The guy is a freeloading bum.  Give me a place to run 900 head of cattle without paying any taxes/fees.  He's not a hero, he just manipulated a bunch of tools to come out and support him.

Ah, that makes more sense.  It seemed wildly inconsistent that you would believe all that you profess to believe about the central govt yet have that attitude about 9/11.  So lemme explain:

Firstly, as I mentioned before, in the scheme of things relative to historic actions, 9/11 was 'no big deal'.  This is even more the case if some parts of the actual human damage component were a fabrication.  It was whipped up into the biggest event in world history, but that would be what one would expect given the goals of the project.

As I've stated before, and a point we seem to disagree on, I see the government (all branches and levels) as being a vast majority just normal and decent people. There is no need to watch them all as you've suggested, because there is nothing to find.

In the case of 9/11, I think it could be achieved by maybe a few dozen people who are formally 'in the government'.  After the event many more people would need to be hooked into the loop, but at that point what real choice do they have?  Even if they would not have supported it, the deed was done and the most common sense path forward was to make the best of it and keep one's mouth shut.  A larger number probably did see the utility of the project.  I can make a pretty strong argument that our nation is better prepared for the 2000's due to actions made possible by the 9/11 event (though I'll not completely agree with the arguments and will have counter-arguments.)

Since I am not a fundamentalist I have no real problem supporting the people and projects of the federal governments which make sense.  Most of their projects and org structures and so on actually do make sense to me.  And I expect that some decent fraction of federal government employees would do the right thing in the right set of circumstances.  (I hope so at least and I am sort of counting on it.)

As I've alluded to, I see the future as probably having an abrupt step function event.  I see it as a losing strategy to do much of anything except engage in certain kinds of preparation prior to such an event.  It's what happens after such an event that will be the defining factor in how our history is written.

Among the reasons, they tend to believe certain things fundamentally and completely and don't see a need to explore things beyond something they choose to believe.  Or are told to believe in most cases.  Most of them really don't seem to have the basic skill-set to do otherwise.

I, of course, didn't believe anything other than what was initially presented about the 9/11 events (though from knowing something about demolishion I was thoroughly surprised that the collapses happened at all when the three buildings came down later that day.)

A few weeks after the event some French guy produced some photos which were of the Pentagon part of the event which piqued my interest since it was pretty clear that if the images were not totally fake, there was no way a commercial airliner hit the building.  From there I exposed myself to a lot of information that people were producing (much of it rubbish.)  By this time I am quite confident that the event was engineered.  It is simply hands down the strongest explanation for all of the observations across the physical and political spectrum.

Much of the Snowden material which was leaked had been leaked in dribs and drabs prior to Snowden himself.  It fit into a body of 'conspiracy theories' which I considered neither true nor false but worthy of analysis.  Once such element of that body is that there is has been for some time an active program of deception using various staged events.  Some of the techniques are borrowed from Hollywood which is on the forefront of making fictional things seem realistic, and the media which who's job it is to present the public with things that they are supposed to be believing.

We do not really know that 'nearly 3000 people' died in the events of 9/11.  That event has gone amazingly unstudied by either government bodies, the court system, or mainstream media.  I've no doubt that some people died, but...

...lets say that 3000 Americans died on 9/11.  It was clear that that many were going to die in an adventure such as Iraq, and many more than that would be maimed.  And that's not even counting Iraqis.  Yet our leadership did everything to enter the adventure anyway in spite of having to know that the excuses for going (Saddam's threat to us) were complete and utter bullshit.  So, the people in leadership positions are demonstrably willing to sacrifice many American lives to achieve a political objective.

You are saying that because 3000 lives were lost that proves that 9/11 could not be a false flag.  Period.  End of story. I'm saying it's not that clear-cut to me in the mode which I think.

Fine with me.


I call 9/11 a false flag operation.  It is very difficult to call it anything other than that after analyzing things a bit.

Most people who've looked into things much are wise enough to keep their mouth shut about it, but as with my attitude about having credibility with the militia loons, I don't really care that much.

9/11 was an engineering solution to a political problem.  It's a tried-n-true method of achieving a political direction that our leaderships wanted to take the nation.  The U.S. certainly didn't pioneer the technique.  It's probably more common than not in achieving shifts in public sentiment, and probably somewhere near 100% of the wars of aggression were touched off by a similarly engineered event.  Both in modern times and in antiquity.  It's nothing more than an extension of some tribal elder sitting around the fire and telling his clan some lie about what some other clan did to them in order to induce them to cooperate in a particular action.

So, in my opinion, you cannot really completely reject a government for one event which is neither anything which they've not done before nor that nearly every other government has done and will do in the future.  The alternative action could well be worse.  The most logical course of action is to work to try to make it so that other similar engineered events are less likely to result in harm to the society, and that would be more effective working within it in some cases.  Certainly including this case at this time.

I've held more or less the same basic concerns with varying degrees of agitation for about 15 years now.  Intellectually I always told myself that things can persist in a steady state for longer than expected.  Steady-state in today's America is not all bad.  We win some and lose some and the world turns.  I believe we are generally on the descent (empire building, extrajudicial killings and gulags around the world, increased stratification and various levels here at home, etc.)  Many of the most dangerous losses are hidden beneath the surface (e.g., the domestic surveillance frameworks, 'fusion centers', etc) which, if anything, makes them more of a threat.

I theorize that there will probably be a step function event that will shift American society sharply.  Most likely it will be an economic jolt of some sort, and will be more-or-less out of the blue...or will seem that way to most people.

At such a point it will be imperative (for us citizens) to have every tool possible at our disposal.  This includes communications abilities (e.g., something like today's internet), economic abilities (e.g., something like today's Bitcoin), and yes, the means of violent resistance if it is unavoidable that the least-bad option (e.g., today's freedom to keep and bear arms.)

(As an aside, I'd further note that it's the potential for violent resistance which is the real value here.  It acts as a very real limit on the flexibility of what a central government can do on various fronts since the cost in terms of support would be huge.  Tactically any arms we might possess are of limited value.  Strategically they have much more value.)

I don't know when a jolt such as I've mentioned will occur, and hope it never does.  If/when it does, it could be decades away (or it could be tomorrow.)  I will say that one of the things I look for as an indicator that such a jolt may be approaching are attacks on the three areas I mentioned.  And others.

When the militia loons shoot their wad over some inconsequential deadbeat rancher like Bundy I don't consider it all bad.  These types are what I would consider a liability.  I don't trust them and I'm happy to be rid of them.  If anything I suspect that they are the types that could be flipped by the Govt and become part of the problem (in the form of death squads and such which our govt is demonstrable fond of employing.)  The trouble is that they take a lot of our otherwise needed tools with them.

@solarion:

Believe it or not, I agree with you on your last post more than I disagree with you.

im glad to see walmart card is in now i can buy one before i go grocery shopping and feed myself with bitcoin!

Wow what a sudden change of events.  So are there still some cards available for purchase at the is time?

I'm here all week.

Try the veal!



grnbrg.

At this time we are unable to provide you  a timetable available to restoration of this service at gyft.com.
 
To purchase gift Walmart gift cards please check the link listed below:
 
http://www.walmart.com/cp/Gift-Cards/96894?povid=cat14503-env172199-module101210-lLink1_SGC
 
If you have additional questions, please reply to this email and we'll be happy to assist.
 
Sincerely,
Walmart.com Customer Care

Finally a point we can agree on.  Examples of malfeasance and graft abound.  They have throughout history and it's hardly a problem unique to America.  It is a natural result of human nature and the structures we tend to form.  As the owners of the land, we citizens have the right and obligation to keep an eye on our employees (the Feds being one of them) so they don't rob the till.

I think that problems in this area are getting better rather than worse in some ways (but not others) as the years go by.  Part of this is due to the increased power of people on the other side (who have their own contingent of fundamentalist who are just as dingy as annoyneymint.)  But our government on the Federal level especially is increasingly 'by the rich for the rich' due to money in politics.  Local leaderships are just as inclined to be corrupted by special interests and personal greed, but they are more visible to the local populations.  The internet has made Fed level politicians more visible to locals as well which might be part of the reason why it is more difficult for the dirty ones to hide.