Friday, September 15, 2017
9/11: A Conspiracy Theory - YouTube
9/11: A Conspiracy Theory - YouTube
The trouble is many people know that, knowing the truth about things is crippling. Your boss lies to you but you don't think of him as a liar, that would make it almost impossible to work for him or her. So, instead, you think of their lies as strategic assertions, not done for the purpose of misleading anyone, but simply as a strategy or strategic move to gain the upper hand position they require to get the program done. As an employee, you welcome anything that helps get the work done, the project completed on time etc., so you know that a focus on the truth of a matter would undermine the effort.
So, then, when John pops up and says: "Regulation 509b paragraph 5 prohibits this.", and the boss slaps back: "That doesn't apply here!" , you don't go look up the regulation to determine the truth for yourself, because that would cripple you, so you accept it and move on, let someone else deal with that issue when the time comes. If someone happens to catch it, the company lawyers will spend some time in court, and/or some settlement will be reached, usually with no one having to admit any fault. Astute bosses and some employees know this and so they've learned and trained themselves to accept lies and move on.
In the years after 911 I had the occasion to talk with a professor and ask why building 7 came down, I got an earful of unlikely reasons. I didn't argue the point because I knew the professors entire career depended on him or her, not paying any attention to either the truth or the details, to keep their status quo they decided to accept the official story and move on. I understood that by pressing the issue, I would only damage this person, to no good effect, since the truth would never be admitted to officially for, perhaps, decades. Only when people reach their "safe space" like retired, can they bother to get into the details, otherwise it's just too dangerous a thing to do. Loss of their job, held up to ridicule would badly damage the life they had struggled so hard to build. While knowing the truth would make them feel cowardly and bring on severe psychological dilemma, with no immediate prospect of benefit. Best they remain blissfully ignorant and simply accept the official story and move on, as if none of it mattered, because for them it really doesn't.
Taking the long, historical view, I can only hope that these people realize that, even while they accept the official line, they realize that there is likely something very fishy about it, and cast their votes accordingly. Remember, the jury is still out on Nero burning Rome and that happened over a thousand years ago. So, try to be kind and patient when discussing 911, there are many real and immediate barriers to getting people to even look at the matter.
The trouble is many people know that, knowing the truth about things is crippling. Your boss lies to you but you don't think of him as a liar, that would make it almost impossible to work for him or her. So, instead, you think of their lies as strategic assertions, not done for the purpose of misleading anyone, but simply as a strategy or strategic move to gain the upper hand position they require to get the program done. As an employee, you welcome anything that helps get the work done, the project completed on time etc., so you know that a focus on the truth of a matter would undermine the effort.
So, then, when John pops up and says: "Regulation 509b paragraph 5 prohibits this.", and the boss slaps back: "That doesn't apply here!" , you don't go look up the regulation to determine the truth for yourself, because that would cripple you, so you accept it and move on, let someone else deal with that issue when the time comes. If someone happens to catch it, the company lawyers will spend some time in court, and/or some settlement will be reached, usually with no one having to admit any fault. Astute bosses and some employees know this and so they've learned and trained themselves to accept lies and move on.
In the years after 911 I had the occasion to talk with a professor and ask why building 7 came down, I got an earful of unlikely reasons. I didn't argue the point because I knew the professors entire career depended on him or her, not paying any attention to either the truth or the details, to keep their status quo they decided to accept the official story and move on. I understood that by pressing the issue, I would only damage this person, to no good effect, since the truth would never be admitted to officially for, perhaps, decades. Only when people reach their "safe space" like retired, can they bother to get into the details, otherwise it's just too dangerous a thing to do. Loss of their job, held up to ridicule would badly damage the life they had struggled so hard to build. While knowing the truth would make them feel cowardly and bring on severe psychological dilemma, with no immediate prospect of benefit. Best they remain blissfully ignorant and simply accept the official story and move on, as if none of it mattered, because for them it really doesn't.
Taking the long, historical view, I can only hope that these people realize that, even while they accept the official line, they realize that there is likely something very fishy about it, and cast their votes accordingly. Remember, the jury is still out on Nero burning Rome and that happened over a thousand years ago. So, try to be kind and patient when discussing 911, there are many real and immediate barriers to getting people to even look at the matter.
Thursday, September 14, 2017
Why the Greatest Advocates of Nonviolence Didn't Condemn Anti-Racist, Anti-Fascist Acts of Violence
Why the Greatest Advocates of Nonviolence Didn't Condemn Anti-Racist, Anti-Fascist Acts of Violence
As usual, it all depends on what the violence is for. It was alright to commit violence to keep the Union. Would it have been alright to protect the civil rights marchers from being beaten and hung? We have police and military forces, because we know that violent people cannot always be stopped by non violence. Sitting around singing Kumbya would not have stopped Hitler, it took military force to do that. Thus, violence to stop violent people from committing violent acts is good.
As usual, it all depends on what the violence is for. It was alright to commit violence to keep the Union. Would it have been alright to protect the civil rights marchers from being beaten and hung? We have police and military forces, because we know that violent people cannot always be stopped by non violence. Sitting around singing Kumbya would not have stopped Hitler, it took military force to do that. Thus, violence to stop violent people from committing violent acts is good.
Monday, September 11, 2017
Sunday, September 10, 2017
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)