.jpg)
From Gustav LeBon's classic : "The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind" Page 6:
"A man of science bent on verifying a phenomenon is not called upon to concern himself with the interests his verifications may hurt. ... To belong to a school is necessarily to espouse its prejudices and preconceived opinions."
This reminds one of the situation here in the United States regarding the 911 truth movement.
On one hand we have professionals with the stones to scientifically examine the plethora of damning 911 evidence then truthfully report their findings to the public that the "official 19-hijacker conspiracy theory" our own government conjured up and sold to us CANNOT BE TRUE.
On the other hand sit their silent colleagues as they face ridicule , job loss and other name-calling - for committing a thought-crime by asking tough questions like How? Why? or Who? would benefit from this obscene mass murder?
Adding to the avalanche of media attacks such doughty champions must weather as they sedulously climb the treacherous slopes of Mount 911Truth - the Brobdingnagian task they face: Awakening and re-educating an American public systematically blinded by blizzards of endless psychological conditioning, misinformation, disinformation, half-truths, outright lies, intimidation ... the whole spectrum of info-war assets the U.S. Federal Government formerly relied on to dominate the mushroom-masses. Too bad for the tyrant-wannabes that the internet blogosphere changed all that. The word is out - our government has lied to us all about what really happened on September 11, 2001. But why?
I suppose we all have to be concerned with keeping our jobs. But at what point does a citizen decide their country and scientific colleagues need them now?
The 911 Truthers
What ever happened to good-old-fashioned scientific curiosity? I thought everybody liked a good "Whodunnit?" As I've followed and participated in the 911 truth movement it seems to me that the people "in the right" as far as truth-seeking-by-scientific-method goes are the "911truthers."
The anti-911-truthers
The opposition to the 911truthers are the "anti-911-truthers," those who oppose 911truth seem to hide behind time-tested propaganda techniques. Are the anti-911-truthers contributing to the uncovering of truth - or simply shouting louder to "win" by silencing their opponents? One must wonder what motivates an "anti-911-truther?"
Stephen E. Jones has been at the forefront of the controversy:
Now listen to a typical "debunker"- Greg Palast beating up on Prof. Jones:
Why is the man a "fruitcake?" Name-calling is so effective when it comes to mass media. Remember what Le Bon tells us on page 57:
"Given to exaggeration in its feelings, a crowd is only impressed by excessive sentiments. An orator wishing to move a crowd must make an abusive use of violent affirmations. To exaggerate, to affirm, to resort to repetitions, and never to attempt to prove anything by reasoning are methods of argument well known to speakers at public meetings."
Is this MIT engineer also a "fruitcake?" If so why?
Again we can learn from Le Bon what is easily fed to crowds vs. the scientific information the 911 truth movement is challenged to get out:
p 69: "Whatever be the ideas suggested to crowds they can only exercise effective influence on condition that they assume a very absolute, uncompromising and simple shape. They present themselves then in the guise of images, and are only accessible to the masses under this form."
Faced with the task of educating a public with facts that require study is an uphill battle. It is not a simple matter for the truth movement to point, shout, name-call, and laugh when complicated facts must be presented to a public that has been prepared with a story that is indeed absolute, uncompromising, and simple. Several Arabs with boxcutters flew planes into buildings - it doesn't get any simpler than that. But for those who dare to examine the facts which are available through many resources - there are many contradictions which beg for explanation.
--------------------------
UPDATES
ICH article Elizabeth Woodworth superb article
January 6, 2009 Good Paper from A&M on disinfo
Feb 25, 2009 Einstein was outvoted but not out-facted
Nice WTC7 article
French Professor sacked for 911 Conspiracy Theory
----------UPDATE VIDEO --SCIENCE VS CONSPIRACY THEORY-----
"A man of science bent on verifying a phenomenon is not called upon to concern himself with the interests his verifications may hurt. ... To belong to a school is necessarily to espouse its prejudices and preconceived opinions."
This reminds one of the situation here in the United States regarding the 911 truth movement.
On one hand we have professionals with the stones to scientifically examine the plethora of damning 911 evidence then truthfully report their findings to the public that the "official 19-hijacker conspiracy theory" our own government conjured up and sold to us CANNOT BE TRUE.
On the other hand sit their silent colleagues as they face ridicule , job loss and other name-calling - for committing a thought-crime by asking tough questions like How? Why? or Who? would benefit from this obscene mass murder?
Adding to the avalanche of media attacks such doughty champions must weather as they sedulously climb the treacherous slopes of Mount 911Truth - the Brobdingnagian task they face: Awakening and re-educating an American public systematically blinded by blizzards of endless psychological conditioning, misinformation, disinformation, half-truths, outright lies, intimidation ... the whole spectrum of info-war assets the U.S. Federal Government formerly relied on to dominate the mushroom-masses. Too bad for the tyrant-wannabes that the internet blogosphere changed all that. The word is out - our government has lied to us all about what really happened on September 11, 2001. But why?
I suppose we all have to be concerned with keeping our jobs. But at what point does a citizen decide their country and scientific colleagues need them now?
The 911 Truthers
What ever happened to good-old-fashioned scientific curiosity? I thought everybody liked a good "Whodunnit?" As I've followed and participated in the 911 truth movement it seems to me that the people "in the right" as far as truth-seeking-by-scientific-method goes are the "911truthers."
The anti-911-truthers
The opposition to the 911truthers are the "anti-911-truthers," those who oppose 911truth seem to hide behind time-tested propaganda techniques. Are the anti-911-truthers contributing to the uncovering of truth - or simply shouting louder to "win" by silencing their opponents? One must wonder what motivates an "anti-911-truther?"
Stephen E. Jones has been at the forefront of the controversy:
Now listen to a typical "debunker"- Greg Palast beating up on Prof. Jones:
Why is the man a "fruitcake?" Name-calling is so effective when it comes to mass media. Remember what Le Bon tells us on page 57:
"Given to exaggeration in its feelings, a crowd is only impressed by excessive sentiments. An orator wishing to move a crowd must make an abusive use of violent affirmations. To exaggerate, to affirm, to resort to repetitions, and never to attempt to prove anything by reasoning are methods of argument well known to speakers at public meetings."
Is this MIT engineer also a "fruitcake?" If so why?
Again we can learn from Le Bon what is easily fed to crowds vs. the scientific information the 911 truth movement is challenged to get out:
p 69: "Whatever be the ideas suggested to crowds they can only exercise effective influence on condition that they assume a very absolute, uncompromising and simple shape. They present themselves then in the guise of images, and are only accessible to the masses under this form."
Faced with the task of educating a public with facts that require study is an uphill battle. It is not a simple matter for the truth movement to point, shout, name-call, and laugh when complicated facts must be presented to a public that has been prepared with a story that is indeed absolute, uncompromising, and simple. Several Arabs with boxcutters flew planes into buildings - it doesn't get any simpler than that. But for those who dare to examine the facts which are available through many resources - there are many contradictions which beg for explanation.
--------------------------
UPDATES
ICH article Elizabeth Woodworth superb article
January 6, 2009 Good Paper from A&M on disinfo
Feb 25, 2009 Einstein was outvoted but not out-facted
Nice WTC7 article
French Professor sacked for 911 Conspiracy Theory
----------UPDATE VIDEO --SCIENCE VS CONSPIRACY THEORY-----
jackrabbit, you freaking dumbass. you don't have to be a scientist to realize 911 was an inside job. the evidence is obvious even to a laymen. i am not scared to die. bring it on fredumbfrus2
ReplyDeleteNice post Jack !
ReplyDeleteWe can also browbeat those debunkers and ridicule them - although I prefer to do this more subtly as I hammer them with the established forensic evidence.
Debunkers who try to make complex "arguments" always flounder when you push the hard physical evidence at them. A dose of ridicule can help to counter their ridicule.
Many of the debunkers use "gutter fighting" techniques which off balance many of us more measured truth proponents. Just hammer right back at them and always stick to what you can prove ...
Cheers Mr Big Ears !!
I never thought that I would get more people like freedumbfrus 2
ReplyDeletemad at me for being MORE polite in my writing. I got some feedback that the other site was too harsh so I started over here. You may notice the zero attempt to conceal continuity.
Why do researchers engage in 'debates' with non researchers? Why does unsubstantiated opinion and invective have to share the podium with someone who is seeking truth in science. They are completely divergent, one scientific, one political. Its the same kind of falacial thinking that occurs at Fox - the need for 'balance'. Science doesn't need balance from politicians or other dogma peddlers. Galileo proved that.
ReplyDeleteI think that underlying the rejection by otherwise well informed and thoughtful people of the mountain of evidence that proves that 911 was an inside job is fear. For them the truth is too frightening to accept, or even comtemplate. I pity them. I think the hidden agenda behind 911 is going to lead to far greater horrors in the near future.
ReplyDelete`hey jack, would you please answer my questions about your post, is the amero real. as i stated, killing for fun and profit linked on your old site laid out nwo plans for only 40 to 45 minutes. poof, it was gone. sucked down the rabbit hole. i am only seeking truth. i never take what i read or hear at face value. if i did, then i would be like the majority of americans with their heads in the sand. seems to me you are trying real hard to stick my head back in the sand. i am not trying to distract from the discussion. the discussion is good and necessary. would it be right for me to except all information at face value. seems to me questions are good. without questions, i will never get answer. why do you think my questions distract from discussions. all you have to do is answer them and then we or maybe just you move on with the discussion. i can feel your resistance to questions. why is that jack. why do you portray my questions as a distraction. are you telling me to shut up and sit down. you are free. go back to sleep america. we have everything under control. you are safe america. go back to sleep. hey honey, come on, hurry. american gladiator is about start. ain't it great honey, we have 54 channels of american gladiator to choose from. i'm so glad we're free. aren't you honey. fredumbfrus2
ReplyDeleteFredumb, will you please post your ssn for everyone? What is the problem if you have nothing to hide?
ReplyDeletePAUL ISAAC (911 NYC/ ENRON / Y2K CONNECTION??) SHADOWS & DUST
ReplyDeleteIf you state data and facts about the fission byproducts and molten steel and customized demolitions and impact areas and someone insults you and lies and yells and all of that, insult their mother. She was inadequate and their father wasn't much either. Evolution comes from the need to improve. Let them know that they should mind their manners around your dog and they need a change of mouthwash before trying to smell his butt. Don't listen, they are trying to hold you hostage. That's a Bush thing. Ignore leather-boy overtures. They just want to swap spit.
ReplyDeleteThe 'why' for the Bush cabal to attack the U.S. thusly? They want America down and out and a massive insurance fraud for Larry Silverstein and BlackStone Investments.
Insurance fraud is simplified when one is in league with the insurance company.
ReplyDeleteYou ought to take part in a contest for one of the finest sites on the internet.
ReplyDeleteI most certainly will highly recommend this site!
Also visit my weblog - paid online surveys