, what this meant is that you didn’t have girders landing outside the Silverstein property, and therefore being photographed and taken into the possession of other people ……. people not under the influence of the shadow governments plans.

The last thing these white-bread criminals would want, is to have a string of different property owners and insurance companies, analyzing girders that had been substantially melted, or with clear diagonal cuts to them.

So the directed energy weapons had to be around the perimeter, helping to set the pace of the collapse of the outside walls, but also systematically dustifying what would otherwise be an accumulating mass of falling concrete and girders.  The falling mass STARTED with a (non-compacted) block of about 14 floors. And under normal assumptions, this mass, would have gone on growing as it fell, supposing that it fell straight down.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

This is how it happened. Directed energy, thermate, AND explosives.

But if you think it happened another way explain your thesis and I’ll be glad to take a look at it.

Advertisements

Responses

  1. As it turned out it wasn’t that hard way back then to hijack a plane and if you so chose to fly it into a building. We know that happened. It was filmed and witnessed by billions.

    As to who was ultimately responsible. I agree we don’t have an adequate descriptor. Shadowy is as best as can be said. But it’s American in origin – as in causal – for sure.

    I think then and now the most pertinent question about the 9/11 attack was – why? And for most of the world’s population the answer remains the same: The US government, over decades of certain behaviours towards the rest of the world, brought it on the American people.

    It marked the beginning of the great and steady decline of this empire.

  2. Yes it was not hard to hijack planes back then. But thats not what happened. The story of the Arabs using box-cutters to hijack planes is just part of the script. There is no way they would have the building rigged up as they did, then be relying on a bunch of Arabs to hijack the planes for them.

    Boeing has said that its not possible to rig their planes up for remote control. So the planes used were not the planes that the narrative says they were. Those planes were destroyed and the passengers murdered elsewhere as part of the operation.

  3. Are you saying that no planes smashed into the Twin Towers?

    • Well you know the planes had flight numbers right? The two planes that crashed into the buildings were not the planes, or the type of planes, of those designated flight numbers. Those commercial passenger planes would have to have been disposed of elsewhere, and the passengers murdered, but not over Manhattan.

      • This is the first I’ve heard of this. All the relatives of the people on the planes have said they were on the planes that smashed into the Twin Towers. So how can you say the flight numbers had been changed. If that was the case we would have heard about this before not least from the relatives of the deceased.

      • Its very clear then, that faking peoples voices, is a capacity within the covert-operations tool-kit. Nor would we have reason to believe otherwise.

      • JUSTICE MUST BE DONE. WE HAVE TO GET FREE OF THE SHADOW GOVERNMENT. LOOK AT THE STEALING SPREE THEY’VE BEEN ON SINCE 2008? LOOK AT HOW THEY INTERFERE WITH THE ELECTORAL PROCESS OF OUR MOST IMPORTANT ALLY. LOOK HOW THEY CORRUPT THE MEDIA, AND KEEP PUSHING GLOBALISM. LOOK AT THE UNNECESSARY WARS THEY GET US INTO AND HOW THEIR LIES OBSTRUCT THE PROSECUTION OF THOSE WARS.

        NOT EVERYTHING THEY PERPETRATE IS BAD IN EVERY LAST RESPECT. I DO THINK WE NEEDED TO OVERTURN SADDAMS REGIME. BUT THAT COULD HAVE BEEN DONE WITH SO MUCH LESS COST IN BLOOD AND TREASURE IF THE SHADOW GOVERNMENT WEREN’T CORRUPTING THE ENTIRE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS.

  4. Webster Tarpley has identified around 60 drills that were in operation that morning. So it was easy to seamlessly incorporated these “drills” into the crime itself. So we have to assume that the Arabs getting on those planes was merely presented to them as a drill, or a trial run, to be triggered at some later date, and unlikely to include these guys killing themselves, at the date of the drill, or even into the future.

    Therefore we need to clear the memory of these kids of this crime. Yes yes they were probably extremists, and they probably were willing to work against American interests. But it is not the same level of dishonor to be doing a trial run-through, so as to be ready to co-ordinate some sort of action, during wartime, within the super-powers borders, as it is to just kill all these civilians, in an action, not part of a co-ordinated war.

    These kids, like many patsies, would surely have had some level of culpability, but its still not right to accuse them of things they were innocent of. They were the victims of this false flag, and not the perpetrators of it. Their families deserve to know that they were probably militants, but not the dirty rotten filth that the shadow government made them out to be.

  5. I find your repeated reference to “Arabs” not only irrelevant in the context, but troubling. Whether the on-the-ground perps were Arab or not is neither here nor there, unless you believe that all Arabs are physically and mentally inferior to everyone else, which of course is pure and unadulterated racism. And more importantly, from an objective position, untrue.

  6. Well we know that the perps weren’t Arabs. We know that it was a stand down, false flag, denial, and deception operation. We know this because of the way the buildings fell, at near free-fall acceleration. Which means they fell against a force that may have been as strong as cardboard, but that could not have been as strong as reinforced concrete and iron girders.

  7. “Well we know that the perps weren’t Arabs. We know that it was a stand down, false flag, denial, and deception operation. We know this because of the way the buildings fell, at near free-fall acceleration.”

    Sorry, but that appears to me to be a complete and utter non-sequitur. Again, your insistence that the perps weren’t Arab bears no relationship that I can see to the argument that it was a false flag op. It may well have been, but the nationality or ethnicity of the perps is irrelevant to your argument.

    • From a pure physics point of view the buildings could not have fallen, in the manner they fell, merely from planes flying into them.

      On top of that we know that there were explosions. So supposing you argue that the buildings came down with the planes alone, and did not need explosions. Well that would be wrong, from the point of view of physics. But its falsified by the explosions.

      Since we know that there were explosives used, and that the planes could not make the buildings fall in the manner they fell, then we know that its a false flag. Since only a false flag, could get inside the building, and have it all tripped out. No small collection of Arab kids could put together such an operation.

      • “From a pure physics point of view the buildings could not have fallen, in the manner they fell, merely from planes flying into them.”

        There is no such thing as “pure physics”. This is what I’ve been trying to tell you. You really should read Aldous Huxley (onwards).

      • Well its just force, mass, and acceleration we are talking about here. Since reinforced concrete and steel will produce a massive upward thrust, then the schedule of the fall had to be radically decelerated at every stage from free-fall. We only see that there is a minor deceleration from free-fall, implying that the falling mass encountered the most minor resistance. Not something these children-of-humanity could have engineered, either before or after their death.

  8. Well you tell me how Arab kids could have smuggled explosives into the buildings and arranged for the quick clearance of all the evidence?

    • I don’t agree with your premise. That Arab (irrelevant) kids (irrelevant and unproved) blew up the building.

      • Right but we saw the buildings fall or disappear. So when we come to ask HOW they fell and went away, we have a number of theories. We then go to see if the theories are possible. And one theory …. the Arabs-Alone theory, turns out to be completely impossible. So we can rule that theory out.

        Then we have to jump to other potential theories. And we note that to be right another theory has to account for the explosions. We want to find out what happened. So we don’t say “it could have come down without explosives” since that doesn’t explain the explosions. And then you keep moving along from there.

        Once you know that explosives had to be brought into the buildings, then you see that this is beyond the capacity of even the KGB to undertake. So we have to interpolate a shadow government. Since there is no chance that even a President could hope to pull such a thing off.

  9. One thing follows on the heels of another. If the buildings could not have fallen, in the manner that they did, as a result of planes hitting them, they had to fall in some other manner. Theories saying that they fell without explosives, don’t account for the explosives. So once we know they fell with explosives, and other tools, we know for a fact that the Arab kids weren’t the perps. So we don’t assume then that they did more than we see them doing on the security cameras. Which just amounts to them converging on a few flights they had booked into.

  10. “Its very clear then, that faking peoples voices, is a capacity within the covert-operations tool-kit. Nor would we have reason to believe otherwise.”

    No, faking voices to loved ones is not an easy thing to do. People know other people not just from the timbre and tone and register but from so many other cues.

    And anyway, the scenario you paint is far too convoluted to be plausible or operational. As with a lie, the most effective technique is to keep as close as possible to the truth. You insert too many baroque details and variables from the main narrative. It just doesn’t pass the realism test.

    • I don’t say it was easy. I say we can infer that it is not beyond the capacity of covert ops to do. That is not the same as being easy. Only that covert ops can convert one persons voice to another persons voice.
      We are not talking about long and drawn-out conversations here.

      • So why bother to remove passengers from the plane and substitute another empty plane?

      • There is no way you can control the original planes remotely. And no way you can get people, themselves duped, to carry out an operation for you, and not expect things to go horribly wrong.

  11. “So once we know they fell with explosives, and other tools, we know for a fact that the Arab kids weren’t the perps.”

    Another non-sequitur. Why not. Any moron can use explosives. And who invented gunpowder anyway?

    • Any moron can use one explosive. But to make a building fall symmetrically you have to cut all the main supports within a fraction of a second of eachother. And to make the building fall symmetrically AND sequentially, is an whole other level of complexity. Beyond the scope of Arab kids who are already dead.

  12. Graeme, please answer my question.

    “No small collection of Arab kids could put together such an operation.”

    What is being Arab in any way significant to your argument?

  13. Its less clumsy then saying “Egyptian and Saudi youngsters.”

    • Are you being disingenuous?

      No, I meant why do you think any nationality is relevant to your argument?

  14. nationality is not the right word, but you know what I mean. You put “Arab” front and centre of your argument against the facts as we know it. I ask again and please answer sincerely and in good faith and honestly. What bearing does being Arab as opposed to say European or Chinese or Polynesian have on this event?

    • Right but I don’t want to shy away from the reality that some people are blaming Arabs for 9/11 and Jews for the war in Iraq. I’ll let these guys shy away from their Jew-baiting by branding these people Neo-Cons. But I have seen through their prevarications on this matter, and in any case I choose to be as blatant as possible. What I am arguing here is that these kids be cleared of these murders, and their memory be only tarnished to the extent of real evidence against them. They were murdered by this false flag. They and their families were amongst the victims of this operation. And they deserve to be recognised as the victims rather than the killers.

      • I’d agree with that.

      • I see what you are doing now re religion/ethnicity. I’m sorry if I misunderstood your motive.

      • Well if you followed me around a bit at Catallaxy you would have seen me being very flippant in my talk of Arabs this and Arabs that, and so you had every reason to think that I was being dismissive and racist both. But this time I had taken the logic a bit further since we just don’t have the evidence that these people, however militant they dreamed, had acted that dirty. Some of the kids named didn’t make the flights and are still at home. The ones who were murdered probably thought they were involved in some sort of trial-run, to get used to the idea of co-ordinating matters in a situation of full-scale war.

  15. “What I am arguing here is that these kids be cleared of these murders, and their memory be only tarnished to the extent of real evidence against them. They were murdered by this false flag. They and their families were amongst the victims of this operation. And they deserve to be recognised as the victims rather than the killers.”

    I’d agree with that in the context of my first comment on this thread.

  16. Actually Birdflaps/Birdlab/JC/Jason Soon/Mark Hill – *you’re* weak as piss.

    You’re cowards.

    Your cowardice seeps from your politics like a putrid stain.

    The saving grace is that few people read your shite. And it’s hilarious that you so infrequently wonder why no women post on your blog except for one or two lemon-mouthed dipsos, bogans and intellectual lightweights.

    Graeme, I salute you once again. I’m not interested in the engineering stuff (I guess some women are, bless their diverse souls) but I agree with you that responsibility for the whole event can firmly be placed at the feet of the US “shadow government”.

  17. And it really beggars belief that the 10th anniversary of this can pass with no mention that I know of in the Western media of M. Atta and co. Has anyone written their bios? Where are their eulogies? I want to know who they were. To understand them.

    But we are denied that. They’ve been obliterated.

    Shame U.S. Shame.

    • Name one. And its critical review.

    • JC, you’re too stupid to be commenting on this blog.

      Put your own house in order, please your wife, look after your kid, and stop vomiting inside your own body and people might consider taking anything you say seriously.

  18. Yeah it is a shame. Atta was an architecture student and may have one day become known for putting buildings up rather than this false accusation of destroying them. Its clear he was working with spooks for one reason or another but its not at all clear that he ever went so far as to kill anyone. It may be that he was going to cut free from this spook game once he had set himself up. I cannot think of a single crime he went through with. But he had a mug-shot that looked the part. He returned a rental car and pointed out a fault with it in consideration of the next customer.

    We ought to support his Dad who is still in disbelief at the accusations against his son. That his son could look pretty spooky when false accusations had been leveled at him is no reason not to give Atta and his Dad our base level dues.

    • Well said. I didn’t know that. Your empathy is commendable.

      • Yes very well said indeed, Mr B.

        Poor Mo. He was a good bloke. Very devout.

        But they have done him like they did our Carl, who was killed by the Shadow Government (ie Vic Pigs) and then had it covered up.

        Someday I hope Mohammed Atta and big Carl alike are recognised as fair dinkum good blokes.

      • Right. Exactly. Well not quite. Its very easy to understand how Carl STARTED up the killing. Thats what happens when you shoot someone in the guts and then get your pig mates to shake his father down. The choice is either to back down to vermin or thin their numbers out. But this is surely a corrupting process if you are locked into a corrupting business. Its not likely that you can deliver justice under those circumstances and still stay a reasonable moral fellow.

        Atta has no known crimes to his memory and has to be given the benefit of the doubt. The boxcutter story is wildly implausible.

  19. Where were you on 9/11? And what did you feel and think when you heard and saw it?

    • I was at work. And the first people me and my supervisor thought of was the Palestinians, since they were the people fielding suicide bombers. My supervisor said “If some bunch of foreigners tried to set up a new country here, I’d be shooting at them, but if these guys are going to do THIS, then they’ve lost my support” or something close to that.

  20. I was bushwalking in the Grampians in far western Victoria. Staying in a hut near Hall’s Gap and woke up about 7am and put on the tv to check the day’s temp. It was clear by then according to the commentary that AQ had done it. But that was of less interest or concern to me than what I expected to be the US response which chilled me to the bone. And so it came to pass. For which history and all future generations will never forgive or forget.

    • The Grampians is a rock-climbers Mecca.

      • The Grampians are very mysterious. But then the whole of Australia is an indescribably beautiful wakeful dream.

  21. “It was clear by then according to the commentary that AQ had done it.”

    That was all the media force-feeding that Richard Clarke and others had involved themselves in. That’s the story they taught everyone but there was nothing to it.

    • Well, I do remember at the time thinking “yeah, sure, fellas”, followed by “how very convenient”, followed by holy shit, may god have mercy on us all.

      Species shame was a factor too. H/T some forgotten writer.

  22. It’s worth quoting in full, and is perhaps the best thing Martin Amis ever wrote.

    “Our best destiny, as planetary cohabitants, is the development of what has been called “species consciousness” — something over and above nationalisms, blocs, religions, ethnicities … I have been trying to apply such a consciousness, and such a sensibility. Thinking of the victims, the perpetrators, and the near future, I felt species grief, then species shame, then species fear. ~ Martin Amis on the terrorist attacks of 11th September 2001

    I forgot to mention the fear. It was visceral.

  23. About 1 hour 55 minutes in we have people talking about the psychological reasons why people reject the evidence:

  24. Jason Soon is extremely strange. He quotes Homer saying something perfectly factual. Then he says: “Shorter Homer – those Nazis were so much nicer than the commies”

    What is your point Jason? Where do you disagree with Homer and why?

    • Yes they were good weren’t they. Of course old Adolf had some funny ideas and sometimes got a bit carried away in all the excitement but in the scheme of things the Nazis were pretty good blokes.

      I’d like to think that our Carl, Mohammed and Hermann, Josef, Adolf and the rest of the crew are up in heaven sharing a cold beer, a glass of schnapps and a cup of tea (for Mo) and sharing tales about the one that got away.

  25. Nick Rockefeller needs to be hauled in for questioning over 9/11 as well.

  26. The cohesiveness of Catallaxy has reached an whole new level. Its as if the place has been taken over by a group of inbred sibling-marrying, Melbournian Jewish separatists. But think what they are being cohesive about? Their latest mania has been to deny the reality of the interaction of force, mass and acceleration, when it comes to the 9/11 false flag operation. Truly it was an astonishing thing. You cannot see it now because the debate was so ruthlessly screwed down and eliminated.

    One has to wonder whether Catallaxians generally see their interests in shielding the perpetrators and blaming the mass murder on the Arabs? Well if they are crony-loving big corporatists, I guess they do have an interest in that. Because we can see that if corporatism can lead to a lethal shadow government, then the idea is to get rid of this corporatism with even more ruthlessness than the perpetrators displayed on 9/11.

  27. Whats this Mark L from Brisbanes story. He seems to be the most clubby of all of them. I thought he was considered a bit of a running joke at Catallaxy, But he comes out as this deep defender of Catallaxian groupthink.

    Incredibly I’ve not been able to explain to these guys that we are selling the farm. You would think this was undeniable. I would have thought I’d get the chance to explain the financial imbalances that have lead to us selling the farm. This is very hard to do when the group cohesiveness is such that they have an axiomatic position, shared by every one of them, that we aren’t selling the farm and that we cannot be selling the farm.

  28. Kevin MacDonald talking about the problem of Jewish intellectuals. He seems to be talking about the same sort of insular clubbyness that has developed over at Catallaxy:

    • ” the problem of Jewish intellectuals”

      Sweet Jesus you’ve jumped a prehistoric mega shark with rocket boosters.

      CLEARLY THEY CAN BE A PROBLEM. THEY GAVE US PSYCHOANALYSIS FOR EXAMPLE. THAT STAYED A RULING DOGMA FOR A HUNDRED YEARS WITHOUT MUCH IN THE WAY OF EVIDENCE. THE WERE FORCEFULLY BEHIND MANY DYSFUNCTIONS OF THE HARD LEFT. A FEW OF THEM IN THE MODERN ERA HAVE TAKEN ECONOMICS TO A NEW LEVEL. BUT THATS A MATTER OUTSIDE THE MAINSTREAM. I’M NOT COMPLAINING ABOUT THEIR BRILLIANCE AS PEOPLE. WHAT KEVIN MACDONALD SEEMS TO BE TALKING ABOUT IS CERTAIN BAD HABITS THEY SEEM TO HAVE TO DO WITH NETWORKING AND LOCKING BAD THINKING IN.

      WHATS INTERESTING IS THAT THESE SAME BAD HABITS NOW APPEAR TO BE SPREADING.

      • Glad to see you are really sticking it to the Jews, Mr B. Good on ya.

      • I wouldn’t say that. I would rather want to look at certain group-tendencies without malice. We have to think of these things for their own benefit as much as anything else. If they are above criticism you would expect them to act like spoilt children.

      • Psychoanalysis? Some might say you’d benefit from one, Mr Bird.

      • No-one benefits from bad science except its purveyors. If some people have gotten good results from seeing the advocates, then its just the outcome of the experience that the practitioner has built up and he would have done equally as well if not better, under a more scientific paradigm.

      • I know you don’t hold much truck with Darwin or Marx, but I’d put these two along with Freud up there with the most important, influential intellectuals of the past century and a half.

        Psychoanalytical theory is not a dogma but a series of insights about human emotion and consciousness.

        And it’s also said – and I’d agree – that Freud’s work didn’t add qualitatively to what the three great tragedians of classical Athens, Euripides, Aeschylus and Sophocles demonstrated about human nature.

      • They are the three most influential for sure. But not necessarily to good effect. If we were to understand Marxes critique to have been of corporatism or of the way society works more generally, rather than to have been a criticism of the voluntary society, then a lot of good could have come out of it for sure.

      • How about Hitler? He was pretty smart too.

      • I’M CALLING UPON YOU TO ADMIT THAT YOU CANNOT UNDERSTAND SIMPLE CONCEPTS LIKE:

        FORCE ….. MASS ….. AND ACCELERATION.

      • “They are the three most influential for sure.”

        I see you didn’t rate Einstein in your top 3, oh that’s right, he was a dummy and just a science worker.

        HE WAS AN INTELLIGENT, CREATTIVE BLOKE, WHO HAD SOME PROSPECTS, BUT HE WAS NEVER A FULL-BLOWN SCIENTIST.

        SORRY YOU HAD TO HEAR IT FROM ME BUT THE FACT IS WE ARE NOT INTERESTED IN SCIENCE AS AN EXTENSION OF THE CULT OF PERSONALITY.

    • DO THEY HAVE FORMAL MEMBERSHIP? WHY WOULD YOU ASSUME SO? WHAT IS THE POINT OF THE QUESTION.

      DAVID ROCKEFELLER WOULD HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED TO BE A MEMBER OF THE SHADOW GOVERNMENT. LARGELY BY HIS OWN ADMISSION.

      • Who else Graeme. A 96 year old man can’t do very much on his own.

      • How could I possibly know such a thing? 9/11 proves totally the existence of a shadow government. But it tells us absolutely nothing about its membership.

        People who talk about these things talk about the Rothschilds, the Rockefellers, the various foundations, and the European and American banks. Rockefeller has said that the bankers will do a better job of running things than nation states.

  29. “No-one benefits from bad science except its purveyors. If some people have gotten good results from seeing the advocates, then its just the outcome of the experience that the practitioner has built up and he would have done equally as well if not better, under a more scientific paradigm.”

    Graeme, you’re making the common mistake of confusing or conflating psychotherapy with psychoanalytic theory. The latter, which is the core of Freud’s contribution, constitutes the ideas of repression, the unconscious, the role of sexuality, death, fear, dream life, etc. Much of the knowledge that Freud elaborated on about these has entered common parlance and understanding without people realising and it’s influenced everything from politics, the secret service, management, film, all the arts, parenting, personal relationships, and so much more.

    • Look Freud would be fine if his work had been treated as the speculation that it was. If he had merely been seen to be a fine essayist then there would have been no problem.

      But where I think the MacDonald and other criticism comes from is the way him and his coterie got about locking, what amounted to creative philosophical musings, into this framework where people were supposed to treat it like hard science or be banished to the outer dark.

      Its this sort of behavior that I take McDonald to be whaling-on, rather than on the source material.

      • Well, I think you will find that most “Freudians” today writing about Freud’s ideas in one way or another, or using them in their creative endeavours, or to underpin other theories, do indeed agree that Freud’s (and his descendants’) work IS philosophical speculation and imagining rather than hard science.

      • Right. Then thats probably an excellent and healthy situation. But I don’t think thats the situation that has always prevailed in universities and the medical profession.

      • Look Freud would be fine if his work had been treated as the speculation that it was. If he had merely been seen to be a fine essayist then there would have been no problem.

        Exactly Graeme. The same goes for Jung. Truth be known, Freudian and Jungian ideas had more currency with Hollywood than psychiatry. Even Frasier, with one being a Freudian and other a Jungian, is hopelessly misconstruing the right approach to understanding human behavior.

  30. I think Marx’s work was of the way society works more generally. He’s difficult I suppose though rewarding. I’ve not only read but studied and discussed in a group a lot of his writing including Das Kapital (though that was a while ago) and I can’t say his writings are something I dip into a lot.

    Re Freud and his theoretical descendants: they have systematised and explained the mechanics and possible causes or origins of a whole range of group behaviours and beliefs, from anti-semitism to many other forms of group-think or prejudice that can be broadly described as racist or sexist or homophobic, etc. in content. So for these reasons, many people of the Right do not like psychoanalytic theory because the Right uses these forms of group think as part of its political arsenal.

  31. There’s one really cool writer, a best-seller even, Adam Phillips, who is a Freudian. I hesitate to recommend him because he is a confounding writer almost everything he says is counterintuitive until you think about it and then you see the germ of the truth. He annoys the hell out of me too and most other people I’ve recommended him to, but I guess his attraction is that he writes about quotidian stuff in a really deep way.

    • Right. I’ll try and remember that name. Phillip Adams backwards. Probably its a much better school of thought now that its not dogma within the formal academy. Like there are branches of Ayn Rand intellectual descendants that are far more easygoing and well-rounded then other branches that hang on every turn of phrase of hers.

      Really what we are talking about is the same ossification you had with Aristotle in the middle ages. And he really was brilliant. But there is no way to stop the brilliance of a fellow being turned to dogma by his followers.

  32. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Phillips_%28psychologist%29

    He’s said that psychoanalysis is closer to poetry than science which is the point I was making.

  33. On monogamy

    http://www.salon.com/feb97/monogamy970219.html

  34. Did you know that George W. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld are so personally responsible for the crimes and horrors that followed 9/11 that they cannot leave US soil for fear of being arrested on war crimes charges? And that polls have shown that half of New Yorkers believe that at some level the government knew in advance of the 9/11 attacks and deliberately allowed them to happen?

    The events themselves remain shrouded in secrecy and cover-up. It was reported last week that the records of the 9/11 commission which issued its report in 2004 -documents that were supposed to be made public, albeit in heavily redacted form – remain sealed at the National Archive.

    That commission, in any case, was tasked not with an objective investigation of the attacks and their antecedents, but with an orchestrated cover-up of evidence that elements within the US intelligence apparatus had foreknowledge of and complicity in these attacks.

    We know that a number of those involved in the attacks had been subjects of intense surveillance by the CIA and the FBI for as long as two years before 9/11. Last month, an interview was released in which former chief White House counterterrorism advisor Richard Clarke charged that the CIA knew well in advance of the attacks that two of the hijackers had entered the US and deliberately concealed that information from other agencies.

    One thing is certain, in the 10 years since the attacks, not a single individual in US intelligence circles, the military or the administrations of either George W. Bush or Bill Clinton has been held accountable with so much as a demotion for what was ostensibly the most catastrophic intelligence and security failure in US history. The unavoidable implication is that to hold anyone accountable would inevitably lead to recriminations that would threaten to uncover damning evidence of state involvement.

    • It wasn’t just an intelligence failure. It was an American intelligence crime.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: