Fight against "terrorism"? Try getting the story straight for starters

Erna said:
how can I possibly make someone else grasp the concept.
You can't. Either they are going to have an inner drive to know Truth or not. Do you feel that by having the perfectly worded intellectual response to people's "questions" about what you are presenting to them is going to be all that is needed to turn light bulb on upstairs?

It goes much deeper than that, unfortunately.
 
ScioAgapeOmnis, did you see the amount of posts you've posted.

I do agree with you, about the fact that it must be a piece of cake in the US to blow up loads of people. And yes, it hasn't happened. Believe me, Joe's post clarified things for me. Do you also believe that the blowing up of the American embassies in Tanzania and Kenya were false flag operations? And the blowing up of 'Planet Hollywood' in Cape Town?

beau said:
Do you feel that by having the perfectly worded intellectual response to people's "questions" about what you are presenting to them is going to be all that is needed to turn light bulb on upstairs?
No, but it would help if I can present them with an answer that actually makes sense. Sadly, most people I convey things I have learned to, find the info exciting and say things like "I love stuff like this, it's so interesting". Few South Africans care much about 911 and the aftermath, we have problems closer to home, like crime. Just like few Americans and Europeans care much about the Third World.
 
Erna said:
Do you also believe that the blowing up of the American embassies in Tanzania and Kenya were false flag operations? And the blowing up of 'Planet Hollywood' in Cape Town?
Most probably - no reason they wouldn't be. Why would you think otherwise? I don't think Joe's post clarified as much as you think it did. I could be wrong.

Erna said:
No, but it would help if I can present them with an answer that actually makes sense.
No, it wouldn't help - plus, the answers you can provide right now do make sense to someone who is not sleeping. There is no way on earth you could make any of this make more sense to someone who is asleep - it's not allegory, they are truly asleep and dreaming and you are interacting with a dream when you try to 'make sense' to any of them.

Think about your dreams and how things morph illogically from one form to another - that is what happens in their minds if they are asleep and if they love their sleep - as the vast - vast - majority of people do.

What we do by propagating this information is to send out little clues - for those sleeping minds who want to wake up - little things that don't fit in their dreams -little things that, if paid attention to, will allow them to realize they are asleep and dreaming. For those who truly want to awaken, these clues we send out into their dreams will give them the chance to do that - the rest - no use - they will never awaken.

Trying to convince them is arguing your point to a life-sized cardboard cutout - it will just dream you away.
 
DonaldJHunt said:
Joe, I think you just wrote another SOTT focus piece in your post above (46940).
ok, cobbled something together. ;-)

Joe
 
Erna said:
Do you also believe that the blowing up of the American embassies in Tanzania and Kenya were false flag operations? And the blowing up of 'Planet Hollywood' in Cape Town?
The embassy bombings were clearly Mossad. We published analyses at the time. I haven't looked at the "Planet Hollywood" bombing. Don't get us wrong, we are not saying that every single bombing is the work of the Mossad/CIA/MI5 or agents thereof. Real "terrorist" groups and individuals do carry out attacks for personal or ideological reasons, but the fact remains that those groups DO NOT have the capacity to wage a "world wide war of terrorism" against "all civilized peoples.

There is much important information that is not in the general discourse about just how the intelligence agencies of Major western nations (and that "shitty little country" at the end of the Med) operate.

The state, run by psychopaths, is an extremely paranoid entity. It is very aware that "dissenters" and "activist groups" are always to be found within their own population and that they do, in potential pose a threat. For this reason the modern Western state has always invested the massive resources at their disposal, human, financial and technological in the effort to know and control everything there is to know and control about such people and groups.

They have a general policy of actually creating such groups in order that they can control this element within society. Those groups that they are not responsible for creating, they quickly infiltrate and maintain agents within its membership and often leadership for the entire life of the group. They easily have the resources to do so. The possibility of any group waging a successful war or any campaign against the state becomes clear when you compare the resources that are available to the state and those available to such groups. Particularly in our currently technologically advanced world, it would be like a fly attempting to physically overpower an elephant. There simply is no way it can or will happen.

Of course, that just means that we have to find a different way to accomplish the goal, and since the masses of humanity and their belief centers are apparently the 'materia prima' by which the power of the pathocrats is maintained, it is in this area that we must focus our efforts at destablisation.

Simply put, nothing short of chaos is required in order that the slumbering masses can be awakened, but it is not we that will create the chaos, but rather the pathocrats themselves. We will just bide our time and continue 'transmitting', and perhaps at a certain point in time in the not-too-distant future, when everything, every belief, programmed and not, is suddenly shattered without warning, this breach, that was opened by the pathocrats themselves with the intention of filling it with a new and even more deadly paradigm, will provide the opportunity for the message(s) that we have been repeating ad nauseum for years to take root, and all of a sudden the 'wizard' may be revealed for the charlatan that he is for all to see.

Where's toto!? :-)

Joe
 
Fight against \

Joe said:
The embassy bombings were clearly Mossad. We published analyses at the time.
actually, I was thinking of the Mobassa paradise hotel attack in Kenya in early 2004

see here: http://www.signs-of-the-times.org/signs/signs396.htm

and here: http://www.signs-of-the-times.org/signs/signs397.htm

we obviously couldn't have reported on the Kenyan embassy bombings since we weren't online in 1998. :-/

However, you can check out the embassy bombing facts here. It's got CIA written all over it.

http://www.wsws.org/news/1998/aug1998/bomb-a13.shtml

Joe
 
SocioAgapeOmnis said:
...And after ALL THAT they they went through on 911 they just empowered the very enemy they hate, and hurt themselves immeasurably? We're expected to look at all that and nod like it isn't the most retarded, ridiculous, stupid, absurd, and full of holes story anybody could come up with? Even a movie with such a plot wouldn't sell because it's much too unrealistic, people are used to Hollywood as it is, but this is just pushing it even for Hollywood.
I dunno. While not a film, that made-in-Hollywood television show "24" has story lines similar to what the PTB wants the public to accept. And "24" has quite a following...and high ratings...from what I've read. Even makes torture seem justified and cool if it 'saves lives.' I don't do TV anymore, so my perception of "24" may be skewed reading reviews and recaps of the season's plots.

That said, this is yet another informative thread (and subsequent SOTT article) that has given me more mental 'ammo' should I enter into a conversation or debate with someone regarding who actually benefits from acts of terrorism. Currently, my liberal friends and associates are a tad unwilling to believe that Bush, the CIA, and Israel had something directly to do with 9/11. A few believe there is a slim chance that Bush knew, allowed the event to happen cause he and his neo-con buddies would benefit; but the entire operation was still done by Osama and his cave comrades, spurred on by their hatred of our so-called 'democracy.' (The hated Bush just took advantage of a terrorist 'gift horse.') How's that for logic? They bought most of it...and that's all the controllers need for now.

Frankly, my liberal friends don't sound much different from their conservative counterparts on key points. They are thinking from their emotions. A favorite line is "Bush and his gang have fomented so much hatred and destruction in the world, it's a wonder we haven't been attacked more often than not. Waiting in line at an airport, they feel the same fear (with a different rationale) as the right-winger who believes that added security is justified cause those dastardly Muslims are out to git us no matter what. A small price to pay? Sigh. My liberal friends desperately want to identify with and believe that a Democrat in charge will undo the mess that the neo-cons have created. They refuse to acknowledge there is currently no difference between left and right politicians in the long run.
 
You can delete that :)

It was a little accident, and then I didn't see an option to delete the entire post, only an edit button.
 
Back
Top Bottom