Generalizations & Labeling-"The Government Did It"
I was going to post this in reply to Jon at the thread, "Does Anyone Have Any Questions?
http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1631
post #4
but it is too important and deserves its own thread. This is actually a major point of the truth movement, if such exists (or is going to exist) above us and our individual sense of right, wrong and responsibility to the future.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gold9472
Also... keep in mind that people have a VERY difficult time accepting that their Government could do something like 9/11. I say, just because it's scary, doesn't mean it's not true.
Happy New Year Jon!
We hope it's not another year like the last year in the truth movement.
Yes people do have a VERY difficult time accepting that their government could do something like 9-11. It is time to address cognitive dissonance and the related distortions that people psychologically undergo when contemplating something as horrific as 9-11. Or, ...... getting involved, understanding, unifying and taking action. The perps count on us not being able to get past this.
I submit that the problem is more a part of the presentation of the problem of 9-11 rather than one of acceptance. Let me explain.
GENERALIZATION:
When one says "government" they are saying a great deal. First, what controls it? (Supposedly) the Constitution and all the laws made under it. Is this real? Should we trash this just because the present group of actors ignores it and the laws derived from it?
No, it is not reasonable to relinquish the ideals of the US Constitution. Period.
LABELING:
To say "9-11" is to say a great deal. Huge thing, big event lots and lots of planning by somebody. Many pictures enter into peoples minds. Some think of towers free falling in waves of pulverized concrete, others think of US fighter jets flying around in circles over Alaska or parked on a runway. Some think of the pentagon and a big hole with no, or improper plane parts lying around.
Clearly, a more complex and sophisticated approach to presentation is needed. There is one real good reason for this. It is strictly against the purpose of truth to lump good people in government, and they definitely exist, into the the same group of perpetrators within government that we know also exist. Just because we know they exist, this does not mean it is proper to say "government" when indicating perpetrators. This lack sophistication and many people know it immediately and do not want to associate with it.
WHO NEEDS TO CHANGE?:
Is this their problem or our problem if we are presenting the causes of 9-11 as being based in "government"?
It is just not fair to say "government", and it doesn't serve our purposes. Our purposes are to purify government, unless we are anarchists and seek to abolish it.
I'm going to spend a moment on anarchy because it is a very worthwhile topic that is poorly understood, because it in itself is yet another label which people use for "generalization".
I like the idea of people so aware, so educated, so fair, that they can conduct a peaceful, positive, progressive society without collectively supporting an entity having a structure of rules. I'm also not gullible or fanciful enough to think that we as mammals are sophisticated or developed enough to actually do this. When that gets done, as far as I can tell, everybody (I mean everybody) involved knows just about everything there is to know about our needs as a human family with respect to each individual and is fully prepared to NEVER place a want over a need unjustly.
The above paragraph means, we need government, we are not evolved enough to be peaceful anarchists.
The above sentence means we need to change. Us who use the term "government" to describe the perpetrators of 9-11 are simply applying a generalization that alienates a number of people who might otherwise be allies.
My SUGGESTION
I suggest we NEVER say, "The government did it.", that instead we say, "Our government has been infiltrated and the infiltrators did it."
Suddenly those perceiving our statements who love the notion of the US government as an ideal and want to believe that such actually exists, has been living as it it does exist, are placed in a position of protecting that which they love by simply accepting that their is a serious corruption and "their government" need their help, and, .......... the only way to help the non infiltrators of government, the good people in government, is to listen to those in the truth movement that have a handle on the immense complexity of 9-11 and discern a path of collective action that WILL be effective.
Admitted, it opens a small can of worms as the term "infiltration" implies all sorts of unsavory subjects but the tendency to try and see it as labeling is that of the listeners cognitive disonance rather than our own expression which HAS BECOME specific when using the word and identifying the real problem rather than relying on our lazy generalization of "the government". People know there are problems with government and "infiltration" provides a worthy definition of WHY the problems exist.
Please, if you are serious about using 9-11 truth to purify the US government, please post your thoughts on this subject as I've presented it within its quasi psychological language or complexity and the inherent sociological implications.
Temporary Excursion Off topic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eckolaker
Hi Chris.
Good to see you drop by.
Hello Cory,
More than a visit. I'm camping here for awhile. I've been banned from all other places of discussion for not giving up on reason and the concrete core.
At JREF I fielded every reasonable opposition with logic and explained their misrepresentations of construction images that they would like to think show steel core columns,
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=57426&page=267
After 10k posts in that thread, 2500 or so mine, they decided that my evaluation of their behaviors as "sociopathic" was too much and banned me. Basically because they accept lawlessness in government and try to impede people such as myself who try to create awareness and opposition to the lawlessness, I only have limited terms which to apply that are comprehensive labels after fully testing and understanding them.
A discussion on "Freedom of Speech' was the catalyst for my analysis of their behaviors.
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=72047&page=5
Which ended up with a serious chastisement for their sociopathic behavior.
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.p...14#post2248014
Then I went back to Lets Roll only to find gate-keeping going on with the concrete core information, the only information that actually leads to a realistic, feasible explanation for free fall. I posted a thread about the "Gargantuan thread in denial land" (JREF).
http://letsrollforums.com/forums/vie...18cc0ad4b979a9
Which started up a couple of other threads one of which is the gatekeepers method of creating truth by opinion. Go vote for the concrete core If you cannot find images of raw evidence for the steel core from demo photos or logocal explanations for free fall by cutting steel core columns.
http://letsrollforums.com/forums/vie...18cc0ad4b979a9
So if any truth seekers think we need a realistic explanation for free fall and pulverization that fits the images of raw evidence from the demo, go and vote for the concrete core.
At Lets Roll they are ready to ban me unless i come of with more evidence for the concrete core rather than accepting it's okay for me to ask them to logically support the FEMA statements about the steel core columns within an explanation for free fall or explanation for the non appearance of the steel core columns in the demo images. Of course I always ask them to logically and reasonably explain what this is,
http://algoxy.com/psych/images/southcorestands.gif
if it is not a steel reinforced concrete tube. They hate that and refuse to. Instead I must do the impossible, or that which can only be done with the help of the entire movement, which is come up with a copy of the 1990 documentary called "The Construction of the Twin Towers.". Catch 22, they won't let the issue of the core and the related public search for a copy of the documentary become a part of the truth movement in order to find a copy, but demand that copy of the documentary BEFORE accepting that the concrete core is a valid issue. Or statements from non existent authority that there was a concrete core. Ignoring the statements of Robertson and other engineers which identify a concrete core.
Convenient way to stop the production truth.
Check out my pages documenting the inconsistencies with open truth seeking or disinformation I've encountered.
I find this page particularly interesting as it shows what quasi authority of the movement is doing.
http://algoxy.com/psych/whatis9-11disinfo-actions.html
He's one that is rather bizarre relating to apprent technological manipulatons between software producers and site servers.
http://algoxy.com/psych/whatis9-11disinfo-quasi.html
I'm looking for opinions from knowledgable persons of software, hardware and internet protocols as to how this was accomplished. Apparently the information had an effect as the board where the problem occured changed its imagery. The same problem occured at "Loose Change", "Above Top Secret", where I'm banned and "Let's Roll".
Anybody wo's got feedback on that, please start another thread so this issue of our presentation, generalization, or labeling can stay more on topic.
Hoping Get Back On Topic Sometime
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eckolaker
Have you been to the new Loose Change forums? If you're banned there let me know, Im sure I can assist with that.
I think so. Here is the notification post in the thread where I was posting before being banned.
http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Ch...ic=14889&st=30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eckolaker
As for JREF, I read the threads there quite often but refuse to allow myself to post, for many of the reasons you are already privy too. They're simply a waste of time, I like to call them 18%'ers As in the 18% of people that still buy the official myth of 9/11. They are truly some of the most blind, either by choice or for reasons of following who they believe to identify with.
I understand that. I gave up on finding allies on the 9-11 boards. people are way to into "flock" behaviros and the perps know it, exploit it. It turns out our socialization, unconscious programs respond readily to the written words of ridicule in the quasi social setting of message boards. Gaggly emoticons simply accentuate the ridicule and make people cringe. Lost in cogntiive distortions and emotional reasoning they go along with what is comfortable.
So, not finding any allies on the 9-11 BB's with a hard edge for logic and reason utilizing images of raw evidence, I went out into "denial land" to try my luck at converting some neo con sociopaths. Where upon their eventual default denial and labeling became just too onerous in light of my hard evidence and I had to call them on their BS.
If it talks like a duck, and you have records of what been said, walks like a duck and you have records of ducks walking, it is a duck, or in this case "sociopath".
9-11 made them and brought them out. Fear controls and creates default defenses against the severe cognitive dissonance.
Then again, some of them are certainly disinfo agents of a type. You should hear them cash in on the cognitive dissonance with statements like, "So, you believe your government built the towers just to demolish them."
Hey, did I just get on topic for a second there?
