Garrison Keillor mentions "9/11 conspiracy theory"

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: orz comment

Postby Hugh Manatee Wins » Mon Oct 02, 2006 12:18 pm

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>you make a post with a specific claim that is indistinguishable from paranioa, and then when called on it you start saying you were speaking generally<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>"Indistinguishable from paranoia"<br>Now there's a blanket dismissive statement.<br><br>I notice others have a tendency to set up straw men of things I didn't say, demand unobtainable "proofs," and fail to understand the value of putting a topic on the table as an invitation to think or just for the value of keeping it on the table for new readers in the spirit of grassroots education.<br><br>But I don't say their posts are "indistinguishable from nihilism."<br><br>My recent Operation Mockingbird is a case in point.<br>I didn't "claim" that librarians where using Banned Book Day to help the CIA. I suggested it could be used opportunistically and even analyzed the official Banned Book list and suggested better ones with links to the ones that are available online.<br><br>Lots of info from me and your welcome. sheesh.<br><br>I gave <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>means-motive-opportunity-precedent-evidence</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> of keyword hijacking to obscure OTHER spook projects and dirty laundry because I think it is important to understand this along with OpMock itself.<br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>It was an educational warning, not "a claim."</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> You see, orz, when there is a quesion mark in the thread title that mean it is a question. Atleast, here in the USA.<br><br>If you read the thread you'll see that I gave quite a detailed explication of how a nice group of people could be used as a CIA-front for keyword hijacking due to the word in the name of the group and demographics.<br><br>I showed book publishing and internet examples.<br><br>Who else is doing any grassroots education of COINTELPRO-style infowar tactics that you know of anywhere?<br><br>I have a massive library on Cold War communications research and study social engineering, propaganda, and psychological warfare by studying the neurobiology, psychology, sociology, and history of the last 100 years.<br><br>And you?<br><br>So, orz, if you don't see it, fine. I always want to communicate better. <br> <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
Hugh Manatee Wins
 
Posts: 9869
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 6:51 pm
Location: in context
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: orz comment

Postby Sepka » Mon Oct 02, 2006 12:22 pm

Personally, I find the idea that Democrats are listening to the Prairie Home Companion for their weekly coded instructions to be roughly as questionable as the idea that Kielor is speaking directly to one person.<br><br> <p>-Sepka the Space Weasel</p><i></i>
User avatar
Sepka
 
Posts: 1983
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2005 2:56 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Sepka's comment

Postby Hugh Manatee Wins » Mon Oct 02, 2006 1:12 pm

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Personally, I find the idea that Democrats are listening to the Prairie Home Companion for their weekly coded instructions to be roughly as questionable<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>A basic tenet of propaganda is that visible/audible elite are looked to for cues on what to believe and do. I know people who have for many years listened to Garrison Keillor like a letter from home or a sermon or a political rally. <br><br>That's just basic. And drives the last 60 years of media management towards political ends. <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
Hugh Manatee Wins
 
Posts: 9869
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 6:51 pm
Location: in context
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: orz comment

Postby medicis » Mon Oct 02, 2006 1:34 pm

re<!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :b --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/tongue.gif ALT=":b"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> vonahsen's comments,<br><br>1<br>Question: Is paranoia ever justified and under what circumstance might you imagine that it is?<br><br><br><br>2 re: the following:<br>I am pretty disappointed with this place lately. I thought at first there would be an effort to walk the fine line between rationalism and intuition. What I see of late are delusional and paranoid schizophrenics just running amuck. People seemingly think that every auditory and visual hallucination they have is as real as the chair I sit on. It makes me feel sad.<br><br>Can you provide me with an acceptable (let's DSM-IV quality or better) definition of 'delusion' and 'paranoid schizophrenia' so that I can determine whether or not they are "running amuck" here. <br><br>3 While you are at it, can you provide me with a definition of projection?<br><br>thanks,<br>medicis<br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>
medicis
 
Posts: 220
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 2:37 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: orz comment

Postby professorpan » Mon Oct 02, 2006 1:40 pm

Hugh, you persist in pimping your so-called "keyword hijacking" idea in spite of the fact that you have yet to produce a speck of evidence to back it up. When challenged, you post reams of text from decades-old books about psychology and manipulation. That is not evidence. <br><br>And you bemoan when we ask for evidence? What does that suggest about your emotional attachment to your conclusions?<br><br>You have convinced yourself that a grand, organized conspiracy has overtaken the entirety of the mass media and micromanages the placement of DVDs on your local video rental store. <br><br>Others, myself included, have pointed out the fallacies of your theory, yet you can't seem to back off enough to give your ideas a necessary critical appraisal.<br><br>And that makes <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>us</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> myopic? If anything, you are so buried in your own theories you can't extract yourself from them. That's myopia.<br><br>I have no doubts about your intelligence and your breadth of research. I do question your conclusions and wish you could learn to apply critical thinking to your biases and suppositions. That's the only thing stopping you from being a formidable media analyst.<br><br> <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
professorpan
 
Posts: 3592
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 12:17 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Sepka's comment

Postby Sepka » Mon Oct 02, 2006 4:31 pm

Hugh said: <!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>A basic tenet of propaganda is that visible/audible elite are looked to for cues on what to believe and do. I know people who have for many years listened to Garrison Keillor like a letter from home or a sermon or a political rally.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>I don't for a minute dispute the idea that there are opinion-makers in society. That's a rather more conservative claim than you were making originally, though: <!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>After I heard this I called my angry friend back to say that this was Democrat Garrison Keillor's steganographic message over the air to us that the so-called Heartland-ers are going to be utterly repelled by the 9/11 truth movement so don't go there, just decry the torture and war and looting and etc.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>And for what it's worth, I think you probably overestimate Garrison Kiellor's ability to sway people anyway. The man's popularity comes not from setting expectations, but from meeting them. He shows Americans a picture of small town life as they'd like to believe that it is. He's lauded for reinforcing beliefs, not for defining them. <br> <p>-Sepka the Space Weasel</p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=sepka>Sepka</A> at: 10/2/06 2:35 pm<br></i>
User avatar
Sepka
 
Posts: 1983
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2005 2:56 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

radio listeners' imaginations

Postby ewastud » Tue Oct 03, 2006 2:32 am

The topic here reminds me of when I was a DJ at a small Country and Western format radio station 30 years ago. Some woman with apparently some psychological problems would call me often every night. When I played a love song, she would call me thinking I was sending her a personal message; when I played a typical C&W break-up song, she would call back a couple minutes later angry and cursing me. I think bvonahsen is right on this one. People are reading FAR too much into Keillor's monologue. <p></p><i></i>
ewastud
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 4:55 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Prarie Home Conspiracy

Postby heyjt » Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:10 am

Play Misty For Me... <p></p><i></i>
heyjt
 
Posts: 221
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 11:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: listeners' imaginations. Garrison's all over 9/11..cover

Postby Hugh Manatee Wins » Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:18 am

Keillor has recently published some very political statements about the grandstanding around 9/11 and the war in Iraq.<br><br>In a piece published in late August 2006 he uses the release of 9/11 emergency call tapes with the victim's voices left out as impetus to condemn Rudy Giuliani and other politicians using 9/11 for their own purposes.<br><br>He also embraces the cover story of 19 men with boxcutters.<br>Pity, he's much smarter than that.<br><br>Read the man's writing before you declare me paranoid for reading meaning into his words. He's been a Twain-like public figure for decades. Seems he might really believe the 9/11 truth movement is barking up the wrong tree.<br><br>So he was sending a message in last Saturday's broadcast from Missoula. But the wrong message.<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0824-28.htm">www.commondreams.org/views06/0824-28.htm</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr><br>Published on Thursday, August 24, 2006 by the Baltimore Sun (Maryland)<br>Hear the Voices of 9/11<br>by Garrison Keillor<br> <br>It was painful to hear the woman in anguish on the 83rd floor of the World Trade Center, crying, "I'm going to die, aren't I? I'm going to die." Melissa Doi was 32, beautiful, with laughing eyes and black hair. She was lying on the floor of her office at IQ Financial, overwhelmed by smoke and heat, calling for help. And then there was Kevin Cosgrove on the 105th floor, moments before it collapsed, gasping for breath, saying, "We're young men, we're not ready to die." And then he screamed, "Oh my God" as the building started to collapse. It's in their voices, what they went through.<br><br>Those were two of the 1,613 calls to 911 released by New York City last week, on almost all of which the caller's voice was beeped out. The city argued that to hear people in anguish in their last minutes constitutes invasion of privacy. The truth is that the callers had no interest in privacy - they were desperate to be heard, and censoring them now is a last insult by a bureaucracy that failed to protect them in the first place.<br><br>They were people like us; we might have sat near them in a theater or restaurant, asked them for directions on the street. They went to work that fine Tuesday morning and suddenly found themselves facing the abyss, and the first thing we thought, seeing the burning buildings on TV, was, "What is it like for the people in there?" We wanted to know.<br><br>Then, inevitably, politicians began to seize the day and turn it into a patriotic tableau starring Themselves. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, who does not appear in a leadership capacity in the reliable accounts of that morning - who was captured on videotape fleeing uptown - soon stepped into the TV lights and put on his public face, and a few days later the Current Occupant mounted the wreckage with bullhorn in hand and vowed vengeance. </strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->The media were glad to focus on the martial moment, the flag waving over the wreckage, the theme of America United, and the anguished voices from the towers were unheard; the people who fell from high floors and smashed into the pavement were not seen on American TV. The media averted their eyes from the reality of Sept. 11 and started looking for the Message.<br><br>The best book on the subject, by the way, is 102 Minutes: The Untold Story of the Fight to Survive Inside the Twin Towers, by Jim Dwyer and Kevin Flynn, two New York Times reporters who fashioned a plain narrative out of thousands of stories that took place in the time between the first strike and the collapse of the second tower. You read it, you're there.<br><br>Mr. Giuliani is still flying around giving speeches on leadership, knocking down a hundred grand per shot, getting standing ovations everywhere as a stand-in for the police and firemen who died in the towers. He has never faced up to his failure to prepare for the attack, even after the 1993 bomb explosion at the center, when it was shown clearly that police and fire couldn't communicate with each other by radio.<br><br>Eight years passed, little was done, and then came the 19 men with box cutters. The 911 operators took thousands of calls and had no information to give. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Police helicopter pilots, who had a clear view of the infernos and could see that the buildings were going to collapse, couldn't get word to fire chiefs on the ground who, unable to see the fire, sent their men up the stairs to die. </strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->Official bungling cost those men their lives.<br><br>In the end, what we crave is reality. The woman crying on the 83rd floor was real. Our countrymen died real deaths on a warm September morning, and then, to avenge them, even more have died in Iraq and Afghanistan. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>In our hearts, we know we're on the wrong road, the road to unreality, but the man says to stay the course. And now, as November nears, congressmen who have supported the war, no questions asked, find it convenient to admit to having "questions" about it. "We are facing a difficult situation," they say. They are "troubled."<br></strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br>The woman who cried on the 83rd floor was more than troubled. She saw death. It is indecent for New York to stifle the voices of the people in the towers. The congressmen who deal so casually with life and death ought to sit down and listen to those phone calls.<br><br>Garrison Keillor's "A Prairie Home Companion" can be heard Saturday nights on public radio stations across the country. <hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br><br><br>Keillor wrote about 9/11 alot this year. Here he is in the NYTimes Sunday Book Review on 9/3/06 focused on the people dying at the WTC and the people photographing this.<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/03/books/review/Keillor.t.html?ex=1314936000&en=f02e3602f38069a7&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss">www.nytimes.com/2006/09/0...nd&emc=rss</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Bearing Witness<br><br>By GARRISON KEILLOR<br>Published: September 3, 2006<br><br>It was a perfect late-summer day in New York, the sort of day when a person feels terribly lucky to be in the city. A man named Pavel Hlava was showing his brother Josef around town and raised his video camera toward the World Trade Center just in time to catch a bright object flashing in the sky and then a puff of smoke from the north face of the north tower. A French filmmaker, Jules Naudet, who was making a documentary about firefighters, was with a fire truck responding to a gas leak at Lispenard and Church Streets downtown when he heard the roar of a jet engine and raised his camera to catch the plane too. And so did two Webcams from an apartment window in Brooklyn. It was 8:46 a.m. on the 11th of September, 2001. At 8:49 a.m., CNN went live with a shot of the towers from a camera on the West Side. The second plane hit the south tower at 9:03, and by that time dozens of cameras were on the scene, aiming upward.<br><br>In his apartment at Broadway and Franklin Street, Lyle Owerko heard the first explosion, grabbed a Canon EOS 3 with a 400-millimeter zoom lens, dashed downstairs and around the corner to Chambers Street. “Life was still oddly normal,” he tells David Friend. “People stood buying bagels and coffee [from] corner street vendors.” Tom Flynn, a CBS News producer, was reading the morning paper on his deck in the West Village when “a plane went over the trees in my garden. It was low, it was loud, and it was determined. It was not right. It seemed to be revving up. Then there was a pop, like the sound of a softball hitting a glove.” He said to his wife, “We’re under attack,” and jumped on his bike and headed downtown. At the trade center, he found a Merrill Lynch employee, Eddie Remy, shooting video, and signed him up for CBS. By the time the south tower collapsed, shortly before 10 a.m., there were hundreds of photographers on the scene, some on assignment, some freelancers, most of them amateurs. Grant Peterson, shooting for Brides magazine in his studio near Broome Street and Broadway, turned his 4-by-5 view camera toward the burning towers. A woman named Kelly Price bought disposable cameras at a bodega and was taking pictures of the fires when the south tower pancaked to the ground. She raced down Broadway, running for her life, stopped at Pine Street and took a picture of the advancing Niagara of dust and debris and a man running ahead of it. He is holding a camera in his right hand and glancing over his left shoulder.<br><br>Friend, who was director of photography at the old Life magazine, writes: “As the morning crept on, New Yorkers poured into the streets, many to help, many in flight, all of them aghast. Out, too, came their cameras. Men and women by the hundreds, then thousands — bystanders with point-and-shoots, TV news teams, photojournalists by the score — felt compelled to snap history, fiery and cruel against the blue. People photographed from windows and parapets and landings. They photographed as they fled: in cars, across bridges, up avenues blanketed in drifts of ash and dust. They even photographed the images on their television sets as they watched the world changing, right there on the screen.” And soon thereafter, rescue workers in dusty yellow slickers started showing up at the Time & Life Building in Midtown trying to sell pictures they had taken.<br><br>A brief review can’t do justice to “Watching the World Change,” a lucid, thoughtful and wide-ranging book. In truth, Friend’s excellent writing conveys more of the truth of the day than photographs can. The picture of the three firemen raising an American flag over the ruins, which became an icon of 9/11, is not nearly so gripping as the story he tells of the exploitation of the picture, the feelings of the photographer, Thomas Franklin, and the stoical refusal of the three firemen to be lionized (though they did approve plans for a bronze statue of themselves, 18 feet tall on a 12-foot marble pedestal).<br><br>Photography is meant to convey reality, but some realities were judged unbearable. Jules Naudet arrived at the north tower with the men of Engine 7, Ladder 1, his camera running. He saw a screaming woman who was burning in an inferno of aviation fuel that had poured down an elevator shaft and decided, “I didn’t think anyone should have to see this.” An Associated Press photograph of a dark-skinned man falling through the air, upside down, his arms at his sides, one leg lifted, was printed in some newspapers; most considered it too graphic. The Daily News, after debate among the editors, published a picture of a severed hand lying in the street — “You can’t do the story without doing the story,” said the editor, Edward Kosner. French television, but not American, showed “scenes of plummeting people . . . one after another. Some tumbled. Some held hands, jumping in pairs, or three and four at a time.” Owerko, shooting the burning north tower, heard the crowd around him let out a long gasp: “I looked up to see an object descending from the tower. I recognized it to be a person and stood frozen as the body flipped and turned in a slow, tragic ballet, down to the courtyard. People screamed and cried. I watched in shock as another human shape began falling to earth. . . . I clicked away. . . . I wasn’t photographing death, it seemed to me. I felt, instead, that I was preserving the last moment of these individuals’ conscious existence.”<br><br>WE saw photographs that week of buildings burning, stunned onlookers, dust-covered firemen. Very few pictures conveyed the fact that people just like us, our fellow passengers on the subway, suddenly found themselves in a mortal predicament and many died horribly. We who weren’t downtown that morning tried to comprehend the horror. The most electrifying picture I remember from that week was a snapshot by a Port Authority employee, John Labriola, descending with other office workers in a stairwell of the north tower. A handsome young fireman is ascending the stairs, his eyes open wide, perspiring, hauling gear. All week one had seen distant images of fire and smoke, but here was a shot from inside a building about to collapse, and you looked at the fireman and thought, “My God, that man is about to be crushed to death.” (In fact, he escaped with a minute to spare, Friend reports.)<br><br>But mainly a cool decorum prevailed. We were shown pictures of this and not of that, allowed to see this and not look over there. The mainstream media seized upon inspirational and patriotic images, such as the picture of the three firemen; thus began a sort of mythification of the day into which George W. Bush and Rudolph Giuliani entered, bearing spears and shields. Photography assisted in that. Photography couldn’t convey the failure of national defense and intelligence, or the failure of the city of New York, even after the 1993 bombing of the trade center, to coordinate police and fire communications, a failure that cost many lives that morning, or certain tragic choices in the design of the towers. You need prose reporting for that. And in the end the images become common and one turns to words to find the reality. “The one conclusion I came to on 9/11 is that people in the stairwell . . . really were in ‘a state of grace.’ They helped each other. They didn’t panic,” Labriola says. “Most people are basically good. I knew this, with certainty, because I had gone through the crucible. What a great example people left: be selfless, help the person around you and get through it.”<br><br>Garrison Keillor is the host and writer of “A Prairie Home Companion” and the author of 16 books. He is the editor, most recently, of an anthology titled “Good Poems for Hard Times.”<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=hughmanateewins>Hugh Manatee Wins</A> at: 10/3/06 2:11 am<br></i>
User avatar
Hugh Manatee Wins
 
Posts: 9869
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 6:51 pm
Location: in context
Blog: View Blog (0)

There are many books on Propaganda Analysis

Postby NavnDansk » Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:33 am

I don't think the writers of such books are mentally ill, that is ridiculous.<br><br>January 25, 2006<br>By Pamela Troy<br><br>"If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime - Pol Pot or others - that had no concern for human beings." <br><br>- Senator Richard Durbin 6/14/05 <br><br>Does anybody remember Dick Durbin and the infamous "Nazi" remarks made on the Senate floor? The ones where he drew parallels to the way we treat our Iraqi prisoners and the human rights violations of regimes like the USSR, Pol Pot, and Hitler? You know, the remarks that prompted calls of "Insidious!" "Repugnant!" "Outrageous" from the talking heads and for which Durbin apologized a week later? <br><br>Of course, the Dick Durbin thing was several months ago which, given the attention span of the American media, qualifies as almost a century. That might explain the amnesia that seems to have set in among various pundits. Or maybe the weird inconsistency currently being displayed has to do with the ongoing drive to transform the memory of the Third Reich into a carefully preserved and shellacked museum piece. <br><br>Whatever the reason, some of the same people who were making horrified noises about Durbin seeing a moral similarity between torturing Middle Easterners in 2005 and torturing Western Europeans in 1942 responded to the latest Osama Bin Laden recording by gleefully comparing Bin Laden's comments to those of American critics of Bush. Joe Scarborough said, "When you look at what Osama Bin Laden said it sounds an awful lot like what we hear the President's political enemies domestically - not only like what a lot of democratic senators have been saying, but also what one or two movie makers have been saying over the past several years..." Chris Matthews compared Bin Laden to Michael Moore. Tucker Carlson spent several minutes giggling about it on his show, declaring "I literally expected him to say Hillary in 2008 in the end." <br><br>Not, as some of them insist, that they're equating Bin Laden to America's critics. Oh mercy no! They're just, well... thinking out loud. <br><br>So why is it appropriate to compare statements from Bin Laden with those of opponents of the Bush administration like Michael Moore, John Kerry, and Howard Dean but inappropriate to compare torture committed by Germans to torture committed by Americans? <br><br>One of the answers commonly offered is that the Third Reich was extra, extra special. It represented an incredible effort at mass extermination, combining a fanatical ideology with modern efficiency and mechanization. The death, the havoc, the suffering of millions was unprecedented, and all the more terrible in that the nation responsible was one that had formerly been an open society admired for its contributions to literature and philosophy. <br><br>Therefore, according to some, the best way for us all to show respect for Hitler's victims is to act as though what happened to them couldn't possibly have anything to do with us. As Jon Stewart explained about the Durbin quote, the question is whether or not inmates at Auschwitz would consider such treatment "a day at the beach." That criterion effectively eliminates as victims of Nazi-like treatment not only Hans and Sophie Scholl of the White Rose resistance group (they were "merely" beheaded without being tortured five days after being arrested for passing out anti-Hitler leaflets), but the inhabitants of the Warsaw and Lodz ghettoes, the people targeted during Kristalnacht, and those folks who were forced by German soldiers to scrub the sidewalks of Vienna shortly after the Anschluss. <br><br>And besides, it's argued, the "hallmark" of Nazism is how many they killed. Until a society begins to murder on that scale, using the Nazis as a parallel is just plain wrong. Those leaflets the White Rose risked their lives to distribute, like the one that opened with "Nothing is so unworthy of a civilized nation as allowing itself to be governed without opposition by an irresponsible clique that has yielded to base instinct?" Irrelevant! Why, nothing would have insulted those martyrs to free speech more than the thought that someone several decades down the road might take their message to heart before the death toll had hit six million. The Niemoller Statement? Badly worded. What Niemoller probably meant to say was "First they came for no fewer than several thousand Communists..." <br><br>And now Bin Laden is being merrily used as a club with which to beat critics of the Bush administration. Where an insanely narrow set of criteria is being demanded for comparisons with the Third Reich, an insanely broad set of criteria is used to justify comparisons with the man widely considered America's number one mortal enemy. <br><br>What made Hitler's name a curse in the mouths of any civilized person was the fact that even before knowledge of the death camps became widespread, he was known to be a thug whose followers tortured and often killed any opponent unlucky enough to fall into their hands. It was his use of deceit and brutality, whether in the streets of Berlin or the concentration camps or the Gestapo prisons that made him a bad guy. It wasn't because he was a vegetarian non-smoker, because he was an anti-Communist, or because he disliked Winston Churchill and Franklin Delano Roosevelt. <br><br>So pointing out any shameful similarities in the way we treat prisoners to the way the Third Reich treated prisoners (or the way the Soviet Union or Pol Pot treated prisoners) is valid, painful as it may be. Taking a quote from Hitler in which he criticizes Franklin Delano Roosevelt, laying it alongside a quote from an American Republican who criticizes Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and coyly inviting everyone to observe the similarities is not valid unless that Republican is also comparing Jews to maggots or rhapsodizing about the use of force and the single idea in motivating the masses. <br><br>What has made Bin Laden despised in the U.S. and much of the western world is the fact that he's believed to have masterminded the worst terrorist attack in American history. Countless American citizens did not spend three days in September of 2001 sitting stunned in front of the television because someone was uttering criticisms of George W. Bush. We were horrified and enraged by a crime that left some three thousand people dead. <br><br>If a prominent Democrat or liberal advocates hijacking a plane and flying several hundred terrified passengers into an occupied building, then comparing that Democrat or liberal to Bin Laden is valid. It might even be valid if a prominent Democrat or liberal seriously suggests that citizens start strapping explosives to their bodies, going into public places, and blowing themselves up. But highlighting the fact that Bin Laden says "George Bush lies" and so does Michael Moore and other Bush critics as if this were somehow revealing about either Bin Laden or those critics is beneath contempt. <br><br>For the past few years there has been a steady escalation in rhetoric as the right edges closer and closer to the overt rejection of political freedom as we know it. The terms "aiding and abetting the enemy" – part of the legal definition of treason – have been used repeatedly to describe the actions of administration critics from Cindy Sheehan to John Kerry. It is no coincidence that at the same time, there has been an effort to drive the example of the Third Reich out of all memory, to turn what happened in the mid-twentieth century to the formerly tolerant and cultured society of Germany into little more than a backdrop for war films or video games. It's especially discouraging that some moderates and Liberals who should know better, like Jon Stewart, laughingly dismiss the relevance of those hard-won lessons. <br><br>2006 America is not the Third Reich. We do not legally equate dissent with treason, haul critics of the Bush administration before a court and publicly denounce them before sending them off to prison or the gallows. But there is a steady chorus of voices who plainly regret those differences, voices that are rising in volume and confidence. <br><br>Consider some of the comments made about and to anti-war activists and Bush administration critics, both on right-wing blogs and forums and by prominent pundits who are presumably in the mainstream of American politics. <br><br>"[Name withheld] is a traitor!....If this was 1943 she would have been detained long ago and no one would have heard from her again until after the war."<br><br>"He stabs his country in the back!"<br><br>"...a shameless bitch who needs to either shut up or be shot."<br><br>"We need to defeat the defeatists, and keep our troops from being stabbed in the back."<br><br>"They ought to hang this [name withheld]."<br><br>"Your terrorist aid to the enemy will cause the death of more of our troops!"<br><br>"[Name withheld] should be arrested for treason and if not hung, put in a hole."<br><br>"How can you join ranks with those who support the terrorists?"<br><br>By the way, since we're on the subject of valid and invalid analogies – I cheated. Two of the above quotes are not from the 21st century at all, but from the Third Reich's notorious "People's Court" judge, Roland Freisler. He was the man who tried White Rose members Sophie and Hans Scholl and Christophe Probst and sentenced them to death for passing out leaflets opposing Germany's war. I invite readers to guess which quotes are his. <br><br>No, we're not in the Third Reich and probably will never be. But a lot of Americans – and not all of them powerless crackpots - want to take us to a place that's far too much like it. Equating critics of the war with Bin Laden and anti-war activists with Iraqi insurgents is a big step in that direction. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=navndansk>NavnDansk</A> at: 10/3/06 1:36 am<br></i>
NavnDansk
 
Posts: 825
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 10:57 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Prof Pan's comment

Postby Hugh Manatee Wins » Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:42 am

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>You have convinced yourself that a grand, organized conspiracy has overtaken the entirety of the mass media and <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>micromanages the placement of DVDs on your local video rental store.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>If you keep distorting what I write, Prof Pan, I'm going to conclude it is intentional.<br><br>Keyword hijacking is not so obscure an infowar tactic that I'm the only one who notices it. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>I am in touch with the people at Project Censored and some of them knew about it already when I mentioned it.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>That was a particulary warped description of my learning of the work of the Johnson Group (works for Pentagon and White House just like the CIA cut-outs called the Rendon Group and Lincoln Group) being behind the making of a holocaust memorial documentary involving Tennessee schoolkids (awww) called <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>'The Paperclip Project'</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> and which is now being marketed to schools as an educational package. (That documentary is on the shelf at my local video store and that's how I learned it existed.)<br><br>Funny that the name of the US importation of Nazi war criminals to use in CIA and NASA was practically the same damn name...<!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Project Paperclip.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>Thus will America's school kids learn to associate the Paperclip Project with a warm fuzzy memorial instead of the fucking Gehlen Project and Hitler's V2 rocket scientists running NASA and the US using Klaus 'the butcher of Lyon' Barbie as an asset in South America.<br><br>You can see this, can't you, Prof Pan?<br><br>I have a number of other examples, not just this one.<br>So you can poo-poo the idea of keyword hijacking all you want but this blindness does not speak well of your analytical capabilities.<br><br>Guess you never heard of the PATRIOT ACT.<br><br><br><br> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=hughmanateewins>Hugh Manatee Wins</A> at: 10/3/06 2:13 am<br></i>
User avatar
Hugh Manatee Wins
 
Posts: 9869
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 6:51 pm
Location: in context
Blog: View Blog (0)

well...

Postby orz » Tue Oct 03, 2006 4:22 am

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>If you keep distorting what I write, Prof Pan, I'm going to conclude it is intentional.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br>You DID write this... You also implied that a White Zombie CD being on the recommended shelf had sinister implications and was intended to send out a message (other than the obvious that there's a new White Zombie CD out). <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :rolleyes --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/eyes.gif ALT=":rolleyes"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <p></p><i></i>
orz
 
Posts: 4107
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2005 9:25 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Prof Pan's comment

Postby Sepka » Tue Oct 03, 2006 5:04 am

You've said that the conspirators dictate the placement of DVDs at Borders on at least two occasions, Hugh:<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://p216.ezboard.com/frigorousintuitionfrm10.showMessageRange?topicID=5270.topic&start=21&stop=40">p216.ezboard.com/frigorou...21&stop=40</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>The latest DVD format is a good excuse to rerelease old propaganda movies with the keywords and themes desired.<br><br>Go look at the featured DVDs at Borders and look for militarist, pro-men/anti-women/anti-black themes. Loads of 'em.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://p216.ezboard.com/frigorousintuitionfrm27.showMessage?topicID=450.topic">p216.ezboard.com/frigorou...=450.topic</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>I see evidence of a campaign to friendly up Jews to the historically not-too-Jew-friendly American population in the interest of the US-Israeli alliance.<br><br>[...]<br><br>There's a movie AND a graphic book of comics (probably cross-marketing) that exposes the history of the smear job against Jews called 'The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.'<br><br>The movie blurb on the DVD featured at Borders (where, by the way, the corporate headquarters orders what is to be featured where because publishing companies PAY BIG for those front tables and other marketing favors like payola) tries to suggest that anti-semitism is what is behind the 'inside job' suspicions regarding 9/11.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>In that thread, you also state:<br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Back in Kennedy's day the newly deployed Minute Man missiles (ah, how Paul Revere-like) were being called 'Honest John' missiles to imply their virtue compared to the dastardly Soviet missiles.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br>which is just plain factually wrong. Minuteman is a silo-launched ICBM from the late 60s, made by Boeing. Kennedy was dead before they were ever deployed. Honest John was an unguided short range (15 miles or so) artillery rocket from the early 50s, built by Douglas. About the only thing they had in common was that they were solid fueled, and could carry nuclear tips.<br> <p>-Sepka the Space Weasel</p><i></i>
User avatar
Sepka
 
Posts: 1983
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2005 2:56 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Sepka's comment

Postby Hugh Manatee Wins » Tue Oct 03, 2006 5:28 am

Borders, yes. Absolutely. Because Borders HQ dictates what goes where based on what publishing companies pay for. Payola rules.<br><br>I asked at Borders to see how this works.<br><br>But Prof Pan wrote about "my local video rental store."<br>That ain't Borders.<br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>CIA + publishing is an old relationship.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>And you only put part of my previous post on the use of attitudes towards Jews/Israel being used to color the topic of 9/11 and war in Iraq. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Recall that recently there was floated the idea that 'those who post conspiracy theories on the web are inciting extremism and terrorism.' I think this is due to a general campaign to discredit the internet (as the GOP jst did when addressing Foley's using it to email interns. "Parents should worry...") and especially the 9/11 truth movement-</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>I wrote this back on July 25, 2006-<br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>I see evidence of a campaign to friendly up Jews to the historically not-too-Jew-friendly American population in the interest of the US-Israeli alliance.<br><br>Al Franken, right? Yesterday on Air America he was falling all over himself justifying the Israeli bombing and invasion of Lebanon.<br><br>I think this is Joe Lieberman's role in the public eye, too.<br>Remember? He's the "conscience of the Senate."<br><br>There's a movie AND a graphic book of comics (probably cross-marketing) that exposes the history of the smear job against Jews called 'The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.'<br><br>The movie blurb on the DVD featured at Borders (where, by the way, the corporate headquarters orders what is to be featured where because publishing companies PAY BIG for those front tables and other marketing favors like payola) tries to suggest that anti-semitism is what is behind the 'inside job' suspicions regarding 9/11.<br><br>So, just as discussed ad nauseum last year, the barbed-wire of 'anti-semitism' is being placed around the topic of 9/11 and used to cover for the Israeli-US alliance in the guise of (rightfully) debunking the old Jews-conquering-the-world myth of the Protocols.<br><br>Now the ADL is covering for Prescott Bush and the Johnson Groups is covering for Project Paperclip.<br><br>WWII has never stopped, has it? Just some have switched sides to 'the winners' and keep using the old uniforms to confuse the civilians during the "new" war.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=hughmanateewins>Hugh Manatee Wins</A> at: 10/3/06 4:01 am<br></i>
User avatar
Hugh Manatee Wins
 
Posts: 9869
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 6:51 pm
Location: in context
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Sepka's comments on 'Honest John' missiles.

Postby Hugh Manatee Wins » Tue Oct 03, 2006 5:34 am

Why are you quibling on exact dates of the 'Honest John' missiles.<br>(I have reference to them in a JFK tribute book from just after his murder.)<br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>The topic was WORD-management.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> <br><br>Thanks for saving my posts. That's very interested of you. <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
Hugh Manatee Wins
 
Posts: 9869
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 6:51 pm
Location: in context
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to 9/11

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests