9/11

[CarGuy65]

Well....... Since others have made it clear how they feel about it, my turn. I do not believe in the conspiracy theories or the "truthers" I do not think the government at the time ( or since for that matter!) had the intelligence to pull it off. With that being said, The whole event hit me very hard and I had nightmares for months after. My sister and I have spent every 9/11 together since. It hit her just as hard if not more. We have watched all the programs many times and tried to see it from the truthers point of view and we just can not see it. The sad thing to me is how patriotic America was for a few years after and I hear a lot of "oh yea... it is the anniversary isn't it? I almost forgot". It makes me sad! I think what happened is pretty much the way it happened. It is my opinion, and I am entitled to it. But you know what they say about opinions and all!

[Steve]

...The sad thing to me is how patriotic America was for a few years after and I hear a lot of "oh yea... it is the anniversary isn't it? I almost forgot". It makes me sad!...

Yes, it is sad. It is also a fact of life. Exactly how many people are still living who remember this country's fight for independence from the Crown? What about the Spanish American war? The civil war? World wars I & II? Vietnam? The crash of the Hindenburg? The assassination of JFK?

My point, without more history, is that time tends to erode traumatic events. As the people die who were directly part of these conflicts and tragedies, so dies the intense emotion surrounding the event. We may remember what we are taught in history, and we have a special day to honor those who gave life and limb for this country, but for the vast majority of people these are nebulous recollections of long passed history. One day even the events of 9/11 will fall into such a place in time. Already the youngest members born since then do not have the same sense of horror we experienced that day. Even more sad, think of all the people who have passed into time, faces and names unknown, since the beginning of mankind. Like it or not, that is the destiny for the majority.

-------------------------------------------------

Now, on topic. I'm going to excerpt from a letter I once wrote to a friend.

Common sense and tolerance don't seem to be a part of government anymore. It feels as if we've slipped back into the golden age of the robber barons, legal slavery, and sold my soul to the company store. There is still a large branch of the KKK, white supremacists not very far of here. And don't even get me started on how the republican party has completely morphed into something unrecognizable from the GOP of our youth...
...This country scares the shit out me of now. It isn't like the (past), when civil disobedience was a practical, brave, way to gain attention to the truth. These days police in droves arrive on the scene in military grade vehicles, with 21st century military grade armor and weapons which they don't hesitate to use because the blue wall of silence, that brotherhood of cops protecting cops, has become steel instead of bricks and mortar that can be chipped away. All the racism and discrimination still exist. And the more the courts are packed with conservative justices, bought by business and supported by politicians also bought by business... it all scares the hell out of me. This country was such a great idea. It's too bad the founding fathers didn't factor in man's near absolute greed and obsession for power at any cost. Although I suppose hoping for utopia would have been too much to ask for realistically..."

I later retracted my use of the term utopia as a poor choice of wording. Utopia equates to ideal, which is too close a definition to perfect. Almost nothing that I am aware of is perfect, and I dislike hyperbole and absolute terms without reasonable qualifiers.

Another excerpt from another letter:

As for our government, and any other, I pretty much know that the public has never received any truth. Versions of it, perhaps, but the larger scale moves, not so much. Privacy is a thing of generations past. Anything they want to monitor is possible. Emails with certain words are immediately flagged. Telephone conversations listened to, recorded. You can surely bet that the Muslim population in Detroit are watched more closely than child molesters in Sunday school. Oh wait... those are called Catholic priests, right? The short and long of it is that I no longer trust my government. Money, power, and operations so deeply buried within its structure make such trust impossible.

Before members draw conclusions, I would state that I have a deep and abiding respect for those that lost their lives on that day, including the families of the fallen. In addition, the soldiers who laid down their lives for this country also must be paid the debt of loss, and injury. The price of those days, and years to come, was terribly, awfully too high,

Those things addressed, due respect given, my policy toward any government is distrust. People may be told versions of the truth, but certainly not the entire story, nor the true motivation behind events. Certainly it would be a small group of individuals who undertook such manipulative actions, otherwise it would be impossible to keep such diversions of truth from being exposed. It is inevitable that not very many individuals know the details that steer this country, and other countries, toward the publicly made plausible explanations when a much less simple explanation lay beneath. My belief is that no act is beneath those in power from committing, no matter how heinous, to achieve a specific goal. These goals may or may not be exclusively for the benefit of our country. The ends justify the means and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Such is my distrust of this goverment.

I was taught a valuable lesson in school. An instructor spent nearly an entire class period explaining a psychological theory of a man he named Dr. Peter Simon. Near the end of class the instructor asked, "How are you sure this lesson is true?". Remember, when I was in school Google, indeed the internet, was not even a glimmer in some programmer's eye.

We were indignant. If it weren't true why spend the entire period, people desperately scribbling notes for a possible test, if the lesson was false? It had to be true. He was a teacher and wouldn't intentionally give us false information. Some students felt the lesson content was sufficiently sound to believe it true.

Just before the end of the hour the instructor cackled to himself, admitting the whole lecture was false. Now we were bewildered. "Why would you deliberately mislead us?", we asked.

"Never take anything you are told, you see, you hear, smell or touch as the truth. No matter who tells you what may be fact learn to question everything. While Occam's razor may be proven, it is not infallible. Question everything,"

With that the hour was up.

[Pix]

I thought I'd share this as I expect it would be appreciated by some (especially Stevie):




Just to be clear (so I can't be called on it later), that's not exactly my perspective, though I think he makes many good points. I'm sharing it because I think some here will like it. And if you're all patriotic, don't give up on it when the character first rips into the idea that the US is the greatest nation in the world, wait for where he goes with it.

ETA: Damn, I hate it when they won't let you play it (guess they got to be sure they get every thumbs up and comments possible...), and though I normally refuse to share such vids at all on general principle, I'll make an exception for this one:

[MikeW]

"Never take anything you are told, you see, you hear, smell or touch as the truth. No matter who tells you what may be fact learn to question everything. While Occam's razor may be proven, it is not infallible. Question everything,"

That's exactly right. Here is one of my infamous mottos (gained from having been somewhat down the intelligence/counter-intelligence rabbit hole): Who ever controls your perception of reality controls you. Whatever you believe to be true will be the basis upon which you make your decisions, regardless of whether it is true or not.

There's nothing "conspiratorial" about it. This is the way it works in ANY chain of command. Your superior tells you something and you *have* to believe that what they are telling you is accurate information. If it weren't that way (in most instances at least), how could chains of command operate?

And a chain of command isn't just military -- it is bureaucratic. It needn't be a "senior officer," it is anyone who is in a position of authority above you. Whatever information they give you as a general rule you trust that information. You don't have much choice if you want to maintain your position. But you don't know what your superior knows -- that is how it works both in government and in corporations -- and in education and everything else. You only know what you've been told.

Now, obviously, there is more to it than this. It isn't that 'cut and dry'. But it is far more like this than not.

This is especially true when you're dealing with "matters of national security." There are laws that govern who gets to see what information.

How many people here, for example, know that (according to Freedom of Information requests filed by "truthers") NONE of the plane wreckage from 9/11 has been positively identified by the NTSB as having come from the planes that we're told flew into the buildings or crashed at Shanksville? How many people even *know* this weird fact? Normally when there is a plane wreck, the NTSB gathers all the wreckage, looks at the serial numbers of the plane parts (all the parts have maintenance records), takes them to a hanger and reassembles them. BUT in the case of 9/11 that didn't happen because these weren't 'accidents'. The plane wreckage was collected by the NTSB but it was under the investigative umbrella of the FBI. Thus, the NTSB didn't cross check *any* of the wreckage numbers. Someone submitted several FIOW (freedom of information act requests) first to the NTSB and later the FBI to find out what procedures they used to identify the wreckage. Eventually the answer came back from the FBI that NO procedures were used. Why not? Because (according to the FBI) "The identities of the planes were never in question." In other words, they don't need to cross check because they already know the answer.

Does this sound like a forensic investigation to you? When does one *assume* anything in such an investigation? We have planes that wen't off grid (off radar) for quite a long time -- especially Flight 77. How can anyone be certain that a plane didn't land somewhere and another take off in its place? Once it was back on radar with its transponder turned off, there would be no way to be 100% certain that it *was* the plane that had gone off radar. This is especially true for Flight 77 that allegedly hit the Pentagon. Well, yeah, one can *assume* it was Flight 77 -- but it is an assumption. So, why would't the NTSB or the FBI want to verify this assumption? (My personal *belief* is that they DID check BUT this information is so highly classified they can't even tell us it IS classified -- but I say this is a "belief" because I can't prove it.)

Those who suggest that "the government" is incompetent aren't really thinking this through. Of course there are areas of incompetence within any government or any chain of authority. But there is always way more going on in any bureaucracy than those in lower positions know, too. Always. That's how they work. They are compartmentalized. You only know what you're allowed to know -- what you "need" to know to do your job. The BIG decisions are not made by "then little people." They're made by those at the highest levels -- in the case of government, those with high level intelligence clearances who have access to classified information. Thus the "reasons" for their decisions may or may not be what we're told. If the "reason" is classified under the auspices of "national security" -- they can only tell us what they're allowed to tell us.

[Virge]

The OP attempted to start a thread about a day when 3,000 lives were lost in a tragedy that left no one unaffected and will never be forgotten. It was a day when planes were skyjacked to become instruments for narrow minded political purposes -- not too much unlike the way this thread was skyjacked for the same purposes.

What happened was wrong, inconsiderate and just plain rude.

With that off my chest. This is all I have to say about what happened here and the rationale behind it.

A rational understanding of conspiracy theories.

The Romans were famous for being skeptics. Their skepticism was very rational and analytical. In their age when rumors of political intrigues and conspiracies were as numerous as they are today, skeptics asked, “Cui bono?” Who benefits?

This phrase has come down to us through Cicero, a Roman who was famous as a politician, lawyer and inventor or many conspiracy theories himself that he himself benefited from.The answer is almost always the same. The people who stand to benefit from rumors and conspiracy theories are the enemies of who ever the rumor or conspiracy theory is about.

It’s worth mentioning advice Cicero received from his brother, Quintus on how to conduct a successful political campaign. The entire pamphlet, in both Latin and many varying translations, is online and is part of any political strategist’s tool kit. Here are two lines from the famous pamphlet by Quintus Tullius Cicero over 2000 years ago.

“Contrive any sort of rumor of scandal against your adversary for crime, corruption or immorality….” “Seek out incompetence and private correspondences to exhibit as evidence of subversive intentions and conspiracies.”

The idea behind ‘cui bono’ is far reaching and goes hand in hand with the law of parsimony, “the simplest explanation is generally the correct one and the most complex explanation is generally the wrong one.’ There’s never been a simple conspiracy theory. In fact one of the consistent elements of them is such a degree of complexity no incompetent government could ever administer them to the degree required to satisfy the minds of the people who concocted them.

Another aspect of conspiracy theories is that they almost universally interpret discretion as evidence of cover-ups and conspiracies to mislead the public. Police use tremendous discretion in documenting crimes in order to protect innocent victims and witnesses as well as to preserve harmony within the general population. The military practices discretion to prevent the naïve general population from knowing the horrors of wars. Governments practice discretion in spreading information based on national security, and what the public needs to know, not what they want to know. It’s not much different than how parents explain sex to a curious four year old or a fourteen year old.

Overall the general public doesn’t have the capacity to comprehend much of what is kept from them by police, military and government. Much like the counterparts in Rome 2000 years ago, their concerns extend to reasonable immediate comforts, security, ‘bread and circuses’ -- or in the 21st century televised entertainment and the perks of various social programs administered by incompetent bureaucracies. If the average person knew every detail of every crime they’d form vigilante mobs or become reactionary panic driven neurotics. If they knew the details of wars they’d have nightmares. If they knew the details of every discrete government treaty negotiation or interactions between politicians they’d be out of their wheelhouses.

But even discretion, the cautious dispensation of information, is not evidence of conspiracies --- except to people seeking any reason whatsoever to malign the people they detest in government. For them the thought process is, “I detest them therefore they must be guilty of this.” Not “let’s apply some ciu bono and the law of parsimony to this before I swallow this.”

Cui bono? Who benefits from convincing people to believe in a conspiracy theory? It’s always obvious once you remember to ask before you step into one.

[Uneunsae]

It's just as important to discuss the events surrounding 9/11 as it is to respect those who lost their lives, regardless of what one believes.

[Steve]

Thanks for that Pix.

Follow me if you will.

This video Pix posted is one of the reasons I love art. The product of art, its end result, is supposed to evoke feeling. A feeling, we may like, and many we may not. These feelings should, in some manner, push us to examine ourselves, question what and where we fit in the world, wonder if we have been mistaken by some situation, some supposed fact, some way of looking at life. Should we reexamine ourselves to find flaws within our long held beliefs, or were we correct all the time? How many of us are willing to do the digging, bring to light the joy and pain of our lives, ask the difficult questions we need to ask, and then proceed to look for answers?

Art evokes mystery as well. How many times have you heard pondered the reason for the Mona Lisa's sly smile? What does that mean? Why is it there? Art isn't just a canvass with pretty colors for people to wander about in museums debating, form, context, quality of execution, etc. Those are the people who set themselves as knowledgeable experts, readily able to discern crap from Christmas, all knowing bastions of the quality of imagination. Common wisdom is only slightly more productive: art is subjective, "I know what I like", or beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Truisms perhaps, but none provide an answer to mysteries in art. To utter any such statement is to point out the obvious without really answering the question. It is circular logic, which is often good enough for the madding crowds.

This video, which Pix posted with me in mind (I am humbled that you thought of me Pix) and which I enjoy for many reasons, purports to give answers to questions most Americans would rather not hear, would find offensive, would rather believe the bill of goods sold to us by time and media, than examine for honest answers. For those reasons alone I enjoy the words, crafted by an artist, a word smith, because writing is an art form. The answers he gives make us pause, make us feel, and were we smart, make us want to dig for answers. Answers not necessarily provided by polls, by media or word of mouth, by not being lazy and spoon fed what a majority is led to believe or what might have been purposely crafted by people who slant answers to persuade us to believe what they want. Answers are found by doing the hard work of finding out reality.

For the record, although I love and feel honesty in his answers in the video, I still need to ask the questions... Is he right? Should I believe what he says just because he says it?

Everyone one of us must draw our "line in the sand". Relentlessly pursuing the truth can lead to madness. Not many have the time or inclination for such a quixotic quest and the windmills are too often tampered with, made to seem as one thing, but have been altered to hide a truth.

I would ask though, as I have pointed out to many inexperienced souls who find their way to this forum to ask for help, is it really wise to make immediate decisions in the midst of intense emotional upheaval? Most often we leap before we look. Given little time with which to make a choice, many if not most people, choose an answer, a truth, which they are reluctant to part with because the initial answer chosen has become engraved in their system of belief. What was a short term solution often becomes a safe harbor to anchor in.

The thing about taking time to look at a problem or an answer, is that it gives us some perspective, a distance with which we are able to look through ideas outside our own experience, to sort the truth from the lies. We may assume an immediate postulate when provided no time to ask questions, when faced with unimaginable reality, but if we make that postulate a immutable truth, that guess, that spoon fed answer, as the end all be all truth, we do a disservice to logic. We fall prey to man's embedded ego that what we believe is correct, no matter what evidence is possible, we are simply right. It is the nature of our ego. We hold the answers fed to us so closely that no perspective is allowed, there is no room to consider an alternative. Whether tampered with to cause a reaction, to misdirect a belief, or a need to feel we know all that we need, our ego maintains that what our five senses tell us is enough immediate information with which to base answers.

Las Vegas magicians count upon this instinct. Illusionists depend upon the validity of Occam's razor which must be thwarted through purposeful misdirection to achieve an end. People delight that magicians end results are harmless misdirection, meant to amaze and befuddle.

Now allow yourself to envision how, aided by floods of quickly obtained information disseminated by various media sources and pundits with good intention, used to propagate this misdirection. Helped by strong emotion which clouds good judgement and dragged out by months of reminder, remembered and constantly replayed images, pain of loss, and horror of the resulting action, intelligently confounded information can point us in the toward of the easiest answer. Meanwhile an underlying misdirection of truth is perpetuated, nearly unknown.

People who have the courage and ask important, unanswered questions are scoffed at when mob mentality wield the torches and pitchforks of that closely held, cultivated belief carved into their ego, now thoroughly known as the truth. Nonbelievers are forced into silence. Ridicule and hate by peers and large groups of people are emotions designed to hurt, to cause self doubt, add a weight to heavy to shoulder. Effective tools to silence a truth. Difficult to gather a support group -one not thought of as a group of delusional fools- to help anyone stand long enough to face throngs of hardened believers and ask important questions challenging ideas which have long been cultivated of as immutable fact.

I find myself thinking of parallels of when I was in school in a small town, among many like minded and afraid to speak, to point out the truth, ask important questions of people who could not see past years of hate shrouded by the gentle wording of religion. Ask any gay teenager ready to take his own life to verify this concept.

So then, we are left with popular belief. The easiest answer is the most obvious truth, covert misdirection an impossible concept unless it is expected. The lady in the box has been sawed in half, although her head and feet still move. The statue of liberty has been made to disappear. The card you randomly select, tell no one about from a new unopened deck is in fact the card hidden inside your bra. Go to the show an be amazed at the illusion. Try to figure out how it was done. You can do that because you know that it is entertainment. You know ahead of time that sleight of hand when done well is utterly believable.

Then step out of the theatre and resume your belief that you are back in reality. That what your senses register is truth. That, unless the sleight of hand is not quite perfect, the coincidence too transparent to not be suspect, the chain of events so obvious Miss Marple is unneeded to deduce the truth, all is well in the world, and that what you see is what you get. By all means, take persons, places, things, situations, etc. at face value influenced by popular and commonly propagated fact. Those are the truths you were wholly meant to believe in as gospel, no questions of misdirection or created fact.

The details of these truths are the windmills most worthy of being tilted.