Looking Toward The Next High

[Eric the Green]

(06-06-2018, 10:53 PM)TheNomad Wrote:

(06-06-2018, 03:01 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(06-05-2018, 07:02 PM)TheNomad Wrote:

(06-05-2018, 11:00 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(06-04-2018, 04:47 PM)TheNomad Wrote: The main reason 911 doesn't get the nod as the Crisis Trigger has to do with timing.

Can you see what you even wrote here?  It doesn't get the nod for the crisis because it didn't happen in the time brackets you believe the crisis happened in.

subjective?

Subjective?  Of course!  All of this is subjective.  All I can do is look at the history as it unfolded and decide if the next turning has arrived or not.  As far as I can tell, nothing about the post-911 period has any crisis-feel to it.  It seemed a lot more like a MIC opportunity: profits for some, war for a few and pass the popcorn for the rest.

FWIW, we discussed this for years after 911, and no one make a strong case for 2001 as the beginning of the crisis period, and there were many who tried.  2001 was early, but not prohibitively so.  911 could have been the trigger, but it shows no signs that is was.  This is especially true when you consider the resolution of that event: none of note.  Afghanistan is still in turmoil, Iraq is stabilizing, but not in a way we would consider transformative, and the war has just spread to Syria and Yemen.  We now have troops in 197 countries and action is most of them, yet the focus of our attention is DJT and his Tweets.

All of this is subjective

That is the whole generational disconnect.  Objectivity views things through a lens that sets aside the observer's "doctrine" so that he/she can make informed decisions NOT on what they already believe or want to believe but in rectifying things they don't believe with things they do believe.  There is very little of that happening in our culture and it is what causes alternate realities and alt facts.  To even say "alternate facts" and have that be a phrase we hear at the highest levels of those in power is insanity.  I am beginning to understand OBJECTIVITY is a concept diametrically opposed to many, possibly unable to comprehend what is even the difference between the two, therefore, unable to BE objective because it means a willingness to stop preaching and start learning.

That somehow ALTERNATE FACTS even exist.  Facts are facts, they can and are spun in any way possible to achieve the end of the person spewing those "facts".  Therefore, subjectivity is wrong and only causes problems leading to Crisis and all the flaming doom we keep seeing in every 4th Turning.  That you can't or don't see that is ITSELF proof what I am saying is true.

Subjectivity is simply another phrase for Culture Wars.  And we have to endure a whole generation of subjective people who cling to their subjectivity before all else - even over solving problems.  I think solving problems needs to be front and center and dogma needs to stay outside until you have a change to walk it.

And yet, Sir Nomad, you believe in conspiracy theories about JFK and 9-11 and maybe more. These are not facts; they are subjective feelings. It had to be a conspiracy, you say, because it must be the actions of those in power and we just refuse to face up to it. The facts are just the facts, and they say otherwise.

We boomers did not see the outer-directed lives of the GIs in a favorable light. They were alienated from life, lacking any inner guidance or gyroscope, just acting out what society wanted them to do, and we didn't believe that was the basis for a good society. Inner exploration is a necessity and a key if we are ever to have a fulfilling society based on love and respect. What you say that S&H say, is not what they said. They were not called prophets and idealists for nothing. Prophets are supposed to show the way forward and lead us there. The blue boomers do that, but aren't given the chance.

I didn't have children because I didn't want any. That was the right decision if I didn't want children, not to have them and then neglect them or not respect them and their value. I felt neglected by my GI generation parents too. They wanted me to be a robot and follow the expectations of society, just as they did.

Objectivity and subjectivity both have their place in a true understanding of reality. Objectivity gives us the observable facts and the engineering skill to build things in the outer world. But lots of things and buildings and runaway thinking alone do not bring happiness or inner peace. That must be found within. Knowing the truth on the inner-directed level means to clear our own consciousness from distortion and see what actually exists and is happening.

And yet, Sir Nomad, you believe in conspiracy theories about JFK and 9-11 and maybe more. These are not facts; they are subjective feelings. It had to be a conspiracy, you say, because it must be the actions of those in power and we just refuse to face up to it. The facts are just the facts, and they say otherwise.

When someone says "you believe in conspiracy theories" I know there is no dialogue possible, so I just don't continue.  It is like a glob of dog poo you found on your shoe and you don't want it so you scrape it off.  No research, no reading, no REAL intrigue into what is fact and what is Warren Report.  I'll say once more and only once more, Judyth Vary Baker was neither interviewed by the Warren Report nor does her name even exist in that report, yet she was personally with Oswald and those surrounding Oswald on many different levels (read: she was not a hooker but a child science prodigy) in the entire year leading up to the assassination.  If anything, her information could shed light on the question "WAS Lee an angry lone nut or was there more going on with him?".  So, because she was not interviewed by the Warrens nor included in their official stamp, TO YOU and others that means she doesn't officially exist.  But she does exist, you have the opportunity to read her book and about her meticulous almost rat-packed supply of physical documentation which proves she is who she says she is and was where she was at the times and places she claims to have been.  What you decide about her from there is on you.  I'm not forcing you to believe anything so much as wishing you were open to ideas not wholly subjective coming down to the serfs from the castle.  After all that is what this entire theme was about - I believe covert operations against American interests have overtaken America and if we could only get ahead of them instead of waiting 50 years for documents to be released and the guilty to die, we might be able to right this ship which has been hijacked.  In 50 years, the 911 issue will be as JFK is now.  It will be a huge portion of America believing something bad happened that was not on the level, so to speak.  But by then, there were will be some new tragedy unfolding to distract us with new people who don't believe anything so sinister could happen, the pattern continues.

But to further close this non-investigation we are having about such a thing, my opinion there was more happening with Oswald than the official stamp has nothing to do with subjectivity and everything to do with objectivity.  A subjective person would 1) not do the research at all 2) auto-condemn any view they don't already believe or accept 3) trust fully in official stamps on such matters.  An objective person would seek out research even that which they don't agree with simply to evaluate it 2) be open to views that do not lead down roads they choose not to explore 3) would never trust in an official stamp coming from on high.

Which are you?  That is not a question I wish to debate, but is for you personally.  And the idea 3 of these angry lone nuts with no ties to anyone or any agenda above them managed to assassinate 3 major figures in 5 years, that doesn't seem odd to you makes you suspect IMO as to your motives for believing the unbelievable.  I don't think you saw Captain America: The Winter Soldier.  It would be a good fictional primer to how a parasite can grow in plain sight and alter the events of a nation from behind the scenes with no one suspecting it.

I suspected the conspiracy was true until I read more and saw more about the facts. Right, there's no more need for me to say these things again. It is not an emotional matter with me. You can continue to hold your point of view about this, and I don't knock you for it. I, however, merely point out that what we think is going on in our country should be based on facts.

Definitely objective. I read all about the case from many sources. I did the research and evaluated all the information. I didn't go by the Warren Report. Oswald did it alone. It's an open and shut case. An expert marksman, Oswald is proven to have bought and owned the weapon found at the scene. He was seen in the car carrying a package which fit the gun on the way to work that day. Witnesses from the street saw the figure of Oswald in the window. The bullet fragments found in JFKs scull, and the same type of mashed bullet found in the car, are both definitely proven to have come from his gun. His fingerprints were on the gun, and on the boxes the gun was sitting on. Three bullet cartridges matching the gun and bullets were found at the scene, and so was the bag Oswald brought the gun there in. It's as if he wanted to be caught; he made it so easy. The projectory of where JFK was hit points right to the 6th floor window of the school book depository. Witnesses saw him leaving, he was the only employee missing, and when a description was given to the police of the suspect, a policeman stopped Oswald and Oswald shot him. The links to Ferrie have been debunked, and also the theories about what happened at the hospital. I read all about what he did in Mexico, and the witnesses who saw him there. I read all about what he did in New Orleans. I read all about Jack Ruby and what he did. We know that Oswald shot a right-wing propagandist a few months before. The pictures of the broken scull are consistent with where the third bullet struck him. The theories about a fourth shot heard and recorded on a motorcycle were definitely disproven. The theory about how his head moved in the film were proven by science to fit the bullet coming from the back from the depository, not the grassy knoll. The single bullet theory about the second bullet have been proven correct. I  shared all the sources on all this and more on another discussion board.

Here is one public TV science documentary that I saw and recorded:




Who was Oswald? PBS Frontline documentary that I saw and recorded:
https://youtu.be/et3zy9wepKM

Let's see an interview with Judith Baker:
https://youtu.be/z9rgzBK3zWQ

and her speaking here; this gets more to her point
https://youtu.be/88KB7Jl5jdE

So far what I hear is just that Oswald didn't kill Kennedy, and he was her hero. The evidence is open and shut that he killed JFK, so this lady has no credibility. The only possible question is whether anyone helped him. Instead Baker does nothing but make some obviously bogus and irrelevant claims that some miscellaneous pictures of Oswald were doctored. She says she knew Oswald in New Orleans and that Oswald was an anti-communist sent to deliver cancer-causing poison to Cuba. That is false, but in any case that says nothing about who killed JFK.

She is hard to follow as she talks and rambles on. If she has more to say about Oswald's association with Ferrie and Bannister than is known, share it. I don't agree with just feelings of suspicion about me and my motives: "And the idea 3 of these angry lone nuts with no ties to anyone or any agenda above them managed to assassinate 3 major figures in 5 years, that doesn't seem odd to you makes you suspect IMO as to your motives for believing the unbelievable." This is only about facts, not about beliefs, and not about suspecting people of motives who disagree with your opinion on what is believable or not. You can do better than that, Nomad.