I'm debating 911 with moms journalism professor fiance, need help with media ctiques and psychology of the big lie research...

All college/university journalism programs teach their students to always, always, ALWAYS choose the side of the 'victim' or the 'little guy' in every story they do.

Remember, they don't just deliver the facts in a neutral way; they have to sell the story, both to their bosses and to the public.

They are taught to bias everything, and if he's a journalism professor, he's both a victim of that methodology/philosophy as well as a perpetuator/perpetrator thereof.

In other words, nothing you present is going to make a dent. He's one of 'them'. It would be like trying to point out corruption in the federal government to Congress.

just a second spanky

everything you need to shut his trap

THIS gives details, motive, and perpetrators

Thread: Black 9/11: Money, Motive, Technology, and Plausible Deniability

It was Osamar Bin Larden

Goebbels..

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

Great video - spot on and the clincher was the fact that
Maurice Greenberg was in the middle of all of this - the same Maurice Greenberg involved in all the false flags events staged using crisis actors and drills ...

The puzzle keeps pointing to the same people.

I have seen this and love it. It is far too far fetched for him or any other simpletons to conceive. That kid is so smug sounding too. I get the same way when trying to explain to sleepers and it commonly is a turn off to them and blocks the receiving of the receiving of info.

I believe these types of questions address the core of how the lie continues. Lets keep the discussion going.

Maybe within the understanding of how the lie is perpetrated is the secret to it exposure???

Thanks. That Goebel quote is more succinct than the one I sent to him.

"The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous."

Goebel

here is my moms fiance responded to the architects and engineers for truth sight and a video drawing together the first mention of the official story by actors on the street (the guy in ball cap that said it fell cuz of jet fuel melting steel) to the "expert" who first brought up bin laden on major network, both before the second tower fell. I you know the videos im talking about please link.

Pete,
I read for about two hours today a lot of the main site you sent to me. It had some impressive sources. But most seemed to base their speculation on what they saw of TV coverage of 9/11. Arm-chair experts, you might say.
Then I did a quick Google search, on “9/11 conspiracy, New York Times” to get a sample of NY Times work on the conspiracy topic. It will give you about a million hits, on Times stories and others. One is:
[link to www.nytimes.com]

Also: A team of researchers at Popular Mechanics did their own research, with hundreds of experts, and produced a magazine project and an expanded report in book form. See these sites:

[link to www.popularmechanics.com]

[link to www.popularmechanics.com]

Anyway, my point is there is a lot of really scientific, credible, non-government, intelligent, honest, professional, expert sources out there who did explain how the fires in the WTC towers brought them down. And that there really were real airliners with passengers in them that hit the towers and the Pentagon. If you read these sites, you might find the evidence compelling.

I think the Popular Mechanics-sponsored book, and many others like it, go a long way to deal with this.

And the NY Times has done many stories about the people who believe the government blew up the towers; as well as details in the stories about the allegations and the theories and how to view the conspiracy groups' web sites.

I am not aware of anyone getting fired for writing those stories.

But if you hear about any firings, I would be interested in knowing about it.

-- Alan

From me to fiance:

An insightful example of interview techniques used by media to discredit the 911 truth movement

Media Manipulation Tactics Analysis 1/3

Play video
Great example of Neuro-Linguistic Programing Source: [link to www.youtube.com]
00:09:17
Added on 1/29/10
8,973 views

[link to www.youtube.com]

Moms Fiance replies:

This is certainly a manufactured video. No argument there.
When was it done? In 2003? Or maybe 2010? Or last week? It was obviously cooked up by some dipshit amateur. Surely there is better stuff than this being passed around. This doesn't even rise to the level of being laughable. -- Alan

Moms fiances reply:


I looked at that clip and a bunch of others bundled with it in the YouTube "similar clips" list. All were from Fox News, the network that proudly makes no bones about being a far-right-wing PR agency, defender of Republican administrations and all things Republican. Fox is, indeed, the laughing stock of professional journalism. Every day.
So it makes me sad to see these Fox-produced, on-air, rude, name-calling snit-fits labeled as examples of how "the media" works.
That said, any television news group is expected to question people who come on the air with any kind of theory. The idea is not to just give the guests unlimited air time to spew their party line.
Questions are asked to get past the generalities, past the smoke and mirrors. The truth, or lack of it, usually lies in the details.
That is how the professional media works; it is also how the courts work. It is the questions, and cross-examinations, that bring out the details.
As Bob Woodward says, that is how to get at "the best obtainable version of the truth."
We are dealing with human beings. They have a tendency to tell lies at times. So their stories, and the details and sources of their stories, are examined closely in matters such as 9/11.
That examination process is what winnows out large chunks of conspiracy theories that often fall apart when closely examined and checked out with intelligent, well-informed experts, witnesses and video from security cams, etc. -- Alan

my reply:I believe the video you are referring to is the one that shows the real time interviews with eyewitnesses that the maker of the video believes to be crisis actors that were making calm seemingly rehearsed statements about the collapse before even the second tower fell. first ow the guy in the ball cap stating that it was certainly the jet fuel that melted the steel and caused the collapse. How could a joe on the street come to to that conclusion just minutes after the collapse? And then there is the terrorism expert that happened to be in the studio with Ted koppel at the same time the guy in the ball cap made the statement on the street. the expert in the studio said the same thing at the same time. When the reporter stated that the first collapse looked exactly like a controlled demolition the expert piped up saying that it was definitely caused by jet fuel melting steel and goes further to surmise that it looks like the work of Osama Bin Laden, all before the second tower fell. To those of us who believe the official story to be a hoax see these two instances as the beginning of the official story. I realize this video provides no proof, to me it is just interesting. I keep the core of my beliefs tied to physics and facts. Like accelerated free fall speed is impossible to achieve unless there is zero resistance. Pancakes stacking and falling would certainly cause resistance and slow the collapse.

Look at a few hi def videos of the collapse. There is 0 resistance, the buildings are pulverized into dust in ten seconds flat. Simply impossible with jet fuel and pancakes.

i should have known better than to send this video someone who hasnt done enough research to allow there mind to come anywhere near the realms of a false flag terror event perpetrated by black ops in our government and apparently from Israel Mossad.

Disregard this video until you can begin to conceive that the events may have been planned and orchestrated to play on peoples emotions and insure they reject any questioning of official events even though they know very little about either side of the story. This is the same type of blind patriotic fervor that was drummed up by hitler that caused people to look the other way when atrocities were being committed.

These atrocities are comparable since we now have a never ending global war on terror and are in the final throws of an engineered collapse of what was once the greatest nation in the known history of this planet.

Fiance:

Anyway, my point is there is a lot of really scientific, credible, non-government, intelligent, honest, professional, expert sources out there who did explain how the fires in the WTC towers brought them down. And that there really were airliners with passengers in them that hit the towers and the Pentagon. If you read these sites, you might find the evidence compelling.

I think the Popular Mechanics-sponsored book, and others like it, might go a long way to deal with this.

And the NY Times has done many stories about the people who believe the government blew up the towers; as well as details in the stories about the allegations and the theories. I am not aware of anyone getting fired for writing those stories.

But if you hear about any firings, let me know.

-- Alan

Tonight From Fiance:

Thanks, Pete. I do respect the amount of time and research effort you have put into this and I must admit, my views are just those of one person (myself) who hasn't been within 500 miles of New York City for a decade or so.
I also must admit that I am, no doubt, sensitive to assumptions that journalists in the U.S. are, in general, controlled or influenced, en mass, to write false or misleading stories by powers that have them all intimidated or fearing for their jobs, or their lives, or their loved ones' lives. After 20-plus years in the profession, and another 12 or so researching it while I teach it, I just have not ran into that. Maybe it's out there. I just never have met journalists from anywhere in the country that deal with that. And I have talked with and worked with people from all over the country, including New York and Washington, D.C., including some high-profile writers and editors for the New York Times and the Washington Post.
Anyway, I will keep your research in mind. Journalists always are intrigued by any reports of foul play. They are curious. And they pursue things and publish them, as verification becomes possible.
Peace be with you.
-- Alan

>>> 1/13/2013 8:07 PM >>>
Alan,

First, congrats on landing my mom. She is quite a catch as you know. i wish you both all the best.

Second I want to finally respond to your emails and let you know I didn't drop the conversation because the popular mechanics and ny times articles provided me with any new insights that changed any of my opinions about what happened that day and in the aftermath to our freedoms.
Rather, it was to avoid the confrontation and frustration inherent in these types of discussions.

i know you don't know me well but i guarantee you i am not a person who will sign on to a belief without some serious research and inquiry. For 6 years I have obsessively researched every available piece of information about 911 including the ones you mentioned as well as having read most of the official 911 commission report and the NIST report of which the engineering of the commission report is based on.

I reserved my opinion on the matter for the first 2 years and many times would play devils advocate to "truthers" in online forums. I know both sides backward and forward. By mine and others research I am thoroughly convinced that all 3 buildings fell as a result of controlled demolition using military grade nano thermite.

Since arriving at this conclusion my research has centered on the whom, how and why, primarily a fascination with the psychology that allows massive lies to be believed and our counties historical use of false flag terrorism events to sway public opinion.

False flags work on simple principles that humans will suspend logic when faced with chaos trauma and terror, tending to believe what is told to them and be more willing to give up personal freedoms in exchange for safety.

911 is more significant than Tonkin bay, Pearl Harbor or the numerous other staged events, because it led to an effective coup in the US via the Patriot act, nsa wiretapping and ndaa. the ndaa allows for the indefinite detainment and imprisonment of US citizens without charges . Obama signed the ndaa last week that contains no exemption for us citizens.

I believe that these laws are not in place for Alqaida (because Alqaida was created and funded by the CIA) but rather for people like myself who practice what the patriot Act calls "domestic intellectual terrorist" or those whom spread of information that threatens national security, like questioning the official 911 story.

If you think the law still protects freedom of speech you need to research the new laws that have been on the bboks sonce 2001 and that are now beginning to be enforced by shutting down web sites and Facebook pages of various truther groups. Even if after research you still want to believe the official story I think you would still support my right to question it. Those rights are quickly disappearing in the US, solely in relation to 911.0

I'm not sure what website you were referring to but it couldn't have been architects and engineers for 911 truth, namely the film " 911 Explosive Evidence". All of the AE for 911 truth research is purely based on testing the conclusions of the commission report and NIST findings. Namely a few important points like jet fuel does not burn hot enough to melt steel and that even if it could there would have had to be some resistance from the remaining Intact floors. Fact, both towers and building seven fell at free fall speed with zero resistance. 10 seconds for the towers and 7 seconds for building 7.

Hundreds of architects, engineers and demolition experts around the world claim the only way for those buildings to fall at free fall speed is if the load bearing, core columns consisting of hundreds of tons of steel and concrete were simultaneously removed by detonation of thermite that had to Have been Attached to the core columns, in advance.

I've gone on and on now, typing on a phone no less. I ask that you watch "explosive evidence" by AE for 911 truth. maintain an open mind while you look at the research. I have little expectation that you will be won over, more over I am interested in dialogue about your resistance and what entertaining this idea would mean to your belief system.


I am now remembering what inspired me to open this conservation with you again. i recently spoke with Faye's uncle, Paul Chicos has recently come to the same conclusion as me after 11 years of belief in the official story which he now attributes to 911 aftershock. Why is Paul's opinion at all relevant? Because not only do I consider Paul to be a very intelligent yet very mainstream in politics and philosophy, I spent many hours hearing his personal 911 story during the time that I was still researching and forming my own opinion. So now that Paul is a truther I have hope that many others are capable of discovering these truths and that possibly that history has a chance of being righted in regards to 911.

Paul's daughter s birthday is sept 11th. Paul works in the elite world of international capital finance. Paul cancelled a meeting at the towers on the morning of 911 so he could spend the day with his daughter. paul knew many people who died in the collapse including most of the people whom attended the meeting at the wtc.

Paul was supposed to be in the building, knew people who died and now after a year of research he joins with the thousands of building engineers, first responders, family members of victims and millions of folks worldwide whom seriously question the official story and demand an independent investigation. So sharpen your investigative pencil, here we go again!

One more thing. Looking back I never received an answer to a question that I asked you and that i ask everyone else who is seeking truth about 911. Were you aware that a third 60 story building that was not struck by a plane fell around 5 pm on 911? If not, how could it be that it wasn't widely reported?

My opinion; because building 7 wasn't struck by a plane it provided the smoking gun that should have pointed the media and investigators to controlled demolition. In fact building 7 was the only steel reinforced buildings that has ever collapsed as a result of fire. The only other two steel framed buildings thatcollapsed by fire happened earlier that day, the wtc towers.

If you care to look the overwhelming evidence has been revealed but that won't matter to most because most Americans won't even look at it. I believe any intelligent person that becomes aware of the glaring inconsistencies int the official story will in the least demand a new investigation.
:)

Sent from my iPhoneo

Fiances response tonight:

I do appreciate the efforts of citizens to help with journalism. One of the great things about our country is its freedoms for anyone to express their views, in private or in public speeches, in blogs, letters to the editor, on radio call-ins, books, you name it.
All this discussion is part of the process foreseen by our nation's founding fathers. They were some brilliant individuals.
-- Alan

My final response:

Alan I appreciate your thoughtful response.
I am on my computer now. Although not a grammar genius I hope I sound at least slightly more coherent when not struggling with my new phones touchscreen and spell check.

I believe the vast majority of mainstream journalist were not aware it was planned and were therefore not intentionally publishing lies. Although there were several that did, namely the authors of the NIST, Popular Mechanics and 911 commission reports.

Partially at fault is the fact that the official story was only re-gurgitated by the mainstream media and that the post 911 trauma/blind patriotic fervor was insurmountable to the effect that no credible/well employed media figure would touch it even if they had questions. The regurgitation is a symptom of the 24 hr news cycle and it is probably more rampant in the independent media than the MSM.

There is also the fact that ground zero was never treated as a crime scene nor was it ever investigated in the standard that any fire inspector would be required to in any event, even with far less significance. And of course the media followed suit. For instance, it is a fact that multiple first responders and media reported secondary explosions while the buildings burned. These explosions were never investigated. Instead the steel, beginning with building 7, was quickly shipped to china for recycling without testing for explosives.

Anytime there was any question of the official story, be it prior knowledge to claims of an inside job, it was attacked by any and all MSM of course with "Faux News" leading the charge. The campaign against truthers was so well orchestrated that the the majority of air time the truth movement got was being shouted downed and threatened by Hannity. Somehow Fox instantly became the watch dog of what was patriotic and what was appropriate to question. The mainstream media engaged in a campaign the 911 truth movement with wackjobs on par with bigfoot and moon landing hoax nuts and it worked. Not because all MSM was in on 911 but because murdoch was in on it and handed down the truther=nutjob dictate which spread through fox and all all the way to NPR who does nothing but bend over backwards to suck the rights ass and appear PC.

Here I must ask again if you had ever heard of the collapse of building 7 before our meeting? I ask that because you have never replied and that it is completely relevant to many of my points. Here it is: How could an investigative journalist that is familiar with details of the official collapse theory not know that a 3rd building fell that day? i will tell you why the vast majority and I suspect yourself didnt know this, because it was barely reported that day, buried after that, further building 7 is not mentioned once in the 911 commission report.

Why? because it is beyond a highly suspect fact that a 60 story building with minimal fires and damage collapsed neatly into its own footprint in 7 seconds, and that it is a smoking gun that points directly at controlled demolition for both towers. I am asking that you analyze the past 2 paragraphs and offer me some explanation on how this could happen. The dire implications of 911 and all that has come to pass is worthy of the inquiry by all citizens especially those involved with media. Its lonely out here with the few million Americans who question the official story. I need the insight of a professional in the field.

Further, I dare you to work a discussion to gain isight into your students opinions of the events of 911. Even in this small bible belt Junior college I can only suspect a strongly opinionated debate with lots of questioning of the OS and others that hold your opinions. I ask that you analyze your feelings and insights during this debate amongst your students and between us.

I believe the truth in how this lie continues is based in the human psyche that does not want to confront the complexity of how it will transform the core of thier beliefs and further what that would represent about them in a culture that is consumed with the lie. Ie; how we would be viewed by the rest of the sheeple. This is paired by a passing the buck system of journalism that passes the lie from one "credible" source to another, trusting the more credible/most lucritive media source without question. In this case the result is a consensus reality that is based on misinformation.


The explanation that was given on live television shortly after the first building collapsed is the one that sticks to this day. The lie was begun while the world stared in shock after the first tower fell. I believe what happened that day was nothing short of calculated mass hypnosis that used modern advancements of nazi propoganda principles as described by Hitler and his propagandist Goebel in the following excerpts.


"that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.
—Adolf Hitler , Mein Kampf, vol. I, ch. X[1]
In that same chapter, Hitler accused "the Jews" of what he claimed was their use of the Big Lie.[1]


Later, Joseph Goebbels put forth a slightly different theory which has come to be more commonly associated with the expression "big lie." Goebbels wrote the following paragraph in an article dated 12 January 1941, 16 years after Hitler's first use of the phrase. The article, titled Aus Churchills Lügenfabrik (English: "From Churchill's Lie Factory") was published in Die Zeit ohne Beispiel.
The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous.
Goebel also said:“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”



Since I mentioned the "right" I must also briefly mention that I do not believe there is any meaningful separation of ideology between the 2 parties. The highest, most powerful offices are owned by the most powerful and ruthless elite powers, primarily banking, energy and military industries. I don't believe these powers and their puppets have any allegiance to any political party or country for that matter and neither do I.

All I know about media is what I have observed and researched. The reason I ever brought this up to you is because the most fascinating part about the whole thing is how this was mostly suppressed from the msm and partially by the mainstream media, not a whole organization was in on it but in fox's case certainly murdoch was involved. I could have debated with my brother in law Scot but never have because he is too immersed in the lie to even consider anything other than what he is told. You on the other hand are an investigative journalism professor. In your case I would expect for logic to prevail over the mass hypnosis.

Peter

[link to www.mediafreedominternational.org]

New research in the journal American Behavioral Scientist (Sage publications, February 2010) addresses the concept of “State Crimes Against Democracy” (SCAD). Professor Lance deHaven-Smith from Florida State University writes that SCADs involve highlevel government officials, often in combination with private interests, that engage in covert activities for political advantages and power. Proven SCADs since World War II include McCarthyism (fabrication of evidence of a communist infiltration), Gulf of Tonkin Resolution (President Johnson and Robert McNamara falsely claimed North Vietnam attacked a US ship), burglary of the office of Daniel Ellsberg’s psychiatrist in effort to discredit Ellsberg, the Watergate break-in, Iran-Contra, Florida’s 2000 Election (felon disenfranchisement program), and fixed intelligence on WMDs to justify the Iraq War.1

...

The term “conspiracy theory” is often used to denigrate and discredit inquiry into the veracity of suspected SCADs. Labeling SCAD research as “conspiracy theory” is an effective method of preventing ongoing investigations from being reported in the corporate media and keep them outside of broader public scrutiny. Psychologist Laurie Manwell, University of Guelph, addresses the psychological advantage that SCAD actors hold in the public sphere. Manwell, writing in American Behavioral Scientist (Sage 2010) states, “research shows that people are far less willing to examine information that disputes, rather than confirms, their beliefs . . . pre-existing beliefs can interfere with SCADs inquiry, especially in regards to September 11, 2001.”3

Thank you!

I will send that information o in future correspondences. I have never heard the term scads. I will also check out the website from the article.

I still dont quite understand how to keep a thread alive. I have posted several that go limp quick.

This is however a very important topic for 911 heads and all of humanity. I will say again: if we can understand how the lie is perpetuated we can figure out how to expose it.

This thread is dedicated to this end.

If you are a GLP wizard, goddess or shill with skills, give me a bump! Give them stars karma or whatever shit keeps this discussion alive.

Thanks and be well from the heart of Appalachia :)!

I personaly think the anthrax lettters were the key to keeping media whore mouths shut. They were sent to selected people with a possible interest in exposing the 9/11 game. People like Daschle, Tom Brokaw, Peter Jennings, the photo editor of the National Enquirer.

If you were a terrorist, you'd send them to the people in power, to Bush, Cheney, Limbaugh, Hannity... not to a bunch of fucks on the other side. The message was clear. Any of you libs who think you're going to talk about this are wrong. Open your mouth and we'll fucking kill you.

That message was recieved loud and clear, certainly after it was discovered that the anthrax was property of the US government. It was the fucking government(Bush and Cheney) that sent the letters. They may be media whores but they aern't stupid. They know what's what.

I'm not sure if this helps at this juncture, but using logic and a solid line of rational thinking tends to be the best method. I save building 7 for "the big finale" when I know they're already starting to accept the possibilities of a false flag.

The art of persuasion requires a combination solid facts and a sensitivity to the listener's state of mind. I think it's more effective to let the other person reach their own conclusion than to try and force what I believe happened. Humans are rebellious by nature and don't like being told what to believe.

If he dismisses building #7 then he'll probably never see it.

Remember that some people are moral cowards. They see it, but their mind is too afraid to accept it. It's just like child abuse trauma. They don't have the strength to face it.

But good luck. Sounds like he's open to the possibility.

true. No one likes to be wrong or talked down to.

He may not. But at lest it is somthing to hone my skills and pass the time.

personally I think a lot of the 9/11 theories are nuts but some aren't.

start with the fact that the mainstream media (official story) is that we knew the perps were terrorists, had their cell phone numbers and were keeping tabs on them. we tracked them to a big meeting in manila with other terrorists.

then we inexplicably give them visas and allow them to enter the U.S. official story is that CIA or NSA (forget which) didn't tell the FBI because we had a policy of not sharing info.

so we let 2 known terrorists who were planning something come in legally.

now tell him that the reason the SAM sites in Washington didn't stop the Pentagon attack was because they were occupied with a military drill at the same time.

coincidentally there's always a drill simulating the exact type of attack as a false flag event that's occuring at the same time in the same location.

yup there is always a near replicate drill to confuse media reports. the same thing was occurring during the national level exercise in new Madrid 2 years ago, the same time as (engineered?) flooding and blowing of the levy's was happening. Im still waiting to see how that plays out.

[link to www.serendipity.li]

Tell him to check out this site. Should make him think twice about using Popular Mechanics as a tool for argument.

Operation Northwoods is proof the government would attack it's own citizens.

[link to en.wikipedia.org (secure)]