Monday, May 20, 2013
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
PLEASE SUPPORT REVERE RADIO:
SUBSCRIBE to the RSS feed
DONATE to Scholars for 9/11 Truth:
---------
(Right-click on guest name to download mp3)
SUBSCRIBE to the iTunes feed
STREAM premieres on Revere Radio
5pm CST (2300 GMT) M-W-F:
---
Followers
Blog Archive
-
▼
2013
(152)
-
▼
May
(14)
- Allan Weisbecker
- Jim Fetzer / Jim Marrs
- Dennis Cimino
- Kevin Barrett
- Bill Still / Karen Hudes / Mark Novitsky
- Jim Fetzer
- Sofia Smallstorm / James Tracy
- Kevin Barrett / Meria Heller
- Stew Webb / Dennis Cimino
- Allan Weisbecker
- Jeff Boss / Kevin Barrett
- Ronald Cole
- Mark Elsis
- Sophia Smallstorm, Jenny Lake
-
▼
May
(14)
speaking of 'cancel the cabal'...
ReplyDeleteVery nice podcast over at The Realist Report with John Friend, and his guest JB Cambell. Good dosage of clarity and truth. Please have him on as a guest Jim.
(Tuesday, May 21, 2013)
http://www.john-friend.net/search/label/The%20Realist%20Report
JB Cambell on The Short End of the Stick also..
Delete"Date: 05-20-13
Today's guest was JB Campbell, founder of the Militia movement. The topics were who controls Amreica and what to do about it."
http://www.renseradioarchives.com/harris/
What a great show. A slam dunk from Dr. Fetzer.
ReplyDeleteNot a satisfying explanation of cognitive dissonance, Dr Fetzer. The term was coined by Leon Festinger and first appears in his book When Prophecy Fails. The point of cognitive dissonance is that the subject's memory of what had happened is altered by the fact that the subject's response to what had happened is in dissonance with what the subject would have expected his or her response should have been. There's a classic experiment by Festinger and James M. Carlsmith in which subjects who are paid less to perform a boring test lied more convincingly to prospective test-takers to say that the test was fun than other subjects who were paid more: the dissonance being between the low pay for lying and the normally high value they placed on their truthfulness; therefore they had to be telling the truth when they said that the test was fun. In your example, the wife would either have believed that she was concealing behavior of her husband that had actually been beneficial to her daughter or perhaps "remembered" that she had witnessed her daughter's having seduced a "defenseless" husband. In the case of 9/11, people were convinced that they "had seen" the planes hit the towers because the planes were necessary to explain the towers' "collapse": the dissonance between "no planes" and "collapse" would have been solved by altering their memories of what they had seen. It's more than simple denial.
ReplyDeletePerhaps the absurdity of having Lee Harvey Oswald "use" a Mannlicher-Carcano "to kill Kennedy" was to create cognitive dissonance as to whether he was the lone gunman. If the Government wanted to pull off a ruse, they "certainly would not" have had their patsy use a weapon that was so difficult to aim and fire. It's so unlikely that such a useless weapon could have made the expert shots that the official account has to be "true". Oswald must have been an extraordinary marksman to have pulled it off--which furthermore argues for Oswald's other exceptional legendary exploits during the day of the assassination. He simply had to be larger than life. And, of course, you have to have a demigod if you want to create a semi-religious myth.
Dr Jim on Dr Stan's show, you can't make this stuff up ladies and gentlemen:
ReplyDeletehttp://archives2013.gcnlive.com/Archives2013/may13/RadioLiberty/0523131.mp3
http://archives2013.gcnlive.com/Archives2013/may13/RadioLiberty/0523132.mp3
For the first link you provide, the end of the interview reveals Dr. Stan as a likely gatekeeper. Fortunately Dr. Fetzer voices his disagreement.
ReplyDeleteOkay, I've had it. If there is anyone who should not use the phrase "cognitive dissonance" it would be Jim Fetzer.
ReplyDeleteUS imperialism in the ME "dovetailed" with Benjamin Netanyahu's efforts to break up the sophisticated Arab states so as gain for Israel undisputed domination of the region? The US and Israel are acting independently? I gues they just collaborate on black-ops, is that it? Is it possible that many of the members of the PNAC were joint US/Israeli citizens and are directing US imperialist policy, at least according to Jim's theory, and yet are that ignorant of, or are oblivious enough to Israeli policy in the region that these two strains "dovetail"? Are they acting independently, or in unison? Which is it?
Who is restraining whom? And why? Israel is a nuclear armed superpower, who, like Pakistan, wouldn't be a nuclear power without America's help. (I guess the Pakistanis control American foreign policy too...) If the Israelis were driving the agenda, the map of the ME would look very different today. Why haven't they conquered Syria and lebanon etc. when their is nobody in the region to stop them? If Netanyahu is actually making the decisions, and he wants to Balkanize the ME, then why hasn't he??????????????????????????????????????????
Figure it out Jim.
Whose cognitive dissonance?
US imperialism is second only to Israel in wars of aggression? Is that a joke? Let's see now, Israel comes into existence in the late Forties, since then it has been involved in about 6 or 7 military engagements, initiating all but two. in that same period, the US HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN THAT MANY CONFLICTS IN THE CARRIBEAN ALONE. From Korea to now Syria the US has initiated scores of battles, well in excess of Israel's, not even close. This is not to excuse Israel's war crimes (or its racism, fascism etc.),but anybody who is insisting that it is the leading imperialist aggressor in the world has lost all touch with reality.
Whose cognitive dissonance?
Maybe somebody out there can help me: How can somebody who crows, as Jim Fetzer does at every opportunity, about his lengthy experience in teaching logic and critical thinking keep making the same mistake over and over [and over and over] as he does? Somebody has suggested that the definition of insanity is doing the same things repeatedly and expecting different results. So is Jim a master of rational thinking, or is he insane?
ReplyDeleteHow can anybody who laments, as often as Jim does, that he has been disappointed by Barack Obama--that he didn't get what he voted for--then endorse Ron Paul ? How can anybody who has peered so deeply into the dark heart of the capitalist state actually be fooled by the electoral ruse again and again and again?!? How can anybody who has devoted so much of his time investigating the manner and motives of the JFK assassination entertain, even in his weaker moments, that anybody who has the interests of the people o this country at heart will ever be allowed to direct public affairs? How is this possible?
And now, astonishingly, Critical Thinking Jim is giddy with hope for Rand Paul's candidacy! The same Rand Paul who has sponsored an anti-collective bargaining bill in Congress, and who has denounced the Occupy- Movement and called the occupiers of the Wisconsin Capitol "criminals" and a "violent mob"! At other moments Jim has expressed solidarity with the latter, now he endorses their shrillest critic. Jim's is a quixotic logic.
Bad news for Jim! Rand Paul is unelectable and the people who own this country know that. He has been the most ardent anti-union, anti-"entitlement" crusader in Congress. The bourgeois trade unions, woefull as they are, will mobilize against Paul and the Dem' turnout will be strong. The ruling class know this and are pushing paul forward to ensure a Hillary victory. That's why he is doing so well in their "polls." Got it now? So it will be Strap-on Hillary who will be sodomizing you after Obama, Jim, not Rand Paul. Not that it matters.
These elections are not held so that the people can get what they want. Right?!? If that were the case the world would be a very different place Jim, wouldn't it? Right? These elections are to create the illusion that we are free and independent, not to make us free and independent. The candidates audition for the ruling class; they hope to demonstrate that they can deliver the public to the capitalist oligarchy and their policies. Got it now?
How can anybody who has a background in logic, and who has observed the machinations of the American government for several decades now, actually believe that the Israeli lobby was unhappy with Chuck Hagel? It was a charade Jim! I mean what a joke!
Whose cognitive dissonance?
Hagel, Clinton, Paul, they are factota, Jim! Got it now? They are putting on a show, it's not real. It is not rational to think that these guardians of the capitalist order are going to be any different from their countless predecessors who offered the same specious palliative rhetoric. Fool Jim once, shame on them, fool Jim a thousand times...
ReplyDeleteIs it intelligent to go on and on about a return to "constitutionality", as Jim so inelegantly puts it, when it never existed and the current administrators of the empire are following the Constitution? Is it possible that a man as logical as Jim can fail to see what Proudhon saw centuries ago, that law and government are "spiders' webs for the ruling class, steel chains for the working class, and fishing nets for the state"? The Constitution allows the government to do whatever its masters want--it was designed for that purpose. All the "rights" which it grants us (all of which added, much to the chagrin of its authors, when they couldn't foist a constituion without a bill of rights upon us) can be revoked with enough votes in the Congress. Each and every amendment is repealable--cuz that's the way the Founders wanted it! The Constitution was designed to protect the wealth and power of the people who wrote it. We know this BECAUSE THEY SAID SO. Is it rational to deny facts?
Whose cognitive dissonance?
How can anybody from Wisconsin not understand that the Consituion is a joke when the people of that state voted for socialist candidates they were denied their seats by the Congress. When one senator elect approached the Senate chamber the guards at the doors drew their swords across the door and barred his entrance. They could do this because the Constitution has a clause which allows the rest of the Senate to keep a duly elected member from sitting if the electee was considered a threat to the...any guesses...Constituion. Get it now, Jim? We don't have the rule of law, that's a charade, we have the rule of capital. We have a ruling class. Got it now? When they need votes, even to deprive the state of Wisconsin its representation, they will get them. If they need 101 votes in the Senate they will get them BECAUSE THEY OWN THE FUCKING PLACE, and the Constitution was written by and for THEM. Got it now? How can an experienced logician like Jim be so obtuse as to not understand this?
Eugene Victor Debs got ten years for reading the Constitution aloud in front of a war recruitment center during WW1. It is a joke, a ruse for the feeble-minded, got it now, Jim? Certainly if free speech exists, one should be free to read the founding document of the state, particularly when no commentary is added! But the ruling class wanted America in the war and they got what they wanted, they always do. And when the Debs case got to the highest court in the land, the one created by the Constitution to guarantee the rights therein, its chief, Oliver Wendell Capitalism, wrote the majority decision upholding the conviction and in it he likened what Debs was doing to shouting fire in a crowded theater. Debs, the court insisted, had exposed the country to danger by encouraging its young men to exercise their Constituional right to conscientiously object to the war. Got it now, Jim? Have you figureed it out now? This is an IQ test, don't flunk it. This is the highest court in the land saying that the free exercise of the rights detailed in the Constitution is a threat to the nation, and can be denied at the discretion of the government. That was the law then and is the law now, got it? The Constitution is a spider's web, t-h-a-t's w-h-a-t i-t i-s f-o-r.
And nowadays most people actually think the case had to do with somebody who actually did yell fire in a theater. Is the truth beginning to penetrate all those layers of critical thinking about which you harp so much?
Whose cognitive dissonance?
Is it rational (or just or reasonable) to say stupidest things about somebody just because he is one's bete noir? Is it possible, just possible, that Jim's various slanderous pronouncements on the subject of Noam Chomsky are motivated more by malice than reason? How can anybody who beats his chest as loudly as Jim does say with a straight voice that the reason a dozen editors of respected linguistic journals turned down an article espousing a theory contradicting Chomsky's was because they had been cowed?!? As though Chomsky were some sacred cow to the bourgoisestablishment, instead of the pariah he is? Is it possible, just possible, that...brace yourself kids...wait for it... that its author and Jimmy the Genius are wrong and Chomsky and the rest of the linguistic establishment are in fact correct? On the topic of whether syntax is inate or learned I confess both ignorance and apathy--it just doesn't matter to me--but that NOBODY with expertise in this field would publish the piece in question suggests quite strongly that Chomsky may be correct. The idea that his influence is so great that the editors dared not cross him is just plain absurd.
ReplyDeleteAnd whatever vices Chomsky may or may not possess, he never has, to my knowledge, uttered anything quite so mind-numbingly stupid as "Putin is a great statesman." How is it that anyone who has ranted against the corruption of the mainstream media, who refers insightfully to the NYT as the Langley Ledger, accepts uncritically, absolutely at face value, what the same bourgeois press says about Putin?
How can anybody who brandishes his critical thinking credentials so aggressively be quite so deficient in critical theory? On what basis can we say that putin, of all people, is a great statesman--on what he says? Certainly if we look at what that murderous sociopath has done [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuJmb3kLE5U] since he seized power, it could only lead a sane person to a very different conclusion. Jim is undaunted in using his scientific skills in exposing the American false-flag operations, yet where the Vladimir the Terrible is concerned suddenly he morphs into Earl Warren.
Putin could have stopped, or at least illegalized, the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Mali, Libya, but he didn't. Instead he swung deals for Russian energy and munitions companies. in Iraq, Putin is by the letter of international law (and by any ethical standard) a participant in the war crime. Is it rational to denounce Bush/obama for their involvement and then say that Putin is a great statesman?
Whose cognitive dissonance?
Been following Jim Fetzer since he was occasionally on Black Op radio and then later became a regular. Found Black Op after I'd realized 911 was either Lihop or Mihop. Back then Jim was not so clued in . . . I heard him transformed and on and on.
DeleteI like him, I don't believe he's working for the naughty ones. Rather, he has a huge ego -- that his manifold accomplishments have inflated. His sensitivity to infringements on his ego personality structure is hard wired into a very emotional personality that seems unregulated by very much introspection. Over and over, this out of control egoistic emotionality overpowers his critical faculties so thoroughly that he appears to be totally unaware how he is acting/speaking out of blind emotion. Naturally, that's caused him some problems in this line of work and allows him to be easily manipulated by the coldly calculating while thinking he must be making totally rational decisions based on his academic training.
Let's do some critical thinking: If we assume that the Boston Massacre II was false flag (and it is a particularly diaphanous one), that begs the question why? The two patsies are from Putinville, why select them? Is this an accident? After the incident Putin roars, rather comically, that now the US understands what Russia has been going through--a statement which cannot be taken seriously--and arrests hundreds of alleged terrorists in the Caucasus. Never does the US even hint that the 'terrorists' were sent by Putin (and of course they were not), why not?. It certainly would enhance their anti-Russian propaganda. There is enormous potential for political capital here, justification for WW3 if Washington wanted it, yet silence...
ReplyDeleteThe Chechnian terrorists are enemies of Putin in Russia and Assad in Syria (or at least according to both Moscow and Washington). Washington and the Chechnyans are on the same side in Syria, it is this relationship which is no longer viable at least publicly because of the Boston bombing.
After the requisite saber rattling to fool their respective constituencies (and some notable masters of critical thinking), Washington and Moscow announce that while they have serious disagreements over Syria, they do agree that their needs to be a transition from Assad's government to another [http://news.yahoo.com/putin-netanyahu-discuss-syrian-conflict-135452498.html]. So Washington's essential wish --regime change in Syria--has Moscow's blessings. Both governments are now collaborating publicly in the overthrow--Washington allegedly for political reasons and Moscow allegedly for humanitarian ones-- of Assad and the Alawites.
Simulataneously we get all this info from the usually reluctant mainstream media about the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian opposition. Terror attacks on American soil, chemical attacks in Syria, the demonization of the Syrian opposition is underway, why?
Thesis: A deal has been struck. Moscow has agreed that Assad has to go, and Washington has flipped the narrative on the Syrian opposition and validated Putin's extrremely brutal suppression in Chechnya and elsewhere. Moscow can now agree to Assad's removal with a straight face, and Washington can back away from the opposition (their intent from the beginning) on the grounds of terrorism. Moscow and Washington are now on the same team, thx to Boston. The new ruler of Syria will be agreable to Moscow and Washington, and will allow both empires to plunder his country in a way which the Alawites never would.
My thesis may be wrong, but I insist it is more rational than Jim's racist, fascist one: the evil ones--the Jews--have gained control over the gov in Washington and are using America parasitically to eliminate their enemies en route to world domination. (Apparently they control Moscow too, which is rather problematic for Jim's breathlessly pro-Putin position.)
Speaking of fascism: It is all well and good, commendable even, to question Israel and her racist policies; to investigate what role it played on 9/11 (although blaming Israel for that event is just as ridiculous and obscurantist as blaming the mafia for the hit on JFK); and to boldly investigate the obviously tendentious official story of WW2, it is quite another to attribute the horrors of this capitalist world to the venalities of a particular race. Jewry is not the problem, this is an idiot's view of the world. Yet guest after guest implicitly or explicitly states this premise while Jim claps along like a trained seal. This racist idea has no basis in science (http://libcom.org/library/white-supremacy-joel-olson), yet the expert in the history of science and critical thinking brings on John Friend, Mark Elsis et alia who beat this social Darwinist drum endlessly.
ReplyDeleteAnd it is for this reason which I know bid TRD adieu. I cannot regress myself far enough back down the food chain to engage this fascist nonsense. TRD, once an oasis of free-wheeling, no-holds-barred investigation into criminal statecraft, is now home to something very different. I had hitherto dismissed the idea that Jim was a gatekeeper posing as a gate-crasher, but the circumstances of his publishing of the article on linguistics has got to give pause to those with any critical faculties, those not suffering from cognitive dissonance. It combined with TRD's Rightward lurch in lock step with the rise of the police state has got to make even the most credulous soul wonder...
In either case, I cannot stomach racism, and TRD has become a haven for racist dimwits.
Well Dave, your informed and thougtful (even if overheated at times) criticism of Jim's blind spots and shortcomings will be missed (by some) here -- so please tell us where we can read your subsequent musings and rants.
ReplyDeleteI for one really appreciated your dissecting of the Putin-Boston cloud of obfuscation, even if it means that the limited-hangout "Boiling Frogs" theory (that's where it first was floated) has some merit.
But Dave, your hair-trigger sensitivity ("It's racism, it's racism!!!") to truthers' oversimplified criticism of Israel may also have blinded you to a clearer vision of just HOW USEFUL the Sayanim (who densely populate nearly EVERY sector of wealth/power/influence) are to the malicious plans of what PD Scott calls the "Deep State".
It seems that there is no evil action that cannot be (Talmudically) overlooked/excused/assisted, to the gross detriment of the Goyim, when Sayanim become convinced (by the psywar specialists of the Deep State) that it is "Good For The Jews". After all, some two millennia worth of vicious pogroms can sure bring on a mighty heady case of persecution mania and situational ethics.
Thus Dallas. Thus Vietnam. Thus Watergate. Thus Waco. Thus Oklahoma City. Thus 9/11. Thus Iraq. Thus Afghanistan. Thus DHS, all the terror-simulations, and the emerging Police State.
Andy Tyme, do you mean the Tziyonim when you write "Sayanim"? Zionism is the nationalism of the Jews: it's the Jews' version of jingoist patriotism. What's going on in the State of Israel and the halls of Congress goes far beyond traditional Zionism. It's amusing how you talk about Dave's "hair-trigger sensitivity", as if he's mistaking an "honest" political critique for virulent antisemitism. Then you follow up by spouting classic virulent antisemitism right out of the bowels of medieval Roman Catholicism and Lutheranism and the modern enemies of democracy who find such atavism politically and economically useful, blaming all the world's problems on "die Juden"/"the Jews". Sound logic? Not. America has plenty of jingos of its own and doesn't need anyone else's atavistic nationalism to turn Muslim kids into charcoal.
ReplyDeleteJim Fetzer, The Real Deal is becoming a magnet for Nazi apologists and Jew-baters. Is this how you attract true patriots to a venue that will serve to recover the "real" America? I hope you'll take to heart what Dave Fryett has written here. I have a lot of differences with Dave, not least with his continuing admiration of Noam Chomsky (who was a personal hero of mine, before he denounced the 9/11 Truth movement); but I agree with most of the other things he wrote. And, by the way, I was propagating the "Moscow-Washington Deal" thesis Dave claims here even before it appeared on Boiling Frogs--when I first saw Russian state TV crowing about how Americans would now know (following the Boston Psyop) what Russia has been going through with the Chechen separatists (whom both now refer to as "Chechen terrorists", just as European monarchs were once joining George III to decry "the terrorist George Washington").
Our home-grown Nazis and Nazi facilitators have been working overtime to capture the Truth community, starting with the John Birch Society agent Alex Jones and his band of National Association of Manufacturers/U. S. Chamber of Commerce flunkies who hate the thought that working people might actually have economic rights or (Heaven forbid!) have a political voice of their own. The level of historical falsification such "Libertarians" will go to to propagate the idiotic proposition that unbridled freedom for the robber barons of industry and finance created American democracy, instead of the other way around, knows no bounds. Americans have grown up with this anti-working class poison to the point that they think of it as true patriotism. It's all you get now (in the midst of the economic depression the industrialists and financiers brought about themselves) on Rense Radio and on other venues of Revere Radio, and on the many other "Libertarian" networks. That's bad enough: but you, Jim, have taken the added step of rehabilitating Henry Ford's, Walter Teagle's, James Mooney's, Thomas Watson's, W A Harriman's and the other "freedom-loving" (as long as it's their freedom) corporate fellow tycoons of their circle's favorite politician, Adolf Hitler! Throw a few Jewish fascists into the mix, and you're ready to accept that only Jews can be real fascists. What kind of logical induction is this?
More misdirection from Atlanta.
ReplyDeleteIf you want to know who's pulling the strings...ask yourself..."Whom can't I criticize?"
The widely circulated post-9/11 stories of the "Dancing Israelis," the Mossad's front-company "Urban Moving Systems," and the "Israeli Art Students" (who supposedly shadowed the "future hijackers"), whatever their basis in fact or fiction, were probably psyop-designed and promoted to serve as INNOCULATIONS -- deftly injected into the collective consciousness of America's Jews and Israelophiles, the vast, vast majority of whom had neither foreknowledge of 9/11 nor complicity in its complex mil-intel staging. And the event's huge profitability (also well publicised) for that elite coterie of high-profile Jews who WERE in on the deal only served to strengthen the resistance-and-immunity (to genuine 9/11 truth) formation-reaction that swiftly and firmly took hold in the minds of our (heavily Jewish) "public intellectuals," media pundits and information gatekeepers.
ReplyDeleteThe overwhelming effectiveness of this brilliant strategy has been on display all across the past decade of deception, as evidenced by the knee-jerk, gut-reaction, vehement opposition that gushes forth from the electronic orfices of the mainstream media (and academia, too) to demonize and silence any voice that dares to question the official, foundational, (and mythological) basis of the Global War on Terror: The holy, Zelikovian fable of the Evil Osama and his nineteen airborne disciples of death.