Richard Cox, is 9/11 Deeply Spiritual? |428|

Of course, American elites are not the only ones that are dangerous - all other societies also have to deal with the psychically blind-deaf people who tend to rise at the top positions in any hierarchical structure. And, were these societies - say, Russian or Chinese - the imperial hegemons, they would undoubtedly act as ugly as the American Empire; it is the Empire itself that is the source of global threat and demage, no matter what exact country plays the role of the current imperial center. And against the ill will of the Empire, in any its incarnation, the people must unite. In the current actuality that we encounter it is the America that is the imperial center; and this means that all good-willed people, including Americans themselves - especially Americans themselves! - should seek to liberate America itself and the whole world from the ruling clique of psychically blind-deaf types that seek to enslave Americans and non-Americans alike, locally and globally.

That quote is where we disagree. All empires are not the same. There is and never will be a utopia on earth. Leaders will always seek to enrich themselves. That is human nature. What counts is how well those being led do, what rights they enjoy, what hopes and aspirations they are able to realistically pursue. There is ample evidence that the quality of life, globally, has increased significantly in the last 70 years. Do you honestly believe that would be the case under Soviet hegemony? Or Chinese, Or Hitler/Tojo? How about under Sharia law?

There will always be poor and oppressed. It's not an all or nothing proposal. It's a matter of how many poor and just how oppressed. What is the trend?

You are never going to have governance by spiritual masters. Societal leadership must first and foremost address material needs.
 
Thank you Sam, for a balanced and calm response. Criticism is not an attack. Being deaf and blind to how your friends hear and see you isn't a great strategy.
Countries don't have "friends". They are self-interested. They ally with other countries when alignment makes sense and they don't ally where interests compete.

You, like many others here, are a globalist/communist and I have concluded that you don't even realize it. You seek a peaceful brotherhood of man in a borderless world where wealth transfer and cooperative arrangements between the global regions eliminates poverty. Other forms of perceived inequity are to be relieved via social programming and law enforcement. The elites will determine how it works and what is unequal and oppressive. That is the communist promise that, of course, never seems to work out as planned. It comes packaged for sale to your cohort as a spiritually enlightened approach to social life. For poor it is packaged as free stuff and, sometimes, as an opportunity for cathartic revenge on the wealthy.

However, global socialism isn't the only organizing force out there. For example Islam has its vision of the Uma and Caliphate. All organizing principles have leaders that are somehow more equal than others and who have to make "hard choices", "break a few eggs" to make that ommelet.
You're never going to get away from that no matter how you "dream" (or scream).

What you also don't seem to realize is that such an arrangement requires a hegemonous govt to force allegiance to its rule. And that is where all of these more recent wars and other actions you dislike come from. Each would be hegemony seeking to extend itself and the other(s) trying to block it and extend themself.

Such is the nature of man, whether it be a primitive tribe, the European kings, Islam or a giant modern nation.

Ironically, we elected a President that wishes to disentangle us from foreign affairs - it's one of the reasons we voted for him - and you don't like him. Again, you are programmed by the very elites that do the things you dislike and who seek the global govt. You want to have your cake and eat it too. Well, you can't.

My primary disagreement with you has only ever been with your rose tinted glasses that you wear when looking at everything except the US + your lack of a viable solution. Criticism without a viable solution is not healthy. Sometimes acceptance of that which cannot be changed is very liberating.

It comes up every time 911 - or other alleged conspiracies - is discussed because, as I said upthread, the conspiracy theories of the event(s) are dependent on a particular view of the US that conforms to yours and not mine.
 
Last edited:
I live in the United States, New York City precisely. I am an outspoken critic when it comes to the many, absurd political decisions my government makes on our behalf. Specifically speaking when it comes to the events of 9/11, the United States surely covered up some interesting anomalies and also its Intelligence Apparatuses (CIA-NSA) have had foreknowledge of said event, with one of it's Directors (George Tenet-CIA) committing perjury before the Joint House Inquiry in 2002. Information which could have prevented the September 11th attacks, went often ignored and even at times not shared amongst judicial agencies like the FBI. There are many things which the average public aren't even aware about that Richard Cox and myself have covered some of those issues in our series and we will cover more in our future podcast. Now im not some "expert" by any means, in fact im part of that public. Im just a bit more aware of these issues that the U.S Government chose to participate and ignore in the two congressional inquiries. The primary problem that resides in the United States, is ignorance. My fear is that "willful ignorance" is far more rampant than i first acknowledged. We also have far too many uninformed folk when it comes to the 9/11 attacks, those are the unfortunates, due to them being exposed to frauds like Alex Jones, Christopher Bollyn, Rebekah Roth and Jim Fetzer. These are people who take advantage of an extremely completed and vigorous event like 9/11 for their own personal gain or to manipulate people into believing 9/11 was a "fantastical" conspiracy......its much more than what they lay claim to. Im just touching on one area involving the egregious acts of the U.S Government, i havent even come close to addressing issues which came after it or even before it that continues to be a repetitive problem for generations to come.
 
I live in the United States, New York City precisely. I am an outspoken critic when it comes to the many, absurd political decisions my government makes on our behalf. Specifically speaking when it comes to the events of 9/11, the United States surely covered up some interesting anomalies and also its Intelligence Apparatuses (CIA-NSA) have had foreknowledge of said event, with one of it's Directors (George Tenet-CIA) committing perjury before the Joint House Inquiry in 2002. Information which could have prevented the September 11th attacks, went often ignored and even at times not shared amongst judicial agencies like the FBI. There are many things which the average public aren't even aware about that Richard Cox and myself have covered some of those issues in our series and we will cover more in our future podcast. Now im not some "expert" by any means, in fact im part of that public. Im just a bit more aware of these issues that the U.S Government chose to participate and ignore in the two congressional inquiries. The primary problem that resides in the United States, is ignorance. My fear is that "willful ignorance" is far more rampant than i first acknowledged. We also have far too many uninformed folk when it comes to the 9/11 attacks, those are the unfortunates, due to them being exposed to frauds like Alex Jones, Christopher Bollyn, Rebekah Roth and Jim Fetzer. These are people who take advantage of an extremely completed and vigorous event like 9/11 for their own personal gain or to manipulate people into believing 9/11 was a "fantastical" conspiracy......its much more than what they lay claim to. Im just touching on one area involving the egregious acts of the U.S Government, i havent even come close to addressing issues which came after it or even before it that continues to be a repetitive problem for generations to come.

Adam,
I am also an outspoken critic of a lot that is happening post 911. I have the same concerns that Edward Snowden did. I don't like the development of a "deep state" since then. I don't the take over of the media as a govt propaganda arm. The Iraq invasion was a horrible abuse of power. While I approved going into Afghanistan, I think the whole COIN and nation building has been a costly mistake (and said it would be before it happened). My son was an Army officer and is now 100% disabled due to wounds received in Afghanistan long after it should have been clear that we were accomplishing nothing and should have left.

All of that said, there are other major global forces at work. What concerns us is not occurring in a vacuum. There is a context that you may be missing. A lot of people here are most certainly missing it.

I do not think that whatever it is you think you know about "anomalies" can fairly allow you to conclude that the US allowed the attack to happen. I think I know what anomalies you are referring to.

I assume you've heard of "fast and Furious" under the Obama admin. Do think that they plotted to have it turn out how it did? Or was it just a screw up?

The "ignorance" you decry is of more issues than you think. How many high school grads can tell even tell you 8 of the 10 amendments that comprise the Bill of Rights? How many people believe what the media tells them? How many understand the history of socialism and its results? How many could find Iraq on a map? How many understand basic economics? How many even care about any of that and much more?
 
Last edited:
Regarding the questions of extended consciousness... What Richard is emphasizing (which coincides with my own exploration) is that what we think we experience when it comes to the anomalous may greatly (even completely) depend on (as he put it) "the lens" through which we are viewing. I take that to mean, the current collective of experiences and the paradigms these experiences might suggest up until the moment someone has a certain significant (life changing) experience such as an NDE or a sudden "something" (a wake up call that is personal and unique to the individual receiving it) glimpse that vanquishes a depression.

And so the appearance of "the phenomena" to the experiencer of such, the form it appears to take (malevolent / benevolent and everywhere in between) could actually be dependent on the experiencer or at least co-created by the experiencer.

When we consider this at both, the level of the individual and the level of the collective, no better example of the possibility of this activity than in the context of "ET" and "UFO."
 
Regarding the questions of extended consciousness... What Richard is emphasizing (which coincides with my own exploration) is that what we think we experience when it comes to the anomalous may greatly (even completely) depend on (as he put it) "the lens" through which we are viewing. I take that to mean, the current collective of experiences and the paradigms these experiences might suggest up until the moment someone has a certain significant (life changing) experience such as an NDE or a sudden "something" (a wake up call that is personal and unique to the individual receiving it) glimpse that vanquishes a depression.

And so the appearance of "the phenomena" to the experiencer of such, the form it appears to take (malevolent / benevolent and everywhere in between) could actually be dependent on the experiencer or at least co-created by the experiencer.

When we consider this at both, the level of the individual and the level of the collective, no better example of the possibility of this activity than in the context of "ET" and "UFO."

Sam,
Yes. I am a totally different person depending on the lens through which I examine myself. A society is different things to different people depending on they view it.

Am I creating different realities depending on the lens? I think yes. We all have our own world to live through. What's "real" to each of us is what we perceive.

I call the lens the "focus of awareness". And where the awareness focuses, "the selected energetic band" and the force that causes a given focus "intent".

It is further my opinion that intent can be manipulated, consciously or, usually, unconsciously. The energy involved in the alignment of focus and awareness and the energetic band is magnetic. It's like a "contact high". If it goes on long enough, then people's world actually changes to some form of consensus reality.
 
Last edited:
Adam,
I am also an outspoken critic of a lot that is happening post 911. I have the same concerns that Edward Snowden did. I don't like the development of a "deep state" since then. I don't the take over of the media as a govt propaganda arm. The Iraq invasion was a horrible abuse of power. While I approved going into Afghanistan, I think the whole COIN and nation building has been a costly mistake (and said it would be before it happened). My son was an Army officer and is now 100% disabled due to wounds received in Afghanistan long after it should have been clear that we were accomplishing nothing and should have left.
Back in 2002/3 Tony Blair made a speech in which he said that it was imperative to concentrate on stabilising Afghanistan before potentially moving on to Iraq. I guess that was before money/power had clouded his judgement. He was, of course utterly right, at least in the sense that if you do invade a country you must have a plan to follow through with some form of nation-building. Of course, in practice this would make invasions almost vanishingly rare - as they should be.
All of that said, there are other major global forces at work. What concerns us is not occurring in a vacuum. There is a context that you may be missing. A lot of people here are most certainly missing it.
Yes there are, and I think that sadly, the UN has evolved from being a force for peace, into an organisation that is looking for power on a global scale. This may be the primary reason for the 'climate emergency'. Fortunately, I think Greta may have inadvertently triggered something of a backlash.
How many people believe what the media tells them?
Possibly one of the most serious issues today is the way the media feel free to use their enormous power to distort the truth until it is little better than a lie, and I include our own BBC as one of the worst culprits. We need to know how this can have happened, and what should be done to fix the problem.

David
 
Back in 2002/3 Tony Blair made a speech in which he said that it was imperative to concentrate on stabilising Afghanistan before potentially moving on to Iraq. I guess that was before money/power had clouded his judgement. He was, of course utterly right, at least in the sense that if you do invade a country you must have a plan to follow through with some form of nation-building. Of course, in practice this would make invasions almost vanishingly rare - as they should be.

I am listening to Andrew J. Bacevich's 'America's War for the Greater Middle East'. His take is that the US and Europe had determined that because they relied on Middle East oil they had an inherent right to be involved. He cited a chilling US document [the author's name did not stick with me] which essentially said that because the West relied on the oiled were the folk who exploited it, they 'owned' it, notwithstanding the fact that it was in countries whose residents neither discovered nor exploited it.

I would say that Blair was simply echoing old British colonial policy, knowing the US had taken it over. He was saying the 'bleeding obvious', once you accepted the premise that invading Afghanistan was a good thing in the first place. The US did have a plan to 'stabilise' Afghanistan - by imposing its version of democracy. How has that worked out?

The Afghanis had resisted the Russians, and then the Americans. Not dissimilar to the way the Vietnamese expelled the French and then the Americans. Neither has 'nation building' worked in Iraq. Its a dumb idea. You invade, meet your military objectives and then bugger off, or you take over. The Romans understood this. So did the Moslems - and the British, the French, the Dutch and the Spanish.

It does seem that the US is under the merry delusion that everybody wants to live like them. Its understandable, but its wrong. You can't barge into a country and then 'nation build' as some kind of intellectual exercise. That's not how reality works.
 
Again, you Laird and Steve were not exposed to any actual reality in those situations were you now?

As promised until now, I was avoiding corresponding directly with you, once again you seem to have incredible talents, by being able to derive so much from a simple ‘like’. What a Guy!!!

Until you have had your home bombed, your country gutted, your life turned upside down, you really haven’t been exposed to ‘any reality in those situations’ either! Mr Fucking Ethical.
 
Last edited:
As promised until now, I was avoiding corresponding directly with you, once again you seem to have incredible talents, by being able to assume so much from a simple ‘like’. What a Guy!!!

Until you have had your home bombed, your country gutted, your life turned upside down, you really haven’t been exposed to ‘any reality in those situations’ either! Mr Fucking Ethical.

I think, Laird, who lived in the South Africa during apartheid and witnessed its ugliness directly, have more experience of confronting large-scale, organised cruelty than most of us.

And, TES, for you - I wanted to quote the post of yours to which Steve is replying, yet I can't, since it has somehow disappeared. So, let me just direct the question at you without quoting you; I'm sure you'll notice my question anyway. And the question is: what direct experience of dealing with violence and horror do you have?

(Just to be clear: I know that this question may be too personal, and touch something you'd prefer not to recall, ever. So, if you'll refuse to answer, I will understand and won't insist.)

P.S. Still, whatever your answer will be, I have to add that direct experience, while being valuable, does not make a person automatically infallible concerning the experienced situation. For example, let's take war veterans: the direct confrontation with the atrocity of warfare almost always lead at least to some change of their personhood, yet this change may be quite different. Some may reach a clear understanding of the inhumanity of war, and dedicate their lives to preventing and stopping current and coming wars; the example of such change is Tulsi Gabbard (the Iraq war veteran). Yet other, enraged and embittered by what they had to come through, feel nothing but greatly intensified hatred to their adversaries, and a desire to crush them no matter what; recently deceased John McCain (a Vietnam war veteran) is an example of this.
 
Steve,
That is just too funny. The pompous gas bag deletes his own posts......

"Again, you Laird and Steve were not exposed to any actual reality in those situations were you now?" TES.. Since deleted by him.
 
And, TES, for you - I wanted to quote the post of yours to which Steve is replying, yet I can't, since it has somehow disappeared. So, let me just direct the question at you without quoting you; I'm sure you'll notice my question anyway. And the question is: what direct experience of dealing with violence and horror do you have?
Thank you Vortex for not attacking me personally as the two above just did, and asking a sincere if not off the subject, question. I know, I removed it... it is just not worth it. It will not be listened to... so it is a waste of my focus. In answer to your question... things which come to mind...

My best friend was shot in the stomach and killed and his girlfriend was kidnapped raped and left dead, because of being the wrong skin color.
My college friend was beaten with a pipe, and had to leave college and go into debt to get his face reconstructed - again being a hated nationality and wrong skin color.
I have gone through two conflicts as a military officer and in combat. I know the sound of 7.62×39mm rounds passing near one's head, or the distinctive whoop of an artillery shell as it comes inbound.
My unit was used as a decoy along a front line, to draw enemy fire.
I have had men die in my arms.
I have had my child severely injured by the DTaP vaccine and end up with permanent disability from brain damage after 6 weeks of screaming in pain.
I have had my other child severely injured with Cerebral Palsy from birth trauma and end up permanently disabled from CP.
I do strategy for nations facing horrid poverty, famine and disease - several times millions in work, for free.
Was held captive with a shotgun under my chin, by a junta in Africa.
Was held in custody by Middle Eastern armed forces and had to be freed by US intervention
Had to make ready to flee by boat, as a socialist force descended upon my hotel to try and kill me and my USAID/European cohorts for doing strategy for a nation. Several people died in the ensuing conflict.
Was attacked by a knife wielding socialist in Spain - fortunately my arms were stronger than his.

I can go on and on Vort... :)

But these things do not qualify me to possess an opinion. And I really would have wanted to keep the discussion focused on the assertion made:

"US is under the merry delusion that everybody (Iraq context) wants to live like them"​
Not personal attacks for having the audacity to disagree.

(I have not attacked anyone here, and the forum members do not deserve to be treated like this. I am here because I like Alex, and I want to learn some things about the 'other side' and how I should regard it... I am a relative newby on that.)
 
Last edited:
Thank you Vortex for not attacking me personally as the two above just did, and asking a sincere if not off the subject, question. I know, I removed it... it is just not worth it. It will not be listened to... so it is a waste of my focus. In answer to your question... things which come to mind...

My best friend was shot in the stomach and his girlfriend was kidnapped raped and left dead, because of being the wrong skin color.
My college friend was beaten with pipe, and had to leave college and go into debt to get his face reconstructed - again being a hated nationality and wrong skin color.
I have gone through two conflicts as a military officer and in combat. I know the sound of 7.62×39mm rounds passing near one's head, or the distinctive whoop of an artillery shell as it comes inbound.
I have had men die in my arms.
I have had my child severely injured by the DTaP vaccine and end up with permanent disability from brain damage after 6 weeks of screaming in pain.
I have had my other child severely injured with Cerebral Palsy from birth trauma and end up permanently disabled from CP.
I do strategy for nations facing horrid poverty, famine and disease.
Was held captive with a shotgun under my chin, by a junta in Africa.
Was held in custody by Middle Eastern armed forces and had to be freed by US intervention
Had to make ready to flee by boat, as a socialist force descended upon my hotel to try and kill me and my USAID cohorts for doing strategy for a nation. Several people died in the ensuing conflict.
Was attacked by a knife wielding socialist in Spain - fortunately my arms were stronger than his.

I can go on and on Vort... :)

But these things do not qualify me to possess an opinion.

Thanks for a reply, TES. Even if we stand in clear opposition to each other, I still can appreciate something in you - your sharp intellect, and your power of will that allowed you to survive through all of it. Respect to an opponent, even to an enemy in a battle, is exceedingly rare but a valuable quality - one that I'm always trying not to lose in the moments of indignation (that you and Eric are pretty much capable to provoke).

Yet, this respect does not lessen my dedication to the positions strongly different from, and in conflict with, your ones.

For example, your experience-based opinion... as I said, there are people who has endured similar, or comparable, ordeals, and yet came to colclusions very different from yours.

Especially the people who were standing on the opposite side of the battlefront: they have lived their life through war and pain as you did, TES. Yet, in a struggle, they had chosen a side directly opposite to yours.

It seems, they didn't saw "the strategy" that you and your USAID co-workers were developing as something greatly beneficial. Evidently they saw it as something not beneficial at all - so far away from being beneficial that, in their view, it was justifiable to fight against it with a weapon in hand.

And some things that I learned about the very questionable "benevolence" of the US-centered global empire and its organisations like USAID let me think that they might have a reason beyond mere ideological dedication. They, or their close ones, might have perceived the imperial "benevolence" first-hand, and experience were quite disappointing. To put it mildly.

You saw the situation from the position of the Empire, TES. They saw it from the position of the ones with whose blood, sweat and tears the Empire is maintaining itself.

Or they came from a more elevated social positions, but, being compassionate to the ones who were paying this heavy price, and furious against the people who forced them to pay it, decided to stand on their side, sacrificing the confort and security their elevated position for the struggle for the liberation of the ones who were much lower than them on the social ladder.

Didn't all those people have their reasons, valid ones, rather than being "evil deluded fanatics" (that's how you probably perceive them, TES... feel free correct me if you think I'm wrong in this assumption).

To summarise: your position, TES, in the one of the veteran Roman legionnaire who scoffs at "dirty barbarians" who were stupid enough to resist Rome's imperial right and authority, and the light of civilisation that the Rome so generously brought to them, and caused so much suffering to him and his fellow legionnaires during the invasions in that he participated (as well as on the Romans who feel compassionate to these "savages"). And, well, this legionnaire does have a reason based in experience: he definitely did suffer a lot of hardship and pain during the imperial conquests in which he fought.

Yet, if you ask the conquered and enslaved "barbarians" who was forcibly subjugated by the Rome, you'll hear a very different story. A story in which the legionnaire and his Roman fellows would be astronomically far from being the "good guys" they believe themselves to be (probably, quite sincerely so). A story of hardship and pain that were caused by them, and were at the very least comparable to - and usually, much worse - than the one that they themselves suffered.

And each one must decide whose story he accepts as the part of his own one, and on which side - the side of the Empire dedicated to "civilising" "barbarians" by force (and to enriching, empowering and glorifying the few people who lead the Empire, of course... but aren't these noble civilization-bringers deserve some humble rewards for their efforts?) or the side of the "barbarians" who felt the effects of these "civilising" eforts by themselves - one stands.

I have chosen my side. You have chosen yours. And they stand in opposition to each other.
 
Last edited:
I have chosen my side. You have chosen yours. And they stand in opposition to each other.

Thanks, and thank you for taking the risk to describe what you believe to be my point of view and experience base. But you are incorrect about 'my side', me and my position. You do not know whom I was working for, and who were my clients. You are not aware of the specific recommendations I made and the outcome of those recommendations. If you did, you would not frame these sides in such a simplistic way.

To summarise: your position, TES, in the one of the veteran Roman legionnaire who scoffs at "dirty barbarians" who were stupid enough to resist Rome's imperial right and authority

This is not true in the least. It is a highly unfair bifurcation. One reason I am called for this work is precisely because I oppose Americanizing other cultures.

Note: I am working on a proposal for a nation right now, and translating it - which is boring as all get-out... so I come here for a break from that monotony. But not for a fight... ;)
 
Last edited:
(I have not attacked anyone here, and the forum members do not deserve to be treated like this.

Once again, you seem to think you’re some sort of victim here.

The truth is that you are the one that included me by name in the post that you deleted, not for anything positive, but for not having been there to experience the reality of war. This purely on the strength of me having the audacity to ‘like’ Michaels post.

I have only posted twice on this thread. Neither of these posts were personal in nature, neither mentioned you, or anything you appear to be particularly interested in, the last one being last Wednesday.

Did I not say I would refrain from communicating directly with you after our last spat? Have I broken my word up to this point? (Well, you know what I mean, in response to your post targeting me)

I make no apology for calling you out for deleting your posts. It’s a cowardly thing to do imo.

This is precisely why I really don’t like communicating with you.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for a reply, TES. Even if we stand in clear opposition to each other, I still can appreciate something in you - your sharp intellect, and your power of will that allowed you to survive through all of it. Respect to an opponent, even to an enemy in a battle, is exceedingly rare but a valuable quality - one that I'm always trying not to lose in the moments of indignation (that you and Eric are pretty much capable to provoke).

Yet, this respect does not lessen my dedication to the positions strongly different from, and in conflict with, your ones.

For example, your experience-based opinion... as I said, there are people who has endured similar, or comparable, ordeals, and yet came to colclusions very different from yours.

Especially the people who were standing on the opposite side of the battlefront: they have lived their life through war and pain as you did, TES. Yet, in a struggle, they had chosen a side directly opposite to yours.

It seems, they didn't saw "the strategy" that you and your USAID co-workers were developing as something greatly beneficial. Evidently they saw it as something not beneficial at all - so far away from being beneficial that, in their view, it was justifiable to fight against it with a weapon in hand.

And some things that I learned about the very questionable "benevolence" of the US-centered global empire and its organisations like USAID let me think that they might have a reason beyond mere ideological dedication. They, or their close ones, might have perceived the imperial "benevolence" first-hand, and experience were quite disappointing. To put it mildly.

You saw the situation from the position of the Empire, TES. They saw it from the position of the ones with whose blood, sweat and tears the Empire is maintaining itself.

Or they came from a more elevated social positions, but, being compassionate to the ones who were paying this heavy price, and furious against the people who forced them to pay it, decided to stand on their side, sacrificing the confort and security their elevated position for the struggle for the liberation of the ones who were much lower than them on the social ladder.

Didn't all those people have their reasons, valid ones, rather than being "evil deluded fanatics" (that's how you probably perceive them, TES... feel free correct me if you think I'm wrong in this assumption).

To summarise: your position, TES, in the one of the veteran Roman legionnaire who scoffs at "dirty barbarians" who were stupid enough to resist Rome's imperial right and authority, and the light of civilisation that the Rome so generously brought to them, and caused so much suffering to him and his fellow legionnaires during the invasions in that he participated (as well as on the Romans who feel compassionate to these "savages"). And, well, this legionnaire does have a reason based in experience: he definitely did suffer a lot of hardship and pain during the imperial conquests in which he fought.

Yet, if you ask the conquered and enslaved "barbarians" who was forcibly subjugated by the Rome, you'll hear a very different story. A story in which the legionnaire and his Roman fellows would be astronomically far from being the "good guys" they believe themselves to be (probably, quite sincerely so). A story of hardship and pain that were caused by them, and were at the very least comparable to - and usually, much worse - than the one that they themselves suffered.

And each one must decide whose story he accepts as the part of his own one, and on which side - the side of the Empire dedicated to "civilising" "barbarians" by force (and to enriching, empowering and glorifying the few people who lead the Empire, of course... but aren't these noble civilization-bringers deserve some humble rewards for their efforts?) or the side of the "barbarians" who felt the effects of these "civilising" eforts by themselves - one stands.

I have chosen my side. You have chosen yours. And they stand in opposition to each other.

I am not for "Americanizing" other cultures. In fact, I think it is stupid to try and the wrong thing to do.

You and others have consistently misrepresented and/or misunderstood what I am saying and thrown back at me (and TES) some straw man that your media sources tell you that I am.

However, you are making my case that the real "spirituality" of 911 is the dark negativity in the hearts of many who are uninformed, other than hateful propaganda, and hold an unrealistically negative view of the US - an unrealistic view that causes them to believe associated conspiracy theories, that, in turn, form a feedback loop with the original base of hate, ignorance and negativity. This is all served up within a deficit of self-reflection. I'm sure those involved will object by stating that they are merely reacting to "attacks" on them. They cannot see the hate and negativity that they emanate.
 
I am not for "Americanizing" other cultures. In fact, I think it is stupid to try and the wrong thing to do.

You and others have consistently misrepresented and/or misunderstood what I am saying and thrown back at me (and TES) some straw man that your media sources tell you that I am.

However, you are making my case that the real "spirituality" of 911 is the dark negativity in the hearts of many who are uninformed, other than hateful propaganda, and hold an unrealistically negative view of the US - an unrealistic view that causes them to believe associated conspiracy theories, that, in turn, form a feedback loop with the original base of hate, ignorance and negativity. This is all served up within a deficit of self-reflection. I'm sure those involved will object by stating that they are merely reacting to "attacks" on them. They cannot see the hate and negativity that they emanate.

The mistake you and TES are repeatedly keep making is that you interpret anything critical I, Steve, Laird, Michael etc. said to you as an attack on you personally. While others and I are criticisng the political, economic, social and cultural positions you support, not trying to attack your integrity as human beings.

Isn't it a Leftie type like me who should be fixated on a personal and group victimhood, eh? ;) Yet I'm not. While you and TES are, unfortunately.

P.S. And, Eric... a complaint about "straw-manning" from your lips sound a bit... misplaced. Since you are constantly and pesistently building straw men of your opponents and their positions, usually in overtly rude and aggressive way (this one criticism is not of you positions as such, but of your very uncivil treatment of eveyone who criticises them - to be clear).
 
Last edited:
The mistake you and TES are repeatedly keep making is that you interpret anything critical I, Steve, Laird, Michael etc. said to you as an attack on you personally.

This is baloney. I've never contended that Michael has attacked me personally - he does not.

There are people who are on this forum ONLY to attack others personally. Their argument style drifts from a facade of apparent discussion, and to the person, every single time - like gravity, it is the only skill/argument they possess - so that is where they go. Read this entire thread, watch how they work.

Please get back onto the topic of discussion. Enough of cleverly nudging the subject into the personal context where you can demean forum members (as you have done in your last three posts). It is tiresome.

Topic: 9/11 is spiritual. To many, the World changed after that moment. Even cinema prior to 9/11 seems very different to me than what we see now.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top