9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out, Full-length, Pre-Release-v1.3

Voyageur

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
[quote author=Laura]

Posters, graffiti, stickers, billboards... that sort of thing could really turn things around.

I don't know how many of you carry stickers around in your pockets and constantly put them in places where they will be seen often, but it's a small thing that everyone can do cheaply. I think we have a thread somewhere talking about it. But you don't even have to get fancy: just words printed on a few sheets of mailing labels.
[/quote]

Agreed Laura, keep making efforts with the words and keep them in the forefront of attention - thanks.

To you as well SAO, your rant resonated big time.

Falling Water, thanks you and your fellow professionals for signing, speaking, for shining a light on the evidence, even if up against the backs of your peers and fears for professional well being.
 

jar

Jedi Master
FOTCM Member
voyageur said:
Agreed Laura, keep making efforts with the words and keep them in the forefront of attention - thanks....

I still have quite a few SOTT bookmarks that I put here and there. It's fun. ;)
 

Buddy

The Living Force
I was contemplating this thread last night and I notice that, whereas SeekinTruth has been thinking of it in terms of 'authoritian followers', I've been thinking of it in terms of 'fear of rejection'. Maybe it's all connected in an addressable way?


Falling Water said:
...this segment from Ray Griffin:

“Empirical People - who will simple say "I look at the evidence and if it’s convincing I will change my mind."

Other people are Paradigmatic People. They have a paradigm. They say “this is the way the world works and I’m convinced this is the right way the world works and 911 does not fit into that paradigm. So I don’t need to look at the evidence”…paradigmatic.

And then there is a third type of person that we often call, “Wishful Thinkers”. I call it “Wishful and Fearful Thinking”. So they simple will not believe something that they fear to be the truth. And I found that –maybe-to be the most powerful factor of people rejecting the 911 truth and not even entertaining the evidence…”

Maybe a commonality between the folks trying to expose the lies of 9/11 and those who won't accept the truth, is that act of narrating away the pain of rejection by others?

If people were simply made up of an intellectual center, you guys, with your brilliant case, could probably simply proceed with the goal of holding someone accountable since you would have only weak and ineffective logical counterpoints to deal with. From what I've been reading and learning though, the logic seems to be of little significance where emotion has more weight and the two are opposed to each other.

Do many people know how social pain neuralizes like visceral pain? I suspect we have amassed enough neuroscience to point at an addressable problem - the technique of social ostracism, or the fear of rejecting attachments (habits and beliefs) and fear of being rejected by their attachments (peers and others). Here's my initial contribution to the idea stream so far:

Basically, the idea is that, in order to think for themselves, people in general must first deal with the fear of rejection in their personal and social contexts, OSIT.

In the paper: "Why rejection hurts: a common neural alarm system for physical and social pain", the authors:
Naomi I. Eisenberger and Matthew D. Lieberman explain how physical and social pain uses the same neural and other circuitry of the body and brain and they describe how this is evolutionarily adaptive.

Why rejection hurts: a common neural alarm system for physical and social pain
_http://www.scn.ucla.edu/pdf/WhyRejectionHurts%28TICS%29.pdf

...the ending of which can be interpreted from opposing perspectives, but in this context I think of as pointing to the action of the narrator's automatic, self-calming overriding (buffering) of input from the body's proprioceptive network - specifically the pain response:

"But there also seems to be a defense mechanism to prevent the pain of rejection from becoming overwhelming.

"We also saw this area in the prefrontal cortex. The more it is active in response to pain, the less subjective pain you feel," Lieberman said. "This part of the brain inhibits the more basic response."

Then there's the specific neuroscience work showing the neural correlates between physical/emotional and social pain. Seems this situation is exploited consciously and unconsciously by people when they are manipulating others to keep them from withdrawing or standing apart from their group. Like the above linked paper, this link shows what neuro-imaging researchers have revealed about how social pain and physical pain share the same neural circuitry in the brain:

Images show a social snub really is like kick in the guts
_http://www.abc.net.au/news/2003-10-10/images-show-a-social-snub-really-is-like-kick-in/1490770

Related, is a article demonstrating the effectiveness of immersion in a 'felt' fantasy reality - how this can easily be an effective pain numbing agent:

Real pain dulled in virtual worlds:
_http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3514937.stm

With the above in mind, here's a few of the over 1800 comments connected with that 9/11 video. When I try to really listen to people, the comments from the 'holdouts' seem to fall one or two ways: comments driven by mere intellectual considerations, and comments which may represent real fear - like from a perceived threat of ostracism (rejection). Notice the last two comments specifically.

Can't say for sure, because there are architectural and engineering experts standing by both sides of the story.

Many conspiracy theorists try to point out that the towers shouldn't have fallen straight down, but they don't take into account the design of the towers. Most high rise buildings use a web column design, the towers did not.


Tell it to my fire safety inspection instructor, who originally told me that it was because of the fire that the buildings fell, and that they fell like they did because they weren't designed like other buildings (Most high rise buildings use a web column design, the towers did not). Also, the towers did not fall it free fall speed. There is a sound clip that shows it took one of the towers more than 15 seconds to fall.


But i dont get who is supposed to have rigged the buildings this is where i start thinking it cant be true that they were demolished. i mean it would have taken quite large teams, perhaps special forces right? well how would they get that many people to willingly rig a trap for thousands of their fellow citizens?


I still don't know about this. We don't have all the evidence (most was removed very quickly). Hard to believe the Government would commit a crime of this magnitude then cover it up.


No discussion in this about the possibility of the building contractors not following the engineering specs given to them in the first place. if the buildings were substandard it might give a different perspective on all this! shortcuts for profiteering in construction are par for the course.

Im not saying this is the case but in this film they talk about science hypotheses but never discuss how this could be fatally compromise any structure!


...as far as I'm aware, only a small group of engineers and architects agree with the controlled demolition theory. Executing something like this would be such a massive undertaking and covering it up would have to be an issue. You can't just sweep something like this under the rug. Evidence would be pouring from all sides for all to see. Especially in this day and age of mass communication.


...did you know that the CIA employs people to go on social networks like sodahead and youtube as debunkers that spread lies and misinformation !My brother did it for 6 months after he got home from iraq...they are trained to get info and attack individuals personally and they even target spreading roomers about families of people who protest the government or whistle blowers !You cant really argue with people like that.

What I experienced often was that people who want to find the truth are 'getting asked' as if they don't respect the victim families because of always talking about this tragic event...

In summary, in addition to the creative priming mentioned in a previous post, maybe folks who've successfully stood up to bullies, successfully left one-sided relationships, successfully stood up for other people, etc, could share some examples of the relevant experience? Something that others may be able to implement with positive feedback that motivates?

There are 'testimonies' on the forum that likely qualify as examples; maybe we just don't see them as such at the moment? I'm assuming that anything that might help people overcome fear of rejection as described here, could benefit them in many areas of life and exponentially increase the spread of any message of Truth as a nice side-effect. :) I'm working up some possible examples myself, ATM.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edit: shifted paragraphs around to correct misplaced references.
Wording for clarity of meaning
 
After finishing the last forty-five minutes of the video I am still quite impressed. Although my thought is that it will just get ignored, (as their freedom of information requests did) or sidestepped. Nano Thermite technology did exist in 2001. I am not a trained engineer but a tool maker with metallurgy and materials background. I know enough that I did not get lost in the explanations. If the engineers & architects got together with some of the other credible groups "perhaps" they could make a difference. Would I bet on it? Perhaps a $10 on a million to 1 shot. Like playing the lotto, "hey you neverrr knoww". We as a group, us souled human beings, can change things but as I figure it we are at least at a 70-75 to 25 disadvantage. Better to work on yourself and learn to serve others without getting the door slammed in your face.
 

Voyageur

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
Buddy said:
Basically, the idea is that, in order to think for themselves, people in general must first deal with the fear of rejection in their personal and social contexts, OSIT.
Think this is so.

In summary, in addition to the creative priming mentioned in a previous post, maybe folks who've successfully stood up to bullies, successfully left one-sided relationships, successfully stood up for other people, etc, could share some examples of the relevant experience? Something that others may be able to implement with positive feedback that motivates?

A brief example might be within one’s own local networking, emails are received from someone trying to understand issues. Because of the work here, work of a great many others, one starts to see the patterns of disinformation in the main, how it is used and who is doing the manipulating and more importantly why. As such, receiving matters from time to time of this nature, particularly from one individual, would reply with well researched pieces without much comment and this has been a steady progression to the point now that this individual has changed from fwd autopilot disinformation to carefully reading and sussing out on his own works known of value – a shift in resonance.

Conversely, just the other day, I made a large error in external considering when a couple, friends of ours came for dinner. We have known them a long time and they are not ill informed people and are well versed in global travels and other cultures. Had received prior to their coming over a fwd of a fwd from one of the couple based on a letter written somewhere that describes in the most bigoted way a woman’s support for the nasty things that solders are doing in Afghanistan. Here is an example;
Written by a housewife in New Brunswick , to her local newspaper. This is one ticked off lady...

When I see a wounded terrorist get shot in the head when he is told not to move because he might be booby-trapped, you can take it to the bank:

I don't care. Shoot him again….

So this letter follows this drift and when at our home I asked her about the email she had sent. She said that she agreed with it, it is this ladies “belief”. I then asked her if she had really read it and found out she had not, yet because it came from her brother and a few words she did read sounded fine, the automation of belief transference was complete. Some of the letter was based on what had happened to 3,000 people on 911 and the terrorists. Asked if she believed this, that those responsible, the official story was what she believed and indeed it was, she cannot believe that authorities would do this, although she does have reservations but cannot fully go there to look.

In saying all this, there was the act of calling her on the email or leaving it alone, being externally considerate of her level of awareness, yet, could not pretend to accept emails of this nature without comment; she had not even read it and yet it became a medium of conveyance of vile viewpoints to others, to friends and it was blind. Later she said it was all water under the bridge in typical sweeping it under the rug fashion. My partner, who is her very good friend, at the time also would not stand for her comments of the validity of the email and let her know also. My partner later told me that she, our friend, knows much of these things but just can’t look at them, there too depressing.

Buddy said:
When I try to really listen to people, the comments from the 'holdouts' seem to fall one or two ways: comments driven by mere intellectual considerations, and comments which may represent real fear - like from a perceived threat of ostracism (rejection)...

In some ways, osit, it seems socially, fear of ostracism works on a two way street, people don’t want to say things against lies for fear of this and people say things for lies, other than their true belief, in the same way, for fear of the threat discussed above. There seems to be a lot of social détente in the interchanges of some people, between friends and colleagues to try and curb fears of what you said perhaps, ostracism. The fear of rejection becomes a powerful nemesis to say nothing, yet external considering with strategic enclosure need be understood;

Strategic Enclosure said:
… because if he attracts the attention of what Mouravieff calls the General Law that mechanically rules this reality, he will be lost, as the reaction of the 'World' against him will be extreme.
 

Buddy

The Living Force
[quote author=voyageur]
A brief example might be within one’s own local networking, emails are received from someone trying to understand issues. Because of the work here, work of a great many others, one starts to see the patterns of disinformation in the main, how it is used and who is doing the manipulating and more importantly why. As such, receiving matters from time to time of this nature, particularly from one individual, would reply with well researched pieces without much comment and this has been a steady progression to the point now that this individual has changed from fwd autopilot disinformation to carefully reading and sussing out on his own works known of value – a shift in resonance.[/quote]

Another example in an email situation:

Someone sends me an article via email written by an author who concludes that because one of the WTC buildings took 15 seconds to fall, the engineer's argument is invalid because the building didn't "free-fall". So, I take the time to read the article, note the author's conclusion and the crux of his argument and send my reply. In the reply, I thank the sender for thinking about me and give a brief accounting of my thoughts - just enough for him to know, in some way, that the rebuttal didn't change my mind.

I might say something like: "The author seems to offer a decent piece of critical thinking, but wasn't convincing in the end. Maybe because he didn't think about assumptions? For example, just because that tower was built different from other towers and didn't "free-fall" by someone's definition, the fact that it fell straight down and came to rest like a Denny's shortstack indicates to me that the floor supports were gone or destroyed in advance of each falling floor. At the very least, I'm still suspicious how all four corners could be so symmetrically or equally useless for the purpose of obstructing the collapse at any point, at any angle, or at any level of the fall. Shoot, even if what I'm saying turns out ultimately meaningless, the author's apparent oversight in a critical piece like that tends to make me wonder about the possibility of an agenda. It was well articulated, though."

Ok, so let's assume the original sender reads my reply and gets defensive - hot even - and fires back something that's more emotional than factual. In that case I might write back something like this:

Dude, [or insert name here], what's the matter? Did I misread your intent by having sent me that piece? Correct me if I'm wrong, but we were discussing an article written by [name] attempting to rebut the "freefall" evidence of a particular tower. I could be off somewhere, but I wouldn't think that a difference of opinion on a particular piece of evidence in a particular article would rate similarly to the emotional intensity connected with the overall horror and tragedy of the event that defines 911. Are you having a bad day? Happens to all of us you know, so I'd understand."

I figure at this point, when the guy finishes reading the above, he will have to re-generate his anger himself in order to continue any attack. Depending on his actual state though, he'll probably implicitly sense an opportunity to save face and change the subject and talk about what he's going through right now if there is something bothering him. Judging from actual experience, the odds are high that there is something else bothering him. Unless he's some corporate shill or whatnot.

I'm pretty sure that in an esoteric context, any thoughtful reply that doesn't leave the sender in a "less powerful" state than before, gives the lie what it asks for without provoking the General Law. At least, by addressing a particular belief or mindset this way, the person, himself, is not left feeling like he's been attacked.

[quote author=voyageur]
In some ways, osit, it seems socially, fear of ostracism works on a two way street, people don’t want to say things against lies for fear of this and people say things for lies, other than their true belief, in the same way, for fear of the threat discussed above.[/quote]

Yep, I think so too.
 
D

Deleted member 8431

Guest
Video is not online anymore. User has deleted it.

The question is why? :ninja:
 

Narco

The Force is Strong With This One
Video is unavailable, could someone provide an alternative source? what is the name of the documentary at least?
 

melatonin

Jedi Master
Narco said:
Video is unavailable, could someone provide an alternative source? what is the name of the documentary at least?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tTMMNTisBM



Just watching it now, think thats the one.
 

Cosmos

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
melatonin said:
Narco said:
Video is unavailable, could someone provide an alternative source? what is the name of the documentary at least?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tTMMNTisBM



Just watching it now, think thats the one.

yeah that's the one.I'll edit the first post
 
D

Deleted member 8431

Guest
Pashalis said:
melatonin said:
Narco said:
Video is unavailable, could someone provide an alternative source? what is the name of the documentary at least?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tTMMNTisBM



Just watching it now, think thats the one.

yeah that's the one.I'll edit the first post

Thanks a bunch guys.
 

Cosmos

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
here is a great presentation from Richard Gage founder and AIA of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth:


This is the full 2 hour version of the original dvd "Blueprint for Truth-The Architecture of Destruction". In 2 hours Richard Gage, AIA of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth takes you through most of the scientific forensic evidence proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the destruction of WTC was accomplished with explosive controlled demolition.

Blueprint for Truth-The Architecture of Destruction:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQgVCj7q49o&feature=my_watch_later_videos&list=WL43E62C54DBAD1D9A

nothing can be better in exposing the utter madness of the official story in almost every section then a scientific investigation and approach to all of those fairy tales!

911 is probably the biggest fairy tale of history and on top of that the worst lie ever told both because so many still believe it and secondly because it is so clearly a lie on every direction that it simply buggles the mind that so many still believe it!

unbelievable! we must live in the darkest age of human thinking capability.......
 
Top Bottom