SIX WAYS TO FAKE A SUICIDE BOMBINGIf major operations like 9/11 are the pillars of deception, minor operations like suicide bombings are its walls. Without doubt, suicide bombings are the staple of destabilization, serving to generate sectarian strife. They also serve to inflame public opinion against Islam and Muslims, apparently a major goal of the group behind the continuing terror operations.
14 comments:
The problem with saying that an incident was a "false flag operation" is that you have to have the hard evidence to back up the claim. Otherwise, your argument is controvertible. Better to stick to the plain facts of the matter.
LOL.
Brother Gray. Let's examine the inverse of your corollary.
The problem with saying that an incident was a "GENUINE FLAG operation" is that you have to have the hard evidence to back up the claim.
You seem to forget that the Hegelians rarely deal in "hard evidence". Regardless of whichever side they happen to be playing against the other.
1) Is there "hard evidence" that Osama Bin Laden is responsible for the 911 attacks?
2) Was there "hard evidence" the US was ever in danger from Saddam and his WMD's?
3) Is there "hard evidence" these bombing attacks in Iraq, that continue to destabilize the country and, just so happen ... to perpetuate the occupation - are really the work of fanatical Muslim sects of Iraqis?
4) Is there really "hard evidence" the weed smoking ex-con brothas in Bronx charged with "Domestic Terrorism" last month, really had the intent and the resources to launch such an attack?
Let us remember Brother Gray, that the "Official Theory" is also a "Conspiracy Theory".
It's just their Conspiracy Theory.
For example: The suggestion that *** a religious fanatic, holed up in a cave in Afghanistan, armed with a satellite phone and a credit card, orchestrated the greatest single terrorist attack in the history of the world ... alone. ***
IS ... A Conspiracy Theory.
It's just the Conspiracy Theory the Plantation chose to soak into the minds of Plantation Negros and Plantation Crackas primed for suggestion.
DV, let's pretend that you're giving a presentation on this topic to a group of random people that you've pulled off the street. How are you going to convince them in such a way that none of your points are controvertible?
Some people are skeptics no matter what. Take UBM for instance. Whenever you post a quote that someone supposedly made, he comes in and challenges the veracity of the quote itself. "So and so never said that", or, "You misinterpreted what so and so said."
How are you going to convince the Undercover Black Mans of the world of the truth of your claims? That's your challenge in posting these types of entries. If someone reviews all of your claims and then applies the pejorative label of "conspiracy theorist" to you, what's your response? Are you going to call them dumb? Are you going to say that they've been duped by the Plantation? Or are you going to reconfigure your presentation in some way?
What's the point of talking about false flag operations and the so-called New Order if you can't convince anyone to accept the veracity of your claims outside of the choir which is already attuned to your preaching?
somebody's attuned to his preaching?
sheeeiiiiit.....,
there I thought it was just the "frisson of intemperate presentation" that kept everybody coming back.
Well obviously some people are more sympathetic to his arguments than others. He has his share of dedicated detractors.
Ahhh ... Gray Con.
I see what you sayin'.
OK. Let's clear up a couple of things.
1) "Belief" Is Overrated.
Plantation Negros and Plantation Crackas always talking about "what they believe and don't believe".
My contention is that they don't know what the fuck they believe. They Just Go Along with shit that doesn't make them seem stupid or that doesn't put them in any perceived danger.
No one any more "believes" Bin Laden orchestrated 911 than they believe my contention that the event is an obvious "false flag".
They just dwell in that Hegelian state of mind numbed do-nothing Synthesis.
2) "Convincing" People Is Overrated.
People don't do what they are "convinced" to do any more than a cow stampedes because it is "convinced" to stampede.
People move with the herd. I don't try to "convince" people of anything.
I move the herd by waving the red cape of truth.
3) UBM is my man.
We challenge each other. I appreciate him for it.
LOL. But, if a tape recorded message from Jonas Salk himself was to emerge today, claiming the whole polio vaccine was a myth, UB would not give it up to DV. Hell nah.
But I Guar-An-Got-Damn-Tee you that were UB to have a son tomorrow - his approach to the vaccination process would be different than before he got down at DV.Net.
Why? Because he "believes me"? No. But because he has been exposed to the Hegelian counterpoint, the anti-thesis, to the Pro-Vaccine Conspiracy Theory.
He doesn't need to "believe me", now that he knows the polio stats were as fabricated after the Salk vaccine as the WMD Intelligence was fabricated before the Iraq invasion.
It's impossible not to be impacted.
4) What's the point?
Capitulating to the Hegelians and allowing them to monopolize the production and distribution of memes is a bitch move.
Control over the knowable, by marketing institutionally accredited science, history, medicine and opinion is a tactic of the elite to dominate Plantation Negros and Plantation Crackas.
The Plantation endeavors to discourage independent reason while exercising illusory power over human knowledge.
DV.Net is an illustration of gorilla meme warfare, a tactical demonstration of how to escape the Plantation's trap of knowledge suppression and selective dissemination.
I'm Marlo Stansfield hustlin', memes on my own corner, planning a takeover of Hegel's Epistemological Cartel.
Gray. The distribution of my food memes alone, just to black churches, could save a million black people a year. Save tens of millions in medical costs, improve the test scores of kids, reduce the incarceration rates, the drug addiction rates and improve literacy.
(LOL. CNu cracks me up with his little DV Theories. LOL. Why you got your lips poked out Bra? If you weren't the most dynamic intellect on the internet - I'd swear you were a hater.)
It could happen, or it could be that cats are actually blowing themselves up.
Most likely, both things are happening at the same time.
Doesn't really matter to me. I don't think about suicide bombers, real or fake, much at all.
But, I do enjoy reading up on your latest theories on the world.
This place is chock full of disparate thinkers all seeking to expound on the "truth" of what's taking place before our eyes.
I really enjoy watching all of y'all rant.
rant?
Come Big Man.
Stop frontin'.
This is school.
If this was a bunch of white cats standing behind ivy, Negros would be mortgaging their houses and applying for student loans to send their kids here.
Name a course you took in college that has as profound an impact on you as denmarkvesey.net.
rant?
Dude this is poetry.
When I typed that word, I knew you were going to have a problem with it.
Yet
Rant: 1 : to talk in a noisy, excited, or declamatory manner
2 : to scold vehemently
transitive verb
: to utter in a bombastic declamatory fashion
The negative connation is your own, not mine. I like rants. I think ranting accurately describes what occurs on this site on many occasions. Ain't nothing wrong with that.
DV said:
1) "Belief" Is Overrated.
2) "Convincing" People Is Overrated.
___________________________
These are platitudes though.
You don't have to convince me of this blog's status as a bastion and prime mover of alternative media goodness. I already know that. What I'm interested in is getting your opinion on the phenomenon of competing truth-claims.
When Colin Powell presented his "incontrovertible evidence" of Iraq's WMDs to the UN Security Council, why do you suppose they selected him to make the presentation, as opposed to someone else—like Dick Cheney?
Could it be that the presenter himself and the method of presentation are equally important as the so-called facts when it comes to making convincing truth-claims?
For example, I've seen you use the phrase "New World Order" hundreds of times on here. Some claim that the existence of the so-called NWO is an incontrovertible fact while others say that only crackpots believe in such things. How would you go about reconciling this he-say-she-say vacillating when explaining your position on the subject to the average person off the street?
If you say to me, "The NWO exists", and I respond with, "Convince me", what are you going to do? Hit me with a barrage of quotes? Leave me to wallow in my own ignorance?
Umm um.
Nah Gray.
Not at all platitudes.
You asked me 'how do I get people to believe"?.
1) I don't get people to believe.
You asked me 'how do I convince people'.
2) I don't convince people.
I think those are legitimate answers to your question.
Gray, the "NWO" no more "exists" than does the Republican Party "exists". It exists no more than GSWS exists.
They are all memes.
They are each ideas.
But ideas can be powerful. And in the case of GSWS some can be weak.
I am not aware of too many serious people who do not believe a very powerful 'idea' called the New World Order exists.
Are you?
Convincing a man that the NWO exists is like convincing him Darwinism exists.
CNu cracks me up with his little DV Theories. Why you got your lips poked out Bra? If you weren't the most dynamic intellect on the internet - I'd swear you were a hater.)
sheeeiiiit....,
I paid you the highest compliment imaginable.
Through masterful presentation and juxtiposition alone, you've achieved a Gurdjieffian masterstroke.
The beauty of DV school is its compulsory requirement that all-comers verify, absolutely verify, everything for themselves.
Hey-ull..., you even got muhphuggahs clamoring overtop one another to compete in the presentation, representation, and verification departments.
That's quite a feat magne.
Everything short of that is mere suggestion, conformity, and idle conversation....,
DV said: "Gray, the "NWO" no more "exists" than does the Republican Party "exists". It exists no more than GSWS exists.
They are all memes.
They are each ideas."
Nah, DV, not in the context in which you use the phrase.
"NWO makes a move", is one of your favorite catchphrases. Both you know and I know that this statement implies an actor performing an action.
If you can't convince someone that the NWO exists, and have stated explicitly that you have no desire to convince them of such, then why bother stating its movements?
"I am not aware of too many serious people who do not believe a very powerful 'idea' called the New World Order exists.
Are you?"
I don't know.
First define what you mean by "New World Order".
Post a Comment