Other than what we're told by history's winners....
Re: Active Shooter San Bernardino
Posted: Sun Dec 13, 2015 4:39 pm
by MacCruiskeen
Slomo wrote:no practical implication.
I grow fatigued. It has several practical implications, such as clearing the names of the framed, showing governments that they can't always get away with murder, and reminding anyone who is awake and cares that they are not alone in objecting to murderous lies, not least when they're used as a transparent pretext for war.
Other than what we're told by history's winners....
That's why we're here, sniffing dissonances and scrawls in the margins?
With tensions rumbling under the tectonic movements of institutions, dipping your fingers in streams of hearsay and speculation is act with real ripple-value.
Re: Active Shooter San Bernardino
Posted: Sun Dec 13, 2015 4:42 pm
by AlicetheKurious
Nordic » Sun Dec 13, 2015 6:39 am wrote:It seems to me that these things are happening more and more often. And that the real perps are getting sloppy. It's like the sophomore album from a band or a successful TV show when the creators start to get a little bored.
This one had a lot of loose ends. People noticed. People who aren't at all in the "conspiracy community" (a term I hate but it's useful so you know what I'm talking about).
Maybe the next one will be even more clearly a Psyop.
Then again these things seem to be used to distract us from big and real news events, like in this case "the USA and its allies are supporting ISIS and even allowing them to get in the oil business".
And the day before the Paris shooting it came out (eerily similar to 9/11) that the pentagon couldn't account for over 6 Trillion dollars. Down the memory hole.
Interestingly, I've heard from people I know who live in the US that people are noticing. Just anecdotes about offhand remarks made by co-workers, etc. But that's where it stops. Like the information about the US connection to "ISIS"/Daesh. For that matter, like the previous knowledge about how the media and their own government lied to them about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and the imminent "mushroom cloud over Chicago", the Pentagon's disappearing trillions, etc. People feel helpless to do anything, but all those feelings have to go somewhere. Enter Trump and all the other demagogues who came before him, offering relief.
I grow fatigued. It has several practical implications, such as clearing the names of the framed, showing governments that they can't always get away with murder, and reminding anyone who is awake and cares that they are not alone in objecting to murderous lies, not least when they're used as a transparent pretext for war.
If you are in a specific position to help clear the names of the framed, then I agree.
Maybe you've gotten further traction in your social circle than I have, but in mine, there is zero interest in hearing about this. All I can do is scroll through the superficial understandings that pop up in my FB. I come here because this place is an island of sanity, regarding the interpretation of these mass killings and related geopolitical events. But it's merely an oasis for me, I can't take anything back with me.
"History's winners" include Ghengis Khan, the Vikings, the Spanish Inquisition, the Australian aborigines, the Ottomans, and the Nazis. They were all doing fine, for a considerable amount of time (anything between 1.5 decades and forty millennia).
dialectic transformations
Posted: Sun Dec 13, 2015 5:04 pm
by IanEye
A campaign of stochastic terrorism based on lies eventually triggers a shooter who is motivated by the lies.
Followed the next news cycle by another shooting where we are lied to about who the shooters actually are.
This triggers a series of violent actions across the country against who the shooters are said to be.
In both cases the hate is focused laser-like on targets of the right wing, Planned Parenthood and Muslims.
In both cases, a series of lies are the foundation for stochastic event cycles.
Re: Active Shooter San Bernardino
Posted: Sun Dec 13, 2015 5:05 pm
by slomo
Mac, are we really disagreeing on anything of consequence? I mean, other than how much individual attention we give to any particular thread on the forum?
Because I'm not trying to suggest that those who are interested in this subject stop what they're doing. I'm just giving voice to those among us who are fatigued to the point where we don't really want to do much other than read the Executive Summary in a couple of weeks.
"Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.".
Re: Active Shooter San Bernardino
Posted: Sun Dec 13, 2015 5:22 pm
by MacCruiskeen
slomo » Sun Dec 13, 2015 4:05 pm wrote:Mac, are we really disagreeing on anything of consequence? I mean, other than how much individual attention we give to any particular thread on the forum?
Because I'm not trying to suggest that those who are interested in this subject stop what they're doing. I'm just giving voice to those among us who are fatigued to the point where we don't really want to do much other than read the Executive Summary in a couple of weeks.
Unfortunately, Slomo, we are disagreeing on something of real consequence. You are saying that nothing can be done, while I am saying that something can be done and is being done, but it will only have real practical and political consequences when a critical mass is achieved. Millions Billions of people are currently waiting around, hoping that it will soon be safe to come out. It used to be very dangerous to risk coming out as a homosexual, and still is, in some countries. It used to be very dangerous to risk coming out as an atheist, and still is, in some countries. It is still somewhat dangerous to risk coming out as a "conspiracy theorist" (ffs)* in most countries; but I am confident (you may say "foolishly confident") that The Fear will someday -- probably soon -- be overcome by a mass of people too large to be ignored or vilified by politicians.
This phrase is among the tireless workhorses of establishment discourse. Without it, disinformation would be much harder than it is. “Conspiracy theory” is a trigger phrase, saturated with intellectual contempt and deeply anti-intellectual resentment. It makes little sense on its own, and while it’s a priceless tool of propaganda, it is worse than useless as an explanatory category.
slomo » Sun Dec 13, 2015 4:05 pm wrote:Mac, are we really disagreeing on anything of consequence? I mean, other than how much individual attention we give to any particular thread on the forum?
Because I'm not trying to suggest that those who are interested in this subject stop what they're doing. I'm just giving voice to those among us who are fatigued to the point where we don't really want to do much other than read the Executive Summary in a couple of weeks.
Unfortunately, Slomo, we are disagreeing on something of real consequence. You are saying that nothing can be done, while I am saying that something can be done and is being done, but it will only have real practical and political consequences when a critical mass is achieved.MillionsBillions of people are currently waiting around, hoping that it will soon be safe to come out. It used to be very dangerous to risk coming out as a homosexual, and still is, in some countries. It used to be very dangerous to risk coming out as an atheist, and still is, in some countries. It is still somewhat dangerous to risk coming out as a conspiracy theorist* in most countries; but I am confident (you may say "foolishly confident") that The Fear will someday -- probably soon -- be overcome by a mass of people too large to be ignored (or vilified) by politicians.
This phrase is among the tireless workhorses of establishment discourse. Without it, disinformation would be much harder than it is. “Conspiracy theory” is a trigger phrase, saturated with intellectual contempt and deeply anti-intellectual resentment. It makes little sense on its own, and while it’s a priceless tool of propaganda, it is worse than useless as an explanatory category.
I was going to jump on top of the bolded text, but your example re:homosexuality is a convincing refutation of the argument that I was going to make, i.e. that critical mass will never be achieved. So I will concede the point, even as I observe that in my own life and social circle, nobody is interested in parapolitics. I'll admit that my social network is composed mostly of individuals on the higher rungs of the Gentry class ladder, i.e. solidly upper to upper-upper middle class, and so perhaps have a vested interest in not seeing the holes in the official narrative.