BE -- "death wish for the planet" why the internet?

[David Morris]

How do you know that you don't know?

On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 9:01 AM, Keith Davis <kbob42 at gmail.com> wrote:

> About the conspiracies, after all this time, no one knows (?) who pulled
> the trigger(s) on JFK. That's a pretty effective cover-up.
>
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 9:58 AM, Keith Davis <kbob42 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> But, as TE and JT say above, there are all of these unanswered questions.
>> Agree also about the tone of the description surrounding the events. He's
>> not offering answers or opinions, but posing questions, without asking them
>> outright.
>>
>> Just finished the Oglesby book and now into the Douglass book. Everything
>> is a conspiracy, just matters what side or sides of it you're on.
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 9:39 AM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> "In organized crime a very simple priciple is at work and is very
>>> effective: bind members to an oath of secrecy, make their membership pay,
>>> kill anyone and their families who squeal."
>>>
>>> Like I said, "vast numbers of conspirators are bound to fall apart.
>>> Either kill all who know the conspiracy, or pay them lavishly until
>>> they die on their own."
>>>
>>> BTW, the mafia isn't exactly a secret.  And their internal discipline
>>> isn't exactly steel-clad.
>>>
>>> "Gary Webb exposing CIA agents"
>>> "Ed Snowden is another example"
>>>
>>> Good examples of why vast conspiracies will always fail.
>>>
>>> David Morris
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 3:44 PM, Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I do not consider this a very good argument.  The whole world of
>>>> organized criminal activity would be in trouble if it were.  I think there
>>>> are several examples of large scale conspiracies that went virtually
>>>> un-noticed by the rest of the world, the mass killing in the Nazi holocaust
>>>> is a powerful example. It shows 3 things about conspiracies: 1) what the
>>>> newspapers don’t report is not considered real and this means no outrage,
>>>> no response 2) even  victims or an opposing army might have reasons or
>>>> might be coerced to keep silence. 3) ordinary people who witness such
>>>> things will often be ignored as unreliable, or lack the courage to risk
>>>> speaking out.
>>>>   The people directly involved in this massive conspiracy were no
>>>> different than American Skull and Bones or CIA or racist pricks or the
>>>> servicemen who committed atrocities in Vietnam.  Hannah Arendt’s studies
>>>> provide persuasive evidence that huge numbers may be recruited into
>>>> murderous behavior  when it becomes the fundamental policy of the state and
>>>> that behavior is perceived as a combination of self interest and duty.
>>>>   In organized crime a very simple priciple is at work and is very
>>>> effective: bind members to an oath of secrecy, make their membership pay,
>>>> kill anyone and their families who squeal.
>>>>    A more recent example is the case of Gary Webb exposing CIA agents
>>>> in an ongoing criminal conspiracy to fund Contras by drug traffic in black
>>>> neighborhoods .  He worked for a reputable newspaper, his facts were well
>>>> supported, he was right as the CIA quietly admitted later, but the NY Times
>>>> and other media kings didn’t like the story precisely because it smacked of
>>>> loony conspiracy theories. They effectively crushed him.  Neither the CIA
>>>> or its agents were ever punished.
>>>>   Ed Snowden is another example. If not for him we would not have any
>>>> kind of accurate picture of the extent of NSA surveillance. People who are
>>>> willing to risk exile and death are actually pretty rare which is obvious
>>>> since this agency has thousands of employees who knew what Snowden knew.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> > On Mar 9, 2016, at 2:28 AM, Thomas Eckhardt <
>>>> thomas.eckhardt at uni-bonn.de> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > Am 08.03.2016 um 23:39 schrieb David Morris:
>>>> >> Thomas Eckhardt said (re. logistics of controlled 9-11
>>>> >> demolition: "Apart from the logistical difficulties such a task would
>>>> >> pose, there would have to be many people involved."
>>>> >>
>>>> >> For me this is another reason vast conspiracy theories are hard to
>>>> >> believe: vast numbers of conspirators are bound to fall apart. Either
>>>> >> kill all who know the conspiracy, or pay them lavishly until they
>>>> die on
>>>> >> their own.
>>>> >
>>>> > Ernie addresses this point:
>>>> >
>>>> > "The chief argument against conspiracy theories is always that it
>>>> would take too many people in on it, and somebody's sure to squeal. But
>>>> look at the U.S. security apparatus, these guys are WASPs, Mormons, Skull
>>>> and bones, secretive by nature. Trained, sometimes since birth, never to
>>>> run  off at the mouth. If discipline exists anywhere, it's among them. So
>>>> of course it's possible." BE, 325.
>>>> >
>>>> > I don't buy this. There are not that many people ruthless enough to
>>>> commit a crime like that IMO, Skull and Bones or not. For controlled
>>>> demolition, furthermore, you would need "mechanics" -- demolition experts
>>>> and the persons actually placing explosives.
>>>> > -
>>>> > Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
>>>>
>>>> -
>>>> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?listpynchon-l
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> www.innergroovemusic.com
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> www.innergroovemusic.com
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20160311/cdd57322/attachment.html>