Lest we forget 911
Back> The Deceived Mind Home> el loco Gringo
My unease with wordiness is that it obfuscates the main point. It is a writing style I call glare. Politicians and other con artists use it to hide what they are saying. Without going into details, after 8 seconds the “bullshit detector” goes to sleep and the mind flips over to the open mode. In practical terms if you’re trying to conceal something, front load your speech, lecture, whatever with undeniable truth (or a pseudo-truth) IE start with a bumper sticker. If you can con ’em for the first 8 seconds the rest of the presentation can be total bullshit and be accepted as true. In the case of a republican, for instance, every 4 years they’ll wrap them selves in the American flag, mom, apple pie, then baffle ’em with bullshit. Only later do they go back to examine the presentation when they are informed that the quote was “taken out of context”. A college professor may start a lecture with a profundity, and will keep referring back to it when cornered. Thus reading glare is cumbersome for me, I have to keep reminding myself to “listen for the new told lie” – Hair. I call it “puttin’ on the Polaroids” to see through the glare. That’s why I say you can type faster than I can read. Another example of glare is Goebbels “big lie” and conspiracy theories. Consider the WTC (not a big issue with me, there’s worse things happening) Even the “crackpot” theories have more credibility than the official version. What no one realizes is that the official version is itself a conspiracy theory. There is actually a law against using glare in Singapore. (They don’t call it glare, they call it fog) called the FOG index. The way they apply it is that any contract, law, regulation etc. must fit on one page with certain constraints.
It has been said that evil cannot exist in the light. Not true, not only can it exist, it can flourish. Let’s take for example the 911 “attack” on the WTC. There is a lot of evidence that cannot be disproved but could be faked. OK, lets discount it. What can’t be faked is live TV coverage of the event. While I will concede your right to your own opinion, you do not have the right to your own facts. I will only include 3 items and challenge anyone to explain them away.
Of the many conspiracy theories about WTC/911 the weakest is the official version. (It is, after all, just another conspiracy theory.)
The flame coming from the towers was yellow with heavy smoke. This is an uncontrolled (open) kerosene (jet fuel) flame which burns at about 1000 deg. A controlled kerosene flame would burn blue about 2000 deg. The point is that the open flame is not hot enough to damage the support columns but the controlled flame is also not hot enough. Think of a gas stove, the blue flame (much hotter) does not damage the iron grill (much softer) A yellow flame isn’t going to damage hardened steel.
The support columns were cut at an angle, this is standard practice in building demolition to cause the building to fall straight down rather than topple over. The only way this can be done is with primacord.
- The live BBC broadcast of the event showed building 7 standing, visible over the announcers shoulder while she was describing the collapse. A full 23 minutes.
- WTC 7 Prescient