FORWARD BASE B

"Pay my troops no mind; they're just on a fact-finding mission."

Rethinking the State

A product of enlightenment thought, the nation-state tried from the beginning to make people into interchangeable citizen-workers. Whether in Japan, France, China, or Italy, no matter when, the program was always the same—to force everyone to speak the dialect of the capital city, wipe out regional differences, and mandate total participation in an impersonalized money economy. It allowed humans coordinate as never before, every citizen with an identification number and papers tracked from cradle to grave, everyone pumped through the same school system to be given the same standardized knowledge and experiences. By the 19th century, homogenized mass states were behemoths able to easily crush other forms of organization. The nation-state craze led to the colonization of most of the planet and culminated in the relentless meat-grinder of senseless world wars. Then an unstoppable force began to come apart.

The one-size-fits-all philosophy of the nation state is its demise. When nationalism stripped away traditional cultures, it never really replaced them with anything of substance. By making all a country one place, all the country became no-place and everyone became no-one. After the world wars, the cognitive dissonance was finally overwhelming. What had all the death and destruction been for? The mass state could grind on like a machine for its own sake and take on a hideous inanimate life devoid of the capacity to care.
The illusion of purpose in the nation-state slipped every time 100,000 young men ended up dead over one mile of ground or a beautiful ancient city was bombed flat for an airy idea. For some decades longer nationalistic zeal was perpetuated by the antagonism between the USA and the Soviet Union. But one could not continue without the other. Without the distraction of threatening outsiders, growing internal divisions could no longer be ignored.
Now, internet and smartphones have made 19th century nationalism obsolete. This is because the advantage of factory-style nationalism is the ability to coordinate millions of people at a time, however clumsily, and overwhelm the enemy.
This is a strategy appropriate for a world where the telegraph, railroads, steamships, and mass production were recent technologies. 1860s nationalism was a way for states to take full advantage of those advances in logistics and communication to crush their competitors. One mistake from a general or bureaucrat could get a million men killed, but so long as the other 10 million made it through, they could win the war.
The problem is communications and logistics have continued to rapidly develop since those days. In an agile world nation states are like drunken giants—mighty, slow, and clumsy.
War has left archaic nation states behind. Paralyzed by the threat of nuclear war, they continue to waste their wealth on massive conventional weapons that just sit there. When they try to use them against small, agile non-state groups, they fail. It’s like trying to swat mosquitoes with missiles.
The world of commerce has left the old nations behind. Corporations have little connection to any nation and they make a profit wherever they can. They are like nomads going from one pasture to the next as they will. When one archaic nation is used up, on to the next.
Culture is leaving behind the nation state as well. With the internet, only language barriers really limit communication any longer. This inherently challenges the ability of each nation to keep a closed off herd with limited access to information. It would be hard for us to imagine WW1 with smart phones. Everyone’s Mom and Dad would see the piles of dead on facebook and everyone would quickly realize the whole disaster had been caused by the machinations of a few effete nobles. With modern communications borders on a map are no longer the main way people determine affiliation. People are still limited by geography, but within their range, they naturally group with others who are like them and share their interests. This is the re-emergence of tribal identity within nations. In United States, politics become increasingly divisive as each faction in a diverse population begins to become more conscious of itself as a separate entity with its own interests diametrically opposed to those of other factions. Elections are thus becoming zero sum competitions to see which groups can screw over the others.

The nation-state became dominant even though it was less efficient and natural to humans than tribal groups because it could operate on a much larger scale. With mass communications, tribal groups can now also operate on a massive scale, neutralizing the advantage of having a monolithic nation.
I have pointed out there will be a state even if it’s just the local gang running things. The difference is there will be tribe-states instead of nation-states. This will mean the rules that could once only be applied to small groups will be applied to large groups.
In my latest articles discussing the ethics of economies, I am applying the rules of small societies to large ones, anticipating what the tribe-state might look like. The enlightenment thought that ultimately devolved into relativism and nihilism in government, commerce, and culture will be abolished. Every action by everyone will be understood to have a purpose in accomplishing a common goal.
It won’t be an order of equality, the most valuable will be rewarded best, though in proportion to what they offer. There will likely be informal castes where different types of people are encouraged to stick to what they’re best at. And I doubt it will be a peaceful time. The world is overpopulated and people are now scrambling to join whatever group they think will help them grab more scarce resources. History doesn’t take breaks and humanity is about to begin another big transition. There could be a dark age for awhile, but it will lead into the next age.

16 responses to “Rethinking the State

  1. Sam February 15, 2016 at 2:37 am

    “…By the 19th century, homogenized mass states were behemoths able to easily crush other forms of organization…”

    We must understand why this is so so we can understand why it is changing. There is no better source for this information than a series of books by James Dale Davidson and Rees-Mogg which I believe I’ve talked about before here. They say power distribution is based on the idea of Meapolitics. Namely that power and politics are based on the Technology of defense and offense. The power of offense increased during the time of large nations. Now due to the microchip defensive power is increasing. Defensive power increasing means that smaller structures are more likely.

    You stated,”…War has left archaic nation states behind. Paralyzed by the threat of nuclear war, they continue to waste their wealth on massive conventional weapons that just sit there. When they try to use them against small, agile non-state groups, they fail. It’s like trying to swat mosquitoes with missiles…”

    Now even after I just stated data that supports this I will say what you said is wrong. The reason the Nation state has no power is the people at the top are too incompetent and have no will power to win. There’s no real advantage in it for them to win. I have stated here earlier that the reason we can’t win in Afghanistan is we don’t have the man power. But while we don’t have the man power to control the Afghans we have plenty to kill them. If we wished we could do exactly as the Romans and take them tribe by tribe and exterminate them. The ones that did as we said would live and receive the Women and young boys (they’re very fond of young boys) left over from the slaughter. The rest would die.

    “…The world of commerce has left the old nations behind. Corporations have little connection to any nation and they make a profit wherever they can. They are like nomads going from one pasture to the next as they will. When one archaic nation is used up, on to the next…”

    We could line a few up on a wall and kill them. The rest would fall in line. The chief of Boeing once said he felt it would be ideal if Boeing had an island that they could operate from. How would he defend it? A fool. If we wished and the leaders were committed to doing all the could for the nation they could put a stop to this immediately. All these tax shelters are completely undefended. We could infiltrate them, invade them, clean out all their records and steal every last dime they have. Very similar to the early nation states “letters of marque”.

    The U.S. Constitution provides, Article I, Sec. 8 cl. 11:

    The Congress shall have Power … To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

    “…In United States, politics become increasingly divisive as each faction in a diverse population begins to become more conscious of itself as a separate entity with its own interests diametrically opposed to those of other factions. Elections are thus becoming zero sum competitions to see which groups can screw over the others…”

    This is only because of Jewish propaganda and business short sighted interest. This could be changed and may very well be. White people are told to be tolerate while increasingly other races become more and more intolerant. Don’t think White people haven’t noticed this. At some point the whole propaganda edifice breaks down and Whites figure if no matter what they do they will be called intolerant and racist they might as well go the full path and expel these people.

    • Giovanni Dannato February 16, 2016 at 12:34 am

      The real natural defense against modern technology is the prohibitive cost of modern weapons systems. Sending in several million conscripts who aren’t needed on the job market anyway might have been a more cost-effective way to win. But like you said there was no will to fight. If there’s no will to fight, you lose no matter what capabilities you have.

      Yes, all commerce requires protection to exist. A long period of relative peace has made many people naive enough to believe in “free markets.”

      Isn’t it more rational to keep Jews around? They’re smart and capable people. Look at all the scientific talent the Nazis missed out on. Like all insular groups you have to prevent them from becoming defectors and harness their potential in a positive way. Isn’t it more logical to expel underperforming groups rather than the best?

      • Sam February 16, 2016 at 5:32 pm

        “…Isn’t it more rational to keep Jews around?…”

        The Jews are fundamentally hostile to any group they live around…or anyone else for that matter. I’m convinced that they are a tribe of psychopaths. Not all maybe not even the majority but a large amount. They are the “root” of dysfunction the USA. They have been thrown out of every single country they’ve ever been to. Now that says something. You may say I’m a raving lunatic but it takes a very odd sort of people to be thrown out of every single country you inhabit.

        If you look at the Talmud it’s just a manual to teach psychopaths rules to live by. In it they say all people that are not Jews are animals, should be enslaved by the Jews and all their property is really the Jews. If this is not the essence of psychopathy I don’t know what is.

        Psychopaths often do the most outlandish things for completely ridiculous reasons. Sometimes they do things for very long term goals but sometimes they just manipulate people for fun. A great read on this kind of behavior is the great book on Psychopaths by Hervey Cleckley, “The Mask of Sanity”. Here’s a chapter all should read. It’s about Stanley. Who does all kinds of manic bullshit and spends all his time feeding people the most outrageous lies. Maybe it will remind you of a certain tribe. New meme. “They’re pulling a Stanley”. The whole book is on the web and worth reading. If you want to know what the Jews are going to do read it.

        http://www.energyenhancement.org/Psychopath/psychopath-Hervey-Cleckley-the-mask-of-sanity-SECTION-TWO-THE-MATERIAL-Part-1-The-disorder-in-full-clinical-manifestations-19-Stanley.html

        Almost all media is owned or run by the Jews in the Western world. This is why we get such complete nonsense as saying all the Muslims moving into Europe is a good idea. Any common sense look at the situation will show it’s going to be a disaster. Our whole society is filled with lies from the media top to bottom.

  2. Giovanni Dannato February 16, 2016 at 6:36 pm

    Tribes fundamentally put their interests ahead of the interests of outsiders. Jews are no different. The Anglo tradition tries to rationalize its conquest of the Native Americans but it really boils down to one tribe having superior force. From the Native American perspective, the founder Anglos might seem psychopathic, because the Anglos at the time were a cohesive tribe that took care of their own first. Actually, clannish and totally unapologetic Ulster Scot frontiersmen did a lot of their dirty work for them.
    As it turns out, the Anglos are possibly not the top of the food chain as they thought they were. Sucks to be on the receiving end.

    Why did everyone else let Jews run the media? It seems the stupid and slow simply lost to the smart and quick. The divided lost to the united. Such are the laws of nature. Predator and prey.

    When black people bitch about not getting Oscars on demand in Hollywood, the Anglo core flips out. Yet they don’t perceive the cognitive dissonance when they disparage Jewish excellence. They’re the same as angry blacks, a weaker group trying to shame the stronger.
    If they had the intelligence and agency they could easily stop going to Jewish movies and patronize their own movie industry instead. But despite their complaints they continue to spend their money to support people they claim to despise and lack the cohesion to start their own. If they cannot successfully pursue their own interests, like impotent blacks, they need to admit they are beaten, sit down, and accept their proper place beneath.

    I say this as the descendant of Irish Catholics and Ulster Scots. All my American upbringing tried to purge the tribalism in me but it’s something I feel I understand bone deep. Thus, I can admire the success of the Jews, they’re obviously doing something right. Every time they get kicked out, they’re at the top of the food chain again someplace else within a few decades.

    • Sam February 17, 2016 at 11:55 pm

      Don’t get me wrong I admire their success but I do not believe they are normal people. “…It seems the stupid and slow simply lost to the smart and quick. The divided lost to the united. Such are the laws of nature. Predator and prey…”, then lets not hear anymore about Hitler or the Holocaust/Holohoax and when the birds come home to roost about 9-11 and their part in it. I don’t want to hear any crying from the Jews.

      The example of American Indians and Whites I don’t believe is apt. The Indians frequently massacred the White settlers. Massacre after massacre breeds the same for them. Now was it their land? Yes but they didn’t farm it so it seemed uninhabited to the settlers. The Indians were in the middle of an apocalyptic meltdown from the mass deaths from disease. They were thin on the ground. If they had not practiced many, many, many periodic massacres of farmers in the outback could we have lived together? Don’t know they didn’t try that.

      Now let’s look at the Jews in the same light. Could they live with others in their community without so much dishonest scheming? Yes but they seem to do the same things over and over. Let’s not forget they were responsible for the communist takeover of Russia and 60 million deaths of the Russians. This fine performance is largely responsible for Hitler’s rise to the top. The Germans and the top people in Germany knew about the Jews behavior in Russia. The Jews also took over areas of Germany and Hungary and immediately started murdering people in large numbers. In the US and Europe they seemed to have learned that a slower approach was better. I don’t believe they will be successful.

      I personally don’t believe that being the most ruthless is a good thing (worked for the Romans though). I spoke about such in the earlier comment and maybe you thought it meant I advocated such but I did not say I approved of such behavior. There’s always someone stronger. Everyone loses power after a time. Best to be treated as you would have others treat you. That being said we know how the Jews have treated us and others I would deport every last one of them.

      • Giovanni Dannato February 20, 2016 at 1:14 am

        The Indians were less powerful than the new group, end of story.
        Like you say one era a group is among the conquerors, the next among the conquered. The dynamics of power are harsh and following the golden rule has little to do with it. There were tribes like the Cherokee that tried to assimilate and cooperate as best they could and they were still exiled onto reservations. Sometimes just being a small tribe in the midst of bigger tribes is enough get squashed, especially if the small group has wealth and property coveted by the big group. All that’s needed for plunder is an excuse. When the Cherokee followed the rules and became landowners in the Anglo system, they were still outsiders and therefore fair game. Imagine a Cherokee has a nice piece of land and you know if you drive him away and take his stuff, no one will stop you, and if he tries to get back at you, your tribe crushes his tribe…

        There were also Jews who did well in Imperial Russia, Ayn Rand’s family for instance. They were screwed over by the revolution. Jews were prominent among the Revolutionaries but so were members of many of the empire’s marginalized ethnic groups. The first big Bolshevik leader was part Tartar and in the struggle for power after his death the Jewish faction lost to a bloc of Caucasian gangsters.
        When did Jews kill millions of Germans and Hungarians?
        As for deporting Jews, what about world class Jewish intellectuals? Imagine if Nazi Germany had talented guys like Einstein on their side and not encouraged some of their best talent to defect to their enemies.

  3. Sam February 20, 2016 at 2:15 am

    “…When did Jews kill millions of Germans and Hungarians?…”

    I didn’t say that. I said they killed millions of Russians. The reason they didn’t kill millions of Germans was because they didn’t get a chance. They took over Bavaria, I think, and killed all the police and many public officials. A bunch of industrialist funded an army and they went and killed them all. If I’m not mistaken Hitler was in the city when the Jews started killing everyone. They did the same in Hungary.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Terror_%28Hungary%29

    You say we should be happy to have a bunch of smart Jews. I say that the last thing we need are a bunch of smart psychopaths running around loose in our country. You may think I’m being hyperbolic when I say the Jews are a tribe of psychopaths. I am not. I dead serious. I’m also correct. It would be difficult to prove as it came to me from a vast amount of reading and I not sure I could condense it readily. One day if they don’t kill us all this will be seen as common sense and everyone will know it. In the past the nature of Jews as being the most awful of people was mostly an agreed upon fact. They haven’t changed.

    As for the Nazis they came very, very close to winning. If we had delayed the channel crossing by six months I doubt we could have pulled it off. I think that Goering’s complete betrayal at Stalingrad was a major reason for their defeat. Goering promised Hitler so many tons of supplies when he KNEW he could not deliver He delivered much less. 15% maybe. Much less. He just didn’t want to tell Hitler he couldn’t do it. With supplies the Germans could have held out at Stalingrad. If he would have known that the supplies couldn’t be delivered he could have made a retreat and tried again later. The end result was a huge material, personal and psychological defeat for the Germans.

    I might add I’m not a Nazi but I fully understand why the Germans tried to get rid of the Jews. I wonder if there were not some way the Germans could have been appeased without destroying the Russians and everyone else. Probably not. The Brits had always balanced forces on the continent and it was Germany’s turn to be crushed.

    “A good time for the Jews is not a good time for mankind. The blessing of the Jews is a curse for others. The regimes that are “good for Jews” are rarely good for anybody else.” — Israel Shamir

    “Any people who have been persecuted for two thousand years must be doing something wrong”-Henry Kissinger

    “They are, all of them, born with raging fanaticism in their hearts, just as the Bretons and the Germans are born with blond hair. I would not be in the least bit surprised if these people would not some day become deadly to the human race.”
    VOLTAIRE

    • Giovanni Dannato February 20, 2016 at 11:26 pm

      Besides just reading about them, have you met any Jews and talked with them? My experience tells me they’re very loyal to each other and to friends of their group. Outgroups throughout history get treated with callousness, whoever the conqueror may be. Psychopathy is when people behave the same way to people in their in-group. Jews seem to support each other and their combination of solidarity and brains gets them ahead.

      The Nazis weren’t close to winning, Russia alone may have been more than they could handle, even with the huge head start given by a surprise invasion. From the outset the economies and manpower of the Allies outweighed those of the Axis It was just a matter of time. Rise and Fall of Nations was pretty clear on this one.

      Well, the Germans kicked out a lot of their best and brightest who went and helped their enemies instead. The results are especially visible in the Manhattan project.

      Kissinger’s Diplomacy is worth a read. European powers spent centuries playing the crabs-in-a-bucket game. Britain is hardly unique. Cardinal Richilieu’s machinations alone made sure German kingdoms wouldn’t be top tier powers again for another 200 years.

  4. Sam February 20, 2016 at 8:21 am

    To give you an idea of how far psychopaths go to deceive people here’s a couple of stories. Notice the strong reliance on pity from the norms.

    http://pathwhisperer.info/2016/01/08/court-jails-conniving-psychopath-for-ruining-teachers-life/#comments

    http://www.energyenhancement.org/Psychopath/psychopath-Hervey-Cleckley-the-mask-of-sanity-SECTION-TWO-THE-MATERIAL-Part-1-The-disorder-in-full-clinical-manifestations-19-Stanley.html

    How am I so sure? On 9-11 building #7 , not hit by a plane, fell the same speed as a rock dropped in free air for roughly 108 feet. even though an hour or so before it only had fire on three or four floors. This is impossible. Completely impossible. The Jews own all the major media and they have completely been mum about the whole thing. Why? They were responsible. Tons, hoards of evidence of this. Only psychopaths would come up with such a convoluted, ridiculous scheme.

    Empathy is I believe the major driver of civilization. Psychopaths are the evolutionary parasite of civilized Man. Notice the Jews don’t seem to be capable of building a decent society of their own.

    • Giovanni Dannato February 20, 2016 at 11:50 pm

      Aw man, now it’s 9/11 conspiracy theories after Jew conspiracy theories? I hope we don’t end up discussing FEMA camps and illuminati/knights templar schemes as well.
      http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

      There’s a whole site dedicated to addressing 9/11 conspiracy theories. It says building 7 was hit by one of the other buildings.

      I will never be a believer in the conspiracy stuff because simple human incompetence is almost always the better and simpler explanation. Maybe every once in awhile someone has a grain of truth but the signal to noise ratio is just too high to bother with it. Conspiracy theory crazes are fed by people who want an easy way to flatter their egos by feeling like they know more than others.

      I also avoid that whole global warming mess like the plague.
      It’s something too many people are too emotional about and have outcomes of their careers invested in. I could probably come to my own conclusions if I spent a few weeks researching it in depth but there’s so much fruit that’s both sweeter and lower-hanging.

      • Sam February 21, 2016 at 5:16 am

        Your a smart guy. Look at these few things you will see I’m correct. The reason I push this is my thoughts on the Jews come directly from 9-11. A guy told me that the buildings were blown up and my response was EXACTLY like yours. So I decided to prove him wrong. I could not. The more I looked the worse it got. The site you linked is designed to deceive you.
        #1 most important point. If you took physics in high school you know the acceleration of a falling body is related to the gravitational field of the Earth. It’s a set rate and you can easily calculate how far an object has fallen at any point in time. I must repeat myself. Building #7 fell the EXACT same speed as a bowling ball or a rock dropped in the free air beside it for around 108 feet. This is impossible. Not improbable or unlikely. It’s impossible. ANY resistance to the building falling would cause it to fall slower. They say damage to the South side and fires caused it to fall. They are lying. I can prove it. The gov. has had to release FEMA confiscated videos.

        They say it fell from fire. Here’s direct evidence it didn’t. They said the North tower fell on it causing massive damage. There was some damage but not enough to bring the building down “symmetrically”. Meaning all four sides fell at roughly the same rate. Even though it had damage to only one side and some sides seemed to have little to no damage. So a building with no damage or very little to some sides and no fire engulfing the building fell the same speed as a rock dropped next to it in the air, with nothing supporting the rock, for roughly 108 feet. This is impossible. Not improbable, impossible. No matter how big the fires there is resistance to the building falling from the concrete, from columns that haven’t been melted by fire and by the columns themselves. Have you ever seen molten steel? Do you imagine that even molten steel has no resistance to being moved or crushed? (Not that I’m saying the steel was molten, it wasn’t. I’m just comparing the most absurd example.) Building #7 could have had it’s floors magically suspended in air with only bags of marshmellows separating them and it would have still fallen slower than it did.

        The Spoofers (as opposed to Truthers) keep lying about the fires or lack thereof. Look for yourself and see the fires or lack thereof. Here’s a video of reporters going into building #7 AFTER the North tower supposedly fell on it and destroyed it sufficiently enough for it to collapse completely. Look at :54 you see the #7 for the building on the door.

        Now you’ve seen video of the inside where there is NO massive damage to make all four sides of the building fall. You want pictures of the back? Here’s a picture of the South side of building #7, facing the North tower, after it had fallen. There is no huge gaping hole. There is no massive fire going all the way up the building. So you can’t say it’s the other side and we have plenty of video and pictures of the North side of building #7 pictures with no damage at all.

        Here’ another NIST FOIA released video taken between one and two hours before building #7 fell. There’s around three floors on fire.

        (Watch the reporter pan up at 2:54. You can clearly see the whole building is not on fire. This side shown is the North side of building #7. Later you can see the fires mostly around three or four floors only and in isolated spots.)
        If the fires were hot enough to melt steel then why isn’t the glass in the windows melted? Glass melts at an extremely lower temperature that steel. Ever put a metal can and a glass bottle in a campfire? The glass bottle melts but the steel can will still be intact. These fires were no hotter than a campfire. One last video of all sides from 23 angles also showing the miraculous collapse.

        Fireman retired so now he can talk. He was right next to the damn building. Says,”…there was an explosion and the building came down…”

        For more info look at a site by some engineers that lay out the evidence.

        http://www.ae911truth.org/

        Now if you look at these it’s going to be extremely difficult from this point on to believe anything the Jew press is telling you. They know the laws of gravity same as I. That’s why the only press I’ve ever seen talking about 9-11 has been Geraldo. He made fun of the “Truthers” until he talked to a structural engineer who is in architects and engineers for truth and Geraldo was amazed that he had never heard this.

        The Jews have made this a class issue. Just like they have with mass immigration and other race based problems. It’s considered low class to believe that people would do such things. Hence they make it such that it considered low class to even look at the issue.

        If you base your world view on the idea that the Jews are a tribe of psychopaths you will never be surprised and many things that don’t make sense will suddenly make a great deal of sense. It also would explain how every country the Jews have gone to they’ve eventually been kicked out of. People can only stand so much of psychopaths behavior and then something must give.

        Notice I’m concentrating just on building #7 mostly. It’s enough but there’s lots and lots and lots of other evidence. I mean LOTS.

      • Giovanni Dannato February 21, 2016 at 3:07 pm

        Ok, one reason I don’t take any of this conspiracy stuff seriously is they all seem to dwell relentlessly on technical details as if they knew more than architects and engineers.
        Some questions would have to be convincingly answered for any of these things to even be worthy of investigation:
        Why blow up a building on 9/11? Were the planes not enough? Why would anyone want a disaster at the WTC in the first place? Forget all the stuff about the temperature at which glass melts. What plausible motive is there? Conspiracy nutcases seem to think it was some plot to expand “big government” but why would something so destructive and risky be needed to achieve their goals? That’s why these theories are dumb. Even if there were a few demi-omniscient Bilderberger Rothschilds running everything, why would they need to resort to such heavy handed methods at one of their own high temples. It doesn’t make sense.
        If I role-play for a moment as a member of some shadowy cabal, I’d probably choose the statue of liberty to really kick the hornets nest while not hurting anything of value to me.

  5. Sam February 21, 2016 at 5:03 pm

    “…Ok, one reason I don’t take any of this conspiracy stuff seriously is they all seem to dwell relentlessly on technical details as if they knew more than architects and engineers…”

    Every question you asked is extremely easy to answer. What has happened is that you have listened to the TV and they’ve told you,” nothing going on here…move along” and you believed them. You are also a a victim of cognitive dis-cognizance that has been programmed that it’s low class to look into so called “conspiracy” theories. Yet you believe that a bunch of guys in a cave got together, took over planes across the planet, defeated the US air defense system for over an hour and made buildings fall that were not hit by planes. And you call me crazy.

    As for the engineers. Here’s a large group of them who have their own site. I got most of the information about the technical details from…engineers who design high rise buildings.

    http://www.ae911truth.org/

    Another reason that technical details are used is they hauled off the destroyed steel from the building and sent it to China to be melted down and as I’ve said simple, very simple, most simple in the world analysis of the rate of falling of building 7 shows, It’s just not possible. I think this is the most important point. No fire can make a building fall as fast as rock dropped in air. What building do you know of that has the density of air???? If an object, like a building, falls through something less dense than air then it will fall slower. A simple example. Swing your hand through the air and see it’s speed. Now try it through a wall. This is not complicated. It’s impossible for a building to fall the same speed as a rock dropped in air…unless there was NO support under it. It’s a fact of the universe we live in. Straight high school physics not some super complicated thing. I hate to dwell on this but apparently people just don’t get this. They think that heavy things move faster than light things. Look at the Apollo mission where they dropped a feather and a hammer on the Moon and they both fell exactly the same.

    “…Why blow up a building on 9/11? Were the planes not enough?…”

    No. The buildings were designed to withstand hits by planes. Notice they didn’t fall when hit. They said fires brought the building down. The intense heat. Well then how did this Women stand in the hole left buy the plane? (this WTC1 not building 7)? The fact is most of the fuel burned off very quickly and as you can see it was cool enough for someone to stand where the plane hit.

    http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/wtc1_woman.html

    The reason details like this are talked about is if you look at them you realize that the whole Arab attack “conspiracy story” is just a huge pile of lies and bullshit.

    I personally think that, though with no evidence, that building 7 was supposed to be hit by a plane also but it was downed somehow. Somebody screwed up.

    “…What plausible motive is there?…”

    Very simple to answer. The way the Jews work is they manipulate people by controlling the main sources of information and the upper levels of government. They even wrote a paper saying EXACTLY what they were going to do. A group of Jews looked at Israels position and realized it was untenable. They came up with a plan. They would destabilize all the dictatorships so that the Sunni’s and the Shia would fight among themselves. To do this they needed the US’s army. They formed a group, the neo-cons” (appropriate name) who wrote a paper called “Project for the New American Century” which was a blueprint for Pax Americana.

    https://wikispooks.com/wiki/PNAC

    Unfortunately for the US it was really all a set up to get us to fight for Israel. They even stated that we would need a Pearl Harbor type event to get Americans engaged and follow their plans. Hence 9-11.

    https://wikispooks.com/wiki/9-11/Israel_did_it

    So look at the wars in the middle east. What happened? Has America in any way enhanced their security? No, but the Jews got rid of their biggest enemies. Saddam and Muammar Gaddafi. The whole area is in disarray and they are fighting each other.

    Now you may say, “how can you know this is planned”. Look at this video of Gen. Wes Clark and see what he was told ten days after 9-11.

    Look there is tons and tons and tons of info that says the gov. story is bull. The biggest one is that building 7 could NOT have done what it did without some kind of demolition.

    A good book is by Christopher Bollyn. He has a good overall view. It used to be free, Here’s his site.

    http://www.bollyn.com/about-christopher-bollyn/

  6. Sam February 21, 2016 at 5:12 pm

    I missed one,”… why would something so destructive and risky be needed to achieve their goals? That’s why these theories are dumb. Even if there were a few demi-omniscient Bilderberger Rothschilds running everything, why would they need to resort to such heavy handed methods at one of their own high temples. It doesn’t make sense…”

    You say make sense…to who? They are a tribe of psychopaths. They don’t think like you. Nothing pleases them more than to pull a Stanley on the stupid Gentiles. Nothing gives them greater joy than some overblown silly conspiracy that is so absurd that…no one will believe it’s a conspiracy. If you judge them by your values you will never understand. They don’t have your values. They are psychopaths. I beseech you once more. Read this post about the psychopath Stanley.

    http://www.energyenhancement.org/Psychopath/psychopath-Hervey-Cleckley-the-mask-of-sanity-SECTION-TWO-THE-MATERIAL-Part-1-The-disorder-in-full-clinical-manifestations-19-Stanley.html

    Planes crashing into buildings. People leaping from them. Fire, destruction…no psychopath could possibly get more joy than seeing this and knowing he’s responsible and the stupid goy will just go kill even more people for him. They LIVE for this sort of stuff.

  7. Sam February 21, 2016 at 8:21 pm

    Another example of psychopaths doing destructive things because it fun for them and she’s only 13.

    https://nopsychos.wordpress.com/2016/01/05/i-am-a-child-psychopath/

  8. Sam February 21, 2016 at 9:01 pm

    One more I’ll stop babbling about this. Either you read this stuff and get it by this time or you probably will never get it. Look at this page of things psychopaths say and relate it to the sayings of the Jews. It can be more clear. The Jews are a tribe of psychopaths.

    https://nopsychos.wordpress.com/stuff-psychopaths-say/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: