June 18 , 2010
Anthony
I've been highly involved in the fight to expose "Holocaust" lies for over 21 years –and I'm 34 years old. I am skeptical of the Holocaust for many of the same reasons I'm skeptical of the increasingly /religious/ dogma that the United States government orchestrated the 9-11 attacks. Both stories amount to 'belief systems' by virtue of their status as so internally contradictory that a sort of blind faith is required to avoid apostasy. The promoters of both conspiracy theories descend into a vicious, rabid mania, almost screeching for blood the moment any heretic doubts the least of their claims. Both conspiracy theories rely heavily on the logical fallacy know as Argument From Authority: lists of names of experts who agree with at least one aspect of the theory (though promoters of both faiths hysterically rub these lists in the faces of any heretic who dares to take exception with /any single aspect/ of either faith, regardless of whether the authorities they use as a crutch believe that particular sub-theory or not). Devotees of both faiths include vast numbers of utterly unqualified laypersons to whom even the most inconclusive, problematic explanations of the physics of their respective theories constitute the FINAL word, such that any reviewer interested in so much as refining the theory through critique should be immediately burned at the stake.
I have rarely been impressed with the endless string of videos my friends have expected would convert me to their religion once and for all. What is plainly clear, however, is that the events did not unfold as the government or the media barons state. Some major questions need answering, but a better understanding of the nature of the relationship between the government and the ruling class (the highly disparate but also relatively unified transnational Jewish nation, most crucially their media barons) happens to be infinitely more congruent with the likely scenario as evidenced by all data, including the silly videos and reports produced by either the federal government or the "Truth" movement and its many clueless Hollywood devotees. I wish I could say that both sides' accounts were equally silly in my eyes.
In any event, my words are unlikely to influence anybody so much as they will enrage the faithful. Because I wish devotees of the "Truth" faith well, and would like nothing more than to see them push the public closer to some reality here or there, I would advise them to consider a few concepts as they proceed to alienate friends, family, and those sympathetic to our real emergency:
(1) The reasons even the world's top scientists still engage in operations called "experiments" is that even these earthly gods of academia-accredited omniscience can never be certain of the outcome of any sequence of movements in a (far more complex than "truthers" or "Holocaust survivors," ie, all Jews, understand) multi-variable physical system. For example: every steel building is different, and the argument that a B-25D crashing into the Empire State building without causing it to collapse means that the twin towers could not have collapsed without the advance placement of explosive charges makes one look as silly to an educated student of skepticism as it makes one look impressive to any halfwit who merely "wants to believe."
(2) One should do as the government does when it carries out naughty business a'la selling crack to blacks in Los Angeles: KEEP IT SIMPLE. By the principle of Occam's Razor, gravitate toward the explanation that requires the least assumptions, refute it and move up an assumption notch until a workable, plausible theory is reached that is not internally contradictory and (crucially) vulnerable to flaws by virtue of far-fetched or impossible necessary conditions of the assumption. For example: If, hypothetically, every single aspect of the "Truth" faith were true MINUS the advance placement of explosive charges in the twin towers, wouldn't that be sufficient to serve the evil regime's interests? The US would have embarked on CLEAN BREAK whether or not the towers collapsed. Why would it instead risk the disaster to unfold if a single remorseful demolition operative walked into a Belarussian media outlet tomorrow with incontrovertible proof and the story of the century? You only understand my point here if you see that evoking some other, utterly convincing evidence of controlled implosion would be completely irrelevant to my point.
(3) One should not repeat with certainty what he has heard from others without knowing for sure what HE is talking about. Doing so in the context of an aside, if easily disproved, can discredit one's entire faith/theory. In the context of the "Truth" movement, I would recommend that devotees and true activists (what few there are) concentrate on Building Seven and totally dispense with the idea that no 727 hit the pentagon. The entire body of conspiracy theories surrounding that sub-topic is so idiotic that the mere utterance of any element of it is, to possessors of brains, analogous to a homeless bag-lady's matter-of-fact reference to the pet purple unicorn she wonders if you can keep an eye on for a moment while she steps into the park porta-potty.
Just trying to help,
Anonymous
On 6/18/10 12:15 AM, "Anthony Lawson" <lawson911@gmail.com > wrote:
Hello,
I'm quite intrigued about the "Helen Thomas Affair." I once caught her bolstering the 19-Arabs-with-Box-Cutters 9/11 scenario, admittedly in a passing way, but such ways are often how a story is made to establish itself as fact, so I wondered: Could a person dedicated to being a news correspondent, never mind the White House adjective, in the United States fail to notice that the planes have never been forensically identified, or that well over a thousand architects and engineers dispute the official story about how the Towers and WTC 7 came down, and all the rest of it?
Either answer must mean that such a person was either:
a) Useless as an observer of what was going on around her, or
b) Was content not to mention these glaringly obvious discrepancies in the official story.
After all, many good men, women and children have died because no one who mattered stood up and cried: "This is wrong!", either just after 9/11 or during the massive weapons-of-mass-destruction swindle that was carried out in plain sight, from within the Oval Office and Downing Street, and which was then brought into the United Nation's Security Council as absolute fact.
Shouldn't Helen Thomas to be castigated for her silence on those issues, as well as many others, while praising her for her question to Obama about Israel's nuclear weapons and her forthrightness about the Palestine issue?
Anthony
On 18 June 2010 01:15, Michael <RePorterNoteBook@gmail.com > wrote:
http://www.informationclearinghouse .info/article257 33.htm
Peace.
Michael Santomauro
Editorial Director
@ 917-974-6367
What sort of Truth is it that crushes the freedom to seek the truth?
Let's End Thought Crimes in the Twenty-first Century. -- to separate historical fact from propaganda…peace is patriotic!
__._,_.___
MARKETPLACE
.
__,_._,___
No comments:
Post a Comment