Terrorist Attacks in London?

Jul 10, 2003
8,395
1,169
223
www.trade2win.com
It's an amazing stupidity to assume what we hear about 2nd hand in any way reflects reality. It's an even greater arrogance to comment authoritatively on those 'facts' which we've been given and swallow without thinking them through.

Soldiers don't join up to 'protect our freedoms'. We have no freedoms. In any part of the world. It's an illusion. Or if you really believe you do, it's a delusion. Governments do not protect us. They protect themselves and the continuance of those they support and have supported unwittingly for the most part, for more than 60 years. And by the way, soldier join up, hopefully, to fight and play with real big toys.

To assume a terrorist is less moral than a soldier or a politician is to miss the point completely.

Would you be less moral or more moral in killing someone who was trying to kill you or murder your family than a soldier who has been told by his government to kill someone in another country to serve their own political/economic/financial ends? What about if you were killing for money? Any worse? Better? It makes no difference.

Morals are a function of the date on the calendar and your geographical location onm the planet - if you are weak-willed. If you are not, they are a function od whatever serves YOU best at any particular time and place. If you find that impossible to consider then consider yourself one of the sheep.
 

Priceman

Active member
Mar 11, 2006
757
84
38
Have any of you read the book "understanding power" by Noam Chomsky... realy heavy sh!t man on how governements manipulate and start wars on other countries that can become powerful, or a threat to their economies. Very good read for anyone who loves conspiracies.

Life's too short to wonder what it's all about, just make the most of what we have at this moment in time, it'll all be gone in the blink of an eye!
 

wasp

Member
Aug 11, 2003
5,107
877
173
Great, albeit one sided films...

Fahrenheit 9/11 and Bowling for Columbine... Only just watched them recently but does show alot IMO.
 

trendie

Well-known member
TheBramble,

I am not quite sure if you are calling me stupid, :eek: , but I agree with you nonetheless.

with regards to geography, etc:

[EDIT; rest of post not specifically at TheBramble]

If there was a headline "23 people killed in bomb attack!".

Do you feel
a: outrage at the act and sadness for the loss
b: have no reaction, until you read further and found out it happened in London, then feel outrage.
c: have no reaction, until you read further and found out it happened in Baghdad, then feel nothing, and go about your business.

I think you are affirming my position that the sense of loss should be same, by virtue of the act itself, not by virtue of the location, or the type of victim involved.

Perspective: [made up] Beijing Times: 52 people killed in London,. No Chinese hurt.
( I hope this causes offense, as we offend whenever we hear of a disaster, such as a plane crash killing 150 people, but note that "2 british dead")

[EDIT2: have ordered that Naom Chomsky book, Priceman, thanks for recommending.]
 
Last edited:
Jul 10, 2003
8,395
1,169
223
www.trade2win.com
trendie said:
TheBramble,

I am not quite sure if you are calling me stupid, :eek: , but I agree with you nonetheless.
I know you to be very much other than stupid Paul. It is my general frustration with the majority's acceptance without consideration. Somebody recently used a phrase which has been with me like a koan ever since. (Thanks mate, you know who you are and yes, you're to blame for all that's about to happen...). And that phrase is "The Balance of Conviction". It was used in a trading sense and makes a lot of sense :LOL: , (and as a complete aside, and quite literally, ended my quest in that particular direction - and as an aside aside, take at look at Mr. Marcus' final post on 'Wot Happened Next' thread and the chart he attached. Now, THAT'S BALANCE OF CONVICTION - in an indicator no less- Lord!).

The Balance of Conviction is what the majority believe to be true. Not what is true, but I stress, what they 'believe' to be true. There are forces that not only can, but do manipulate events to their own advantage to ensure the Balance of Conviction comes out the way that best suits their needs and ends - forces just as there are in the the more micro-cosmic example that so infatuates us all here - the financial markets.

The thing is, few ever stop to either think it through or test what it is they're being asked to believe or asked to do. Or why.

trendie said:
with regards to geography, etc:

If there was a headline "23 people killed in bomb attack!".

Do you feel
a: outrage at the act and sadness for the loss
b: have no reaction, until you read further and found out it happened in London, then feel outrage.
c: have no reaction, until you read further and found out it happened in Baghdad, then feel nothing, and go about your business.
I feel nothing. Period.

trendie said:
I think you are affirming my position that the sense of loss should be same, by virtue of the act itself, not by virtue of the location, or the type of victim involved.
The sense of loss, for me, is the same. Zero. But I suspect that isn't where you were coming from.

I'm sure the world needs people like you more than it does people like me mate, governments certainly do as most definitely do the interests that control them, and the media and your (not mine) way of life.

This is absolutely not a dig at you personally Paul, you represent I am sure the honest majority and I'm using your points, which I am sure are widely similar to the majority's, as an opportunity to respond with my own possibly quite independent sense of outrage and quiet, but quite focused anarchy. It'll all end in tears.

And it's not just in those things which are deliberately managed to remain covert that they would try and hoodwink us or blinker us. It's not all conspiracies and puppet-masters either. It's the soft, warm and comfortable bliss of myopic inertia that the vast majority have gone for in a big way that they prevent themselves from finding the answers. This is by far the most effective tool those who control have developed to ensure socially lubricated compliance. Ask 1000 people and I'm fairly confident not more than one would respond correctly to the question "Does the Moon orbit the Earth?".

The answers are there to be found, quite easily too more often than not. It's just the majority do not even think that they need to look. That's the real killer. They assume they are going to be given all they need, by someone else. From birth - to death. And this insidious expectation is quite deliberately fostered by those that are in a position to nurture this illusion and more importantly, benefit from its socially enervating effects, but to an extent few will ever truly realise, is in no way ever close or ever able to be be close to delivered upon in the way in which the majority believe it is being delivered. "The public wants what the public gets". As true now as then.

Quoting lyrics from songs? Must be Sunday....

Humour is the only thing that's gets me through at times......
 
Aug 21, 2004
9,060
2,276
323
Manchester
Can't be bothered reading through all this lot but here's a thought for yall to ponder.

In an age of Global Everything...only the mavericks will be truly free ..in thought and actions....looking in on it all from outside the box.

The masses are IN the box and therefore controlled by whatever means they willingly or are forced to comply with.

Some of us strive to buck at every opportunity....follow the crowd...not for me ....be controlled ...not for me .....be told I can't do this or that ...not for me....

C V