9-11 box cutters 11 september utility knives

[Joseph Tracy]

> the sheer number of people who must be keeping mum about things they know. People just
aren't that good at keeping massive, world-changing secrets. 

 Very true in many or most cases, and that is the reason I was highly skeptical of an inside job for years, even though the first time I saw the footage on a large screen I was stunned at how much it looked like a controlled demolition. One of the turning points that opened my mind to consider collusion was Colleen Rowley and the fact that she clearly warned her superiors with vital information and was quashed. Later I chanced to have dinner with her at a restaurant in Washington DC after being arrested with her and others for an antiwar protest at the white house. She was with a group from Minnesota where I lived for years. If she is a glory hound then I am popeye the sailor. She knows first hand and is willing to talk about the force that can be applied to whistleblowers . After I met and spoke with her I began to look at what the truthers were saying and to sort through their questions. 

The possibility of getting people to do horrible things on a massive scale and effectively hide them is demonstrated by the Nazi Death Camps.   Beside the effectiveness of the Nazis, even  the OSS and FDR dismissed credible information from reliable sources and kept it under wraps. 

Dick Cheney  makes the devil plausible. 

On Nov 21, 2013, at 7:45 PM, John Bailey wrote:

> I'm not in agreement with Joseph here but I do think the P-list is as
> safe a place as any for him (and others) to share their doubts.
> 
> The main reason I write off truther concerns is the sheer number of
> people who must be keeping mum about things they know. People just
> aren't that good at keeping massive, world-changing secrets. Even if
> coerced, threatened, hypnotised, drugged, etc. A JFK-type conspiracy
> *could* be credible since only a few key players would have to know
> about it, but as Laura points out, you want to bring in Hollywood
> types, and other governments, and thousands and thousands of people on
> the street?
> 
> I also work in mass media and can say first-hand without a doubt that
> the media does not do what it is told. Editors will be biased and play
> to particular parties or ideologies or interests or lobby groups and
> I'm not arguing that you should ever trust what you read, but there is
> no way a government could convince every editor to go with a
> particular story. The noble dream that sends most people to J-school
> is that of speaking "truth to power" and while the dream becomes
> tarnished and dull I have met no shortage of people who cling to it
> like mad dogs until their teeth are at all angles and they would go to
> the wall rather than bow before a political demand to tell a certain
> story.
> 
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 11:20 AM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Pontificating again.
>> 
>> 
>> On Thursday, November 21, 2013, Fiona Shnapple wrote:
>>> 
>>> The Internet induces Sloth, not democracy of information and decision
>>> making. Hey, let the big boys take care of everything. Fiscal Cliffs!
>>> QE! The Debt! The Markets. So complicated. so arcane. Who can even
>>> understand anything anymore let alone make a decision.  The experts.
>>> The specialists. The thousands of expert and specialist cultures, not
>>> two but thousands.
>>> 
>>> Good thing people fuck with it, turn it on and off, mess with it's
>>> delivery systems, create underground delivery systems, financial
>>> systems...so on....this is what BE shows. And P does it, sets the
>>> example, messing with it. Making fun of it. Laughing at what Gleick
>>> calls the Flood.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 7:00 PM, Fiona Shnapple <fionashnapple at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>> The internet was the communication tool that could have induced a
>>>>> democratization of information and decision making but as BE shows, that
>>>>> dream is dead.  Only the earth itself seems to have a revolutionary option
>>>>> to overthrow the madness.
>>>> 
>>>> Oh come on,  Joseph. You never really  believed that the Internet
>>>> could save us from our madness. Did you?
>>>> 
>>>> Did you or anyone else ever seriously believe that the Internet could
>>>> induce democratization of information and decision making?
>>>> 
>>>> Oh,  come on. I though you smarter than that.
>>>> 
>>>> Did you ever believe this? I hope not.
>>>> 
>>>> BE doesn't show us that this was ever a possibility. It's the foolish
>>>> dream of geeks who hoped, of course, to be the liberators and
>>>> democratizers, as long as they got, well, to be cool, and like, a
>>>> little rich.
>>> -
>>> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
> -
> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l

-
Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l