Christophera
01-15-2007, 04:31 PM
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.
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.
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.
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.