An interesting phenomenon seen when we have a perceived transfer of power in our country is “changing partners,” where Republicans and Democrats reverse positions on issues. When Republicans were the titular heads of the executive branch, for example, Democrats were concerned about deficits, and Republicans silent on the matter. In 2008 they switched partners, and deficits became a matter of serious concern. Democrats used to oppose acts to terrorism like torture and rendition, and are now a fervent and aggressive war party.

Most people just do this blindly, but intellectuals are not so lucky. They have to offer justification. That leads to another phenomenon I call “pretzelling,” where no matter the policy, no matter that it is identical (or more extreme) than that of the other party, they will wrap their brains around it. They find ways to obfuscate, justify, and as seen below, will ridicule those who easily see the contradiction.

Below is a quote from Polish Wolf (see comments below the post in this link), who for five years now has been dissecting US military aggression, finding that under Obama it is being intelligently managed.
Continue reading “People o our sort …” →

As the right wing circus celebrates the passing of the brutal dictator Hugo Chavez, life in the free states under our jurisdiction goes on:

Saudi human rights activists sentenced to 10 years in prison

Two human rights activists have been jailed in Saudi Arabia for inciting rebellion and misinforming foreign media. A Riyadh court sentenced Mohammed Fahd al-Qahtani and Abdullah Hamad to 10 years each. As members of the banned ACPRA pressure group, they had called for the introduction of elections and a constitutional monarchy in a state that forbids political parties altogether.

One legitimate criticism of the work of Dr. Judy Wood is this: If such weaponry as directed energy that caused the destruction of seven WTC buildings on 9/11 existed, it would not be born as an adult. There would have to have been tests and smaller events during its development. After all, before Hiroshima, the Nevada desert was used as a testing ground.

We know hardly anything of US military activities around the world – if I were to guess, something like 1% might be visible to us, the rest hidden from view, unknown here in the land of the free and oblivious. Unknown unknowns are the rule.

But there was an anomalous event of suspicious nature at took place on April 19, 1995 in Oklahoma City – the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building was destroyed. The deed was done, we are told, by Timothy McVeigh and accomplices. He went quietly to his grave, like Iago defiant and unwilling to talk. I remember at the time of the bombing an odd-duck right-in-my-face contradiction: TIME Magazine had an artist’s sketch of the crime scene, and in it was a large hole in the ground in front of the building that was created by the fertilizer bomb. The problem was that actual photos of the crime scene, as opposed to the drawing, showed no hole.* (See above.)
Continue reading “Testing 1 2 3” →

High-profile people in high office in DC are just filling slots, but the policy output from those offices does not change nor is it original with them. Replacing Colin Powell with Condoleezza Rice with Hillary Clinton with John Kerry is merely shuffling of personalities to the podium to announce policy initiatives that come from inside the bowels of the Pentagon, CIA, “defense” contractors or Wall Street, or any combination thereof. The office Secretary of State does require a lot of traveling and face time with foreign personalities, and so is a good career choice for anyone unhappy in marriage or just wanting to travel the world. No doubt Bill Clinton was thrilled when Hillary took the job.

“Secretary of State” John Kerry announced that the US will deliver $60 million in “non-lethal” aid to the Syrian “rebels.” Those quotes are there to help you see through the mist.

• Kerry, having served intelligence interests since his days as a war protester (infiltrator, “op,”), is semi-retired now.
• “Non-lethal” aid is only the aid we are allowed to see. Real aid – bombs for terrorist attacks, chemical weapons, guns and mortars are either sent to Syria on the sly or routed through another country, like Israel, Poland, or some other complicit client state. (That’s the old ,Nicaraguan “Contra” ploy, where their weapons came from Israel, Iran, Czechoslovakia, South Africa).
• And the “rebels” are run by western intelligence, and probably consist of fighters trained in Libya, Kosovo, Saudi Arabia, perhaps Guantanamo and other places. Often, when used for other purposes, they are called “Al Qaeda.” They are run by Americans, Brits and Israelis. Since Syria is a former French colony, it is logical to assume significant involvement by them too.

The attack on Syria is just another imperialist venture, and President Bashar al-Assad’s “crime,” the only one anyone cares about, is the refusal to allow his country to be integrated into the London-Washington financial system. That is why our terrorists decide that other people are terrorists.

It is not a matter of what is true that counts, but a matter of what is perceived to be true. (Henry Kissinger)

“Thought control” is a crude phrase, but an accurate one. There are gentler ways of putting it, but that seems the best description of the phenomenon where people assume they are thinking their own thoughts even as they are being manipulated by others. The question should be not whether it exists, by rather if it exists because of us, or some unscrupulous “them” who have entered our minds like body snatchers. (Invasion of the Body Snatchers, like Wag the Dog,” is a movie that makes this exact point in an artistic manner. Since I work with a hammer and not a paint brush, I cannot do what they did.)

The simple fact is that we are almost all subject to the wisdom of others, and none of us are original thinkers. Following is not by itself a bad thing as long as judgment is present. But that has to do with thought, and not perceptions.

Continue reading “On “thought” control” →

Oh, what the hell. We’re having so much fun anyway.

Linked here is an affidavit by John Lear, who is the son of the founder of Lear Jet. I have avoided citing him in any discussions because I am not sure he is trustworthy. One, he was a pilot for the CIA in Vietnam, flying for Air America, or the CIA operation that was used to fly heroin into Vietnam. In the 9/11 business, anyone with an intelligence background needs to be distrusted.

Two, he appears to be doing a garden-path limited hangout. The “limited hangout” is where an agent discloses a certain amount of truth, but only to mislead people. This is what Stephen Jones was doing with his nanothermite evidence – trying to lead people away from Dr. Judy Wood and directed energy, which appears to be on the right track. John Lear is a professional pilot and technically adept in flight engineering and dynamics, so I find his affidavit to be credible. However, if you follow him too far you will learn that he thinks there are people living on the far side of the moon and under the surface of the earth, and that we are all transported there twice before age 13. That is classic psy-op, to lure people with truth, and then crash them into a wall with obvious nonsense.

That in mind, I am putting up the link here because his affidavit was part of a real court case, and so is open to discussion and critique among professionals. It is not hard reading at all, but the concepts are foreign to the pedestrian. He concludes that no plane could have hit the Twin Towers because an inexperienced pilot could not perform those feats; because the building would offer too much resistance for it to be absorbed as seen on TV; because the parts of the plane would not disintegrate anyway, especially engines that operate at 650 degrees centigrade and weigh 9,000 pounds each; and because planes cannot fly that fast so close to the ground.

However, in cartoons, everything is possible! He therefore accuses NIST and the government and its contractors of fraud.

The affidavit is four single-spaced pages long. Takes about twenty minutes.

This is a lesson for all of us, but especially for me: Power owns truth. Believing is seeing.

Working in oil and gas as I have all these years, I have met and worked with technically brilliant people. The science of finding oil in the ground is one that requires both high intelligence and nuance – the technical data tells them things, but they have another voice that plays along side that data and offers another interpretation. That is high intelligence – not a rote reading of data, but an integration of data and experience, scientific knowledge and sideways vision. That is the case with every serious profession out there except economics. And yet these same brilliant people fall for easily detected political lies, impossible coincidence and manufactured evidence. Power owns truth.

I can be played, like anyone, based on my sympathies. Apple computers are just like all other computers, but their advertising created an aura, and I bought in. I’m older now and can see through advertising, and movies have to be very good to even be memorable. But our churches are filled with older people who are still muttering the prayers embedded in their minds in their youth, turning their money over to the likes of Pat Robertson. He’s an actor, a man who is knowingly fleecing people, becoming a billionaire in the process. It is no surprise the that he ran for president, merely taking the act to another level. (It is also no surprise to learn that Billy Graham urged Richard Nixon to bomb the dikes in North Vietnam, killing maybe two million people. It appears from evidence up there that our military murderers tried and failed.) Politics and religion are variations on the same theme.
Continue reading “Power owns truth” →

The phenomenon witnessed at this blog the past couple of weeks has less to do with the events of 9/11 than with human psychology, and it is fascinating. I’d be foolish to presume to understand it in any great depth. People who do that sort of thing are often themselves caught in a trap, as a psychologist I saw in a YouTube saying that the people who don’t believe the official story of 9/11 are mentally unstable, or the “skeptics” at Skeptics Guide to the Universe or Brian Dunning at Skeptoid saying that we just have to trust our government on this one. They all exhibit the trait they arrogantly claim to describe. The most common name for it, not that it is at all descriptive, is “cognitive dissonance.”

I have read of CG and seen it described as the ability to hold contradictory beliefs, firmly believing in each. Another merely describes it as “certainty” in the face of contradiction. Whatever it is, it is the human condition, so that just like the pompous asses of SGU, if I describe it without including myself, I am a naive fool. Let it be understood that this brief essay is about “us,” and not “you.”

Every now and then I get a brief ray of sunlight on some of my behaviors in past years, and see myself as others might have seen me. It creates a shock wave of pain. Very quickly my inner defenses will rush to the breach and reconstruct that past in a favorable light, and project the problem outward. They had a problem, not me.
Continue reading “What is cognitive dissonance?” →

These past couple of weeks have been spent here talking about 9/11. As an idealist, I cannot long live in duplicity, having a secret set of beliefs while pretending otherwise.

I was suspicious of the events of that day from the start and kept quiet about it due to social pressure that is part of the ongoing cover-up. As seen here, it takes no evidence to convince most of the public to believe the official story, and if doubtful, they are programmed to avoid even looking at counter-evidence.**

This is an expertly run PSY-OP. The methodology is to traumatize us, and then implant ideas in that state. Once implanted, the ideas are hard-wired and will never go away. Pearl Harbor* was such an event. It mobilized an isolationist population to participate in a world-wide conflagration.

In 1999, a group of “Neo-Cons” put together a planning document urging President Clinton to attack Iraq. It was called the “Project for a New American Century,” and a paragraph therein said that it would be difficult to get the American people to support the level of war they wanted without some mobilizing event, a “New Pearl Harbor.”
Continue reading “Moving on …” →

David Sirota departed the radio scene here in Denver late last year, and no one is talking about it. I assumed while he was on-air that his goose was being slow-cooked in a crock pot. The only allowed “alternative” radio voices are rank-and-file Democrats like blow-hard Ed Schultz or motor-mouthed Thom Hartmann. The only discussion allowed on our airwaves is about the microscopic differences between the parties. Sirota was openly critical of President Obama, Sen Michael Bennet and Gov John Hickenlooper. Democrats, not known for tolerance, were steaming. When he left radio, I pictured those three eating a dish served cold.

Here’s another view. Sirota had also urged listeners and readers to sign a White House petition for Obama to create a “Do not kill” list so that some of us could be protected from his terrorist drone strikes. Did this make him a target? Is that why he was removed from radio? Will he soon exit the planet?