Everybody's Gotta Learn Sometime
- Thread starter Jonti
- Start date
Jonti said:Things take time. But it's a catchy little tune isn't it?
Keep your ears open
For a thread on 911, it seems remarkably quiet. None of the usual barking dogs are around.
Not surprising really, how can they refute what's in this video? It's getting harder and harder to stick to the line that the USG were incompetent that day, and the days leading up to the attacks.
Anyway, since when were 20 coincidences a concidence?!
Found it interesting.
Filled in some gaps in my knowledge and added some weight to the scales of the LIHOP theory, if only in my mind, due to my lack of detailed knowledge.
Dragged on a bit and was a bit overproduced IMO, bit melodramatic to make a point, but certainly not too far over the top.
Worth watching.
Woof
Filled in some gaps in my knowledge and added some weight to the scales of the LIHOP theory, if only in my mind, due to my lack of detailed knowledge.
Dragged on a bit and was a bit overproduced IMO, bit melodramatic to make a point, but certainly not too far over the top.
Worth watching.
Woof
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Everybody's Got To Learn Sometime was also the title of a song by the Korgis (a forgotten early 80's pop band).
Yossarian
⏭️
fela fan said:
You're a Westerner, aren't you?
Loads of people in the West are perfectly aware that their governments are lying gangs of bastards capable of all kinds of evil, as I'm sure you know.
Personally, I think it's the conspiracy theorists who have trouble with boundaries of validity - they can't accept that the world's a chaotic place where terrorist atrocities can happen out of the blue, they seem to be constantly seeking some order and some control behind it all.
Jonti
what the dormouse said
It's not long since the video was released -- and it was the only review I found. I wanted something as some readers here had complained they had only dial-up and wanted to know what it was about.editor said:
The video sets out a case -- and it's one the reviewers stated they agreed with, if that's what you mean.
Do you have a link to other reviews?
Jonti
what the dormouse said
I think I understand your concern, but I'm by no means familiar with the history of the boards. I hardly read here at all for a considerable period after I first joined. On the other hand, I have been reading quite a lot lately, so perhaps my comments may be of some use.
On the understanding that you are utterly fed up with pointless conspiriloon "debates" then ...
What it doesn't dispute
What it doesn't assert
What it suggests
My difficulty in addressing your question is that I do not know what you mean by "new evidence" -- I simply don't know what you've been obliged to see and read, except that it has evidently involved a terrific amount of the most irritating garbage. We all know what happened (well, most of us). So no, not the usual stuff, as far as I could tell. I would not have suggested folks have a look at it, if that had been the case.
On the understanding that you are utterly fed up with pointless conspiriloon "debates" then ...
What it doesn't dispute
- that WTC1 and WTC2 and the Pentagon were hit by the passenger planes as is commonly accepted
- that the usual suspects were in control of the planes that hit WTC1 and WTC2. It does however question whether the usual suspect had in fact developed (was able to develop!) the requiste skill to pilot the plane that hit the Pentagon (not that he was on board).
- that the damage sustained to the buildings, and the resultant collapse of the World Trade Center towers was a result of the aircraft hitting them, and the resultant fires.
What it doesn't assert
- the use of missiles
- preinstalled explosives in any building
- any substition of the craft or passengers
- pods, aliens, death rays etc
What it suggests
- the PNAC lot are a thoroughly nasty bunch whose behaviour before the attacks was suspicious -- for example the very lenient regime of visa for Saudi citizens introduced just three months before the attack, which a couple of the guys used to go to the States. Other examples that give rise to concern are also documented.
- that warnings were in fact ignored -- this is documented
- that some circumstances on the day itself were decidedly odd. Bush and the schoolkids comes to mind.
- that some of the denials afterwards ("no-one could have foreseen it") are not sustainable
My difficulty in addressing your question is that I do not know what you mean by "new evidence" -- I simply don't know what you've been obliged to see and read, except that it has evidently involved a terrific amount of the most irritating garbage. We all know what happened (well, most of us). So no, not the usual stuff, as far as I could tell. I would not have suggested folks have a look at it, if that had been the case.
Jonti
what the dormouse said
Thanks for that.Jazzz said:I haven't been able to watch it yet Jonti, thanks for the link. My computer is being a bit dodgy playing back videos. Good to see jessiedog appreciated it.
But if you get this thread binned, you'll be joining my select list of folks on ignore. Nothing personal, you understand, you seem a pretty civil kind of guy.
Just that I would be immensely irritated.
teqniq
DisMembered
I'm a 'westerner' too. I've found myself to have become increasingly sceptical over the years; I no longer take anything at face value from governments or the media.fela fan said:
I'm sorry I already thought it was.
Film was ok, bit amatuerish but I don't suppose I could do any better. Few more nasty facts about nasty people, not suprised really.
Yossarian said:
I'm british.
I can fully accept terrorist activities, for the very simple reason that when you have state actions of terror, then you get civilian terrorists in reaction. When you get state repression, you get civilian terrorism in reaction.
If one reads back to the 70s and 80s, during the cold war, you see how they all prized eurasia, for its energy fields. Muslim terrorism was born at much the same time.
I simply believe that x amount of terrorists did the attacks on 911. For me the doubt is whether the americans let them carry out the attacks, or whether they initiated the ideas and planning through their various agents around the world.
You say that our "governments are lying gangs of bastards capable of all kinds of evil", so why do you not think it possible that the americans either let the terrorists get away with this, or in fact set them up to do it?
Ps, i find it virtually impossible to agree with the USG version of events, because i can't see how humans can display such massive levels of incompetence.
Jonti said:Thanks for that.
But if you get this thread binned, you'll be joining my select list of folks on ignore. Nothing personal, you understand, you seem a pretty civil kind of guy.
Just that I would be immensely irritated.
He won't get this thread binned, editor will.
Editor makes very sure posters are aware these threads will be binned, barely a single one ever escapes a locking or binning.
This of course means that people have to think carefully before they post (if they don't want it binned), and that of course is exactly what self-censorship is.
Why he does it is another question. But the pattern has been set in stone for four years or so.
Jonti
what the dormouse said
Let's just see how it goes shall we?fela fan said:
I could put a lot of time and energy into a discusson that I find important only to see it binned. I know that, and sure, it'd be tough on me, and anyone else who's been sincere in their efforts. And yes, that definitely impacts the style and type of discussion folks are prepared to have here. Certainly, I'd agree with laptop (here) that if people intentionally trash threads to get them binned, it might be better to ban the saboteur, not to bin the thread. And notice he never actually said that either, he just meant it. I think you're smart enough to understand what I'm getting at here, young fela.
On the other hand, I've no reason to call for any particular person to be banned, tho' I may express an opinion if asked. And maybe even if not. But this is not my site. I'm free to speak my stuff elsewhere, or even build my own domain for discussion. The software's free, the hosting space is cheap, and the "How To" documentation is freely available online. On the net, we don't get to control other people's sites -- we just vote with our feet*. Mine host has kindly provided an Ignore function so I don't have to deal with abusive or unreasonable posters. Or even folk that just piss me off.
Give it time. Everybody's gotta learn at their own pace. OK?
* gazes at hands with puzzled expression, shakes head, continues regardless
Jonti said:
It's happened to me many times jonti. It used to be frustrating, but now i just accept it like the prophets sung 'let it be'.
What i always find interesting is that mainstream media don't touch this subject except for rare side issues, always with the words 'conspiracy theory' thrown in.
And on urban we can talk about it until the subject starts getting too hot, then it's time out, we can no longer talk about it.
Just what is it about this event? The biggest in all our lives, yet no-one can really talk about it? Why are so many people prepared to
a) accept the USG version of events, ie, staggering and prolonged incompetence, and
b) the accompanying non-call for people to take responsibility for such stupidity.
It's the biggest news in all our lifetimes, yet it is virtually not news. It almost didn't happen. Absolutely fucking amazing.
dylanredefined
Not a house elf a tiger
I'll always go for cock up over conspricy .What appears blindingly obvious
in hindsight noramly comes down to a mixture of Arrogance ,laziness and
stupidity .
in hindsight noramly comes down to a mixture of Arrogance ,laziness and
stupidity .
Jonti
what the dormouse said
Funny really, 'cos there clearly was a conspiracy to highjack the planes etc etc. Urban's term conspiraloonacy is much better than the conspiracy theory of the media muppets.fela fan said:
And of course there was, for example (in some sense of the word), a conspiracy to attack Iraq under false pretences. Or are we to believe just Blair pulled everyone else's strings? Blair lied. Or at least there's grounds for impeachment. Even at the time, it was pretty obvious he was making things up as he went along. People were scared into believing there was an immediate threat, even in the absense of evidence. This involved the manipulation of intelligence assessments. It seems to me an entirely legitimate use of the English word conspiracy to describe what went on, even if was all conducted in a thoroughly English, unspoken sort of way. Can't yet talk about Blair's Conspiracy tho'. The power of the media is, well, shocking and awesome.
Hence the relevance in the the video* of the fairly long section from something originally broadcast in 1976. It shows an impassioned speaker pleading with people to turn off their TVs. It starts at 29:46. I wonder what the guy thinks of the internet, if he's still around. Surely he'd have to like what it makes possible.
* link is to video 1 hour and 12 minutes in length
Jonti
what the dormouse said
I doubt that fela was referring to the attacks themelves.Yossarian said:
There's a section in the video, 20:17 thro' to 28:12, which ends with the question Where is the media on this?. It's specifically concerned with the Able Danger business.
I'd guess that's what fela meant.
dylanredefined said:
So it is always cock up and never conspiracy? Until it is proven (eg WMD lies) and then it becomes a statement of the bleeding obvious.
So, dylan, the WMD lies and the whole build up to the Iraq war is a cock up (arrogance, laziness and stupidity) and not conspiracy? Do me a favour
Officialoons are soooooooooooo gullible.
Personally I believe in cock-ups and conspiracies and until the evidence is properly probed and tested (which in the case of 9/11 is most certainly not the case) I keep an open mind.
So editor, when I say on other 9/11 threads that the 9/11 truth movement has loads of credible people involved and solid evidence to support it. I'm referrinmg to EGLS and similar presentations.
To see the extent to which governments and media are involved in a conspiracy to manipulate the general public, you only have to consider the fact that none of the media report the known facts about how Bush's people fixed the 2000 election. The story was shown once, briefly on Newsnight - and that was it. If you didn't see it then, you didn't see it reported again - Nowhere. If you started telling ordinary americans about this story, afterwards, they mainly just didn't know about it.
http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=27&row=1
The normal course for a british government given this information, would have been to treat Bush and co as a dodgy regime, that achieved power through a coup.
Even a few years later an article yesterday about Gore in the Independent, made no reference to it, only obscuring the issue by referring to the botched Florida recount.
It's kind of like Chris Morris said, Fact + TV = News.
- And here we are with some more facts to put under the cold light of TV to turn them into a news. -
But as it really hardly got any coverage, it didn't really happen. It's just the kind of thing, the obsessed obsess about. After all, the major media are hardly going to ignore a story like that if it's true.
And how on earth could the governments of the US and the UK impose a blanket ban on referring to the facts of Bush's first election victory? They don't have that kind of power. But they seem to have managed it anyway.
Needs a lot of people to willingly conspire.? - or maybe not that many, just a few - those in charge of the media.
http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=27&row=1
The normal course for a british government given this information, would have been to treat Bush and co as a dodgy regime, that achieved power through a coup.
Even a few years later an article yesterday about Gore in the Independent, made no reference to it, only obscuring the issue by referring to the botched Florida recount.
It's kind of like Chris Morris said, Fact + TV = News.
- And here we are with some more facts to put under the cold light of TV to turn them into a news. -
But as it really hardly got any coverage, it didn't really happen. It's just the kind of thing, the obsessed obsess about. After all, the major media are hardly going to ignore a story like that if it's true.
And how on earth could the governments of the US and the UK impose a blanket ban on referring to the facts of Bush's first election victory? They don't have that kind of power. But they seem to have managed it anyway.
Needs a lot of people to willingly conspire.? - or maybe not that many, just a few - those in charge of the media.
Some links to Greg Palast's reports along with other embarrassing news that disappeared down the memory hole
http://www.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/video_iraqwar.htm
http://www.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/video_september11.htm
Palast's 2000 election report is towards the end of the second link
http://www.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/video_iraqwar.htm
http://www.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/video_september11.htm
Palast's 2000 election report is towards the end of the second link
Structaural
in Chatsubo
Watched about 20 mins of it and fell asleep.
It reminds me of the Derren Brown hypnosis technique. He talks about very mundane and boring things very quickly and then slows down and commands the subject - the person usually follows his orders as their brain has switched off in the face of all that irrelavant information.
This video had that quality, loads of tedium followed by an emotional outburst accompanied by very emotive music.
I tried though.
It reminds me of the Derren Brown hypnosis technique. He talks about very mundane and boring things very quickly and then slows down and commands the subject - the person usually follows his orders as their brain has switched off in the face of all that irrelavant information.
This video had that quality, loads of tedium followed by an emotional outburst accompanied by very emotive music.
I tried though.
sparticus said:
My point wasn't so much about that they disappeared down the memory hole, but about how they disappeared down the memory hole.
Given that there's no law against reporting what happened. How have the powers that be managed to maintain mainstream media in virtual silence.
It's a massive achievement if you think about it.
Jonti
what the dormouse said
New World War
There's a dirty little secret I have to share with you, my child,
There's some that when those planes went in that maybe hid a smile.
Others whooped and hollered, cheered by flaming blow,
Having families, friends and neighbours that understood their show.
There never was an Empire built alone on right.
There never was an Empire whose subjects would not fight.
The needless death of many is Empire's private face;
To live by blows and die by blows is ancient as our race.
I've seen the children run and burn from Western fire,
I've seen those people jumping from the massive funeral pyre.
And this to me was evil sure, yet tempering my shock,
A still voice murmurred deep within, "So swings the weathercock".
So put away your grieving, child, there's fightin' to be done,
And, far more than fightin', talkin', before our fight is won.
So put away your chickenhawks and religious agit'eurs,
For freedom's fight's a singing fight and singing's to be heard.
I've learnt McAndrew's lesson hard, my 'puters are his steam,
The towers felled, the world's ablaze not waking from this dream.
My numbers recall many things that seem to be absurd,
For now's the changing of the times:- th' impossible's occurred.
I cannot say I know for sure, I cannot make you know,
The build up to this bloody war was long and sure and slow,
But there are those who dream up war for gold or Empire's gain,
And in all wars the only sure's that both sides will feel pain.
The dream the PNACs had been brewin' came real in fire and fear that day,
No matter much its way of doin', the towers fell their way.
See, 'taint so much its way of doin', tho' take a look in here,
The war the killers had been brewin' had found its engineer.
Know those who love their golden dreams did turn a cold blind eye,
To perverse schemes that smoothed the way for terror from the sky.
While others dreamt cold Empire's dream, knowing for the best we fight,
And in a war this is for sure -- first corpses prove the right.
Think you this war's for freedom's call? Then look you what they do.
Just who would woo with shock and awe as freedom's billet-doux?
Think you that Saddam caused the blow, or he was in on it?
You'll find you've been misled somehow, by media counterfeit.
You think that mass destructive power was hid in wrecked Iraq?
It was not so. No evidence, nor needed to attack.
This new world war's not like the old, the sides are hardly clear.
But, just one side has reason's hold -- the others must use fear.
As reason is our freedom's friend, not Hell or Paradise,
So reason will this nightmare end, not needless sacrifice.
Yes, we've been misled. We've stumbled and we've strayed.
We've been religiously misled, and freedom's been betrayed.
John Tucker, June 2006
This poem may be reproduced in its entirety in
any medium provided this notice is preserved
There's a dirty little secret I have to share with you, my child,
There's some that when those planes went in that maybe hid a smile.
Others whooped and hollered, cheered by flaming blow,
Having families, friends and neighbours that understood their show.
There never was an Empire built alone on right.
There never was an Empire whose subjects would not fight.
The needless death of many is Empire's private face;
To live by blows and die by blows is ancient as our race.
I've seen the children run and burn from Western fire,
I've seen those people jumping from the massive funeral pyre.
And this to me was evil sure, yet tempering my shock,
A still voice murmurred deep within, "So swings the weathercock".
So put away your grieving, child, there's fightin' to be done,
And, far more than fightin', talkin', before our fight is won.
So put away your chickenhawks and religious agit'eurs,
For freedom's fight's a singing fight and singing's to be heard.
I've learnt McAndrew's lesson hard, my 'puters are his steam,
The towers felled, the world's ablaze not waking from this dream.
My numbers recall many things that seem to be absurd,
For now's the changing of the times:- th' impossible's occurred.
I cannot say I know for sure, I cannot make you know,
The build up to this bloody war was long and sure and slow,
But there are those who dream up war for gold or Empire's gain,
And in all wars the only sure's that both sides will feel pain.
The dream the PNACs had been brewin' came real in fire and fear that day,
No matter much its way of doin', the towers fell their way.
See, 'taint so much its way of doin', tho' take a look in here,
The war the killers had been brewin' had found its engineer.
Know those who love their golden dreams did turn a cold blind eye,
To perverse schemes that smoothed the way for terror from the sky.
While others dreamt cold Empire's dream, knowing for the best we fight,
And in a war this is for sure -- first corpses prove the right.
Think you this war's for freedom's call? Then look you what they do.
Just who would woo with shock and awe as freedom's billet-doux?
Think you that Saddam caused the blow, or he was in on it?
You'll find you've been misled somehow, by media counterfeit.
You think that mass destructive power was hid in wrecked Iraq?
It was not so. No evidence, nor needed to attack.
This new world war's not like the old, the sides are hardly clear.
But, just one side has reason's hold -- the others must use fear.
As reason is our freedom's friend, not Hell or Paradise,
So reason will this nightmare end, not needless sacrifice.
Yes, we've been misled. We've stumbled and we've strayed.
We've been religiously misled, and freedom's been betrayed.
John Tucker, June 2006
This poem may be reproduced in its entirety in
any medium provided this notice is preserved
Similar threads
