• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Epistemology and the 911 Attacks

Quiproquo

Thinker
Joined
Oct 29, 2010
Messages
211
Hi, I am new to this forum.

I've read through many threads and I realize this topic is mainly dominated by anti-Truthers. However, I am interested not in debating what conspiracy narrative is the valid narrative to explain the collapse of the World Trade Center towers but the ideology which is behind an operation I personally assume was carried out by a rogue network belonging to the State intelligence apparatus, be it as it may.

Debunkers need not apply here, because there is nothing to debunk :)

Here our some of my thoughts on the philosophy which brought about, and led to, the conception of the dark, brilliant, and sinister 911 attacks against the WTC towers, and I would also like to hear yours if you have any ideas or you would like to elaborate on mine.

If this operation is indeed an insider intelligence operation, as I assume it is, then I believe it was designed not so much to influence foreign and domestic policy, but was construed as an attempt to change human nature itself.

The 911 attacks were in this sense an attempt to institute an epistemological revolution on mankind, by the imposition of a new ideology, through subversive and deceptive means, to a humanity that no longer believes in, or is no longer capable of believing in, ideologies, after and since the failed political systems of the 20th century.

Nine-one-one has thus, in a sense, brought God back into a world in which, according to Nietszche, God is dead.

The WTC attacks are therefore, in my view, the latest mass ideological system adopted by, or imposed onto, mankind, and probably the last. True public revelation of the ideological nature and origin of the artificial 911 myth is considered inconceivable by its designers, for it would destroy the collective, social, and moral basis upon which all modern human societies are founded. The necessity to keep the myth alive is existential in nature. In this optic there can be no other issue but success for and perpetuation of the myth.

Revelation of the myth will cause Western civilization itself to inevitably come to an end. We thus truly live in a "post-911" world, a world in which our sense perception has forever been altered, and one from which there will be no turning back.

Such is the epistemological revolution which occurred on the day of September 11, 2001, in the city of New York, USA: sad, acutely tragic, and profoundly human.
 
But in discussing the ideology you are assuming a conspiracy. It's a bit like saying "let's assume that Santa is real...." as a starting point in a discussion about Christmas.
 
Quiproquo:

Well, then, as a starting point, let us assume that I'm right.


You're wrong.
 
Well, assuming you are correct that it was an inside job, I think we can posit several possible motives and we can do so without evidence but purely on speculation.;)

I think not only is 9/11 an end of ideologies or an affirmation of Nietzsche's character Zarathustra proclaiming "God is Dead!" it also affirms Roland Barthes contention that the author is dead too. We know this from the very fact that the authorship of 9/11 is dead. Narratives have fallen by the wayside plunging us all into competing epistemic relativity. I say, "Inside Job", you say, "Outside Job" and we have no choice but to call the whole thing off!!!!:eye-poppi

Furthermore with the death of God, ideology and the author we find that such struggles now beseiging the Earth or what I prefer to call "Matrix-Earth" could be nothing less than the cosmic struggle between Coca Cola and Pepsi and the 9/11 attacks were designed to re-frame conflict as between those.

Now, we don't know this but lets assume I am right. We know from Foucault that power structures inform debate and what is Pepsi and Coca Cola if not powerful corporations and what could be more likely the guiding principle of 9/11 than to make the Cola Wars literal.

Just a second, another hit on the bong and I'll continue. This time I'll throw Hegel, Heidegger and Derrida into the mix. Don't go away...
 
If this operation is indeed an insider intelligence operation, as I assume it is, then I believe it was designed not so much to influence foreign and domestic policy, but was construed as an attempt to change human nature itself.

I don't wish to debate which narrative is the right one, it's irrelevant.

I just want to point out what they say about assuming things. Thanks.
 
If this operation is indeed an insider intelligence operation, as I assume it is, then I believe it was designed not so much to influence foreign and domestic policy, but was construed as an attempt to change human nature itself.
So you're actually talking about ontology then?

Or, are you just spewing philosophy buzzwords interchangeably in an effort to sound smart?
 
Last edited:
Well, assuming you are correct that it was an inside job, I think we can posit several possible motives and we can do so without evidence but purely on speculation.;)

I think not only is 9/11 an end of ideologies or an affirmation of Nietzsche's character Zarathustra proclaiming "God is Dead!" it also affirms Roland Barthes contention that the author is dead too. We know this from the very fact that the authorship of 9/11 is dead. Narratives have fallen by the wayside plunging us all into competing epistemic relativity. I say, "Inside Job", you say, "Outside Job" and we have no choice but to call the whole thing off!!!!:eye-poppi

Furthermore with the death of God, ideology and the author we find that such struggles now beseiging the Earth or what I prefer to call "Matrix-Earth" could be nothing less than the cosmic struggle between Coca Cola and Pepsi and the 9/11 attacks were designed to re-frame conflict as between those.

Now, we don't know this but lets assume I am right. We know from Foucault that power structures inform debate and what is Pepsi and Coca Cola if not powerful corporations and what could be more likely the guiding principle of 9/11 than to make the Cola Wars literal.

Just a second, another hit on the bong and I'll continue. This time I'll throw Hegel, Heidegger and Derrida into the mix. Don't go away...

 
"Assuming for the sake of argument that I'm right, how cool is it that I'm right?"
 
Just a second, another hit on the bong and I'll continue. This time I'll throw Hegel, Heidegger and Derrida into the mix. Don't go away...

Immanuel Kant was a real pissant
Who was very rarely stable.
Heidegger, Heidegger was a boozy beggar
Who could think you under the table.

David Hume could out-consume
Schopenhauer and Hegel,

And Wittgenstein was a beery swine
Who was just as schloshed as Schlegel.

There's nothing Nietzche couldn't teach ya
'Bout the raising of the wrist.
Socrates, himself, was permanently pissed.

John Stuart Mill, of his own free will,
On half a pint of shandy was particularly ill.

Plato, they say, could stick it away--
Half a crate of whiskey every day.

Aristotle, Aristotle was a bugger for the bottle.
Hobbes was fond of his dram,

And Ren Descartes was a drunken fart.
'I drink, therefore I am.'

Yes, Socrates, himself, is particularly missed,
A lovely little thinker,
But a bugger when he's pissed.
 
Loss Leader said:
"Assuming for the sake of argument that I'm right, how cool is it that I'm right?"
Depends on the colour of your turtleneck.
 
img-foucault.jpg


I am a very serious man!

michel+foucault


I have very serious ideas!


foucaultandcat.jpg


And a nice fluffy cat!

michel-foucault_1213343694.jpg


And a nice polo-neck!

Foucault.jpg


I am not pompous!
 
Last edited:
Sounds to me like the OP is using 9/11 as an excuse for his or her own personal amusement.

You can fantasize a distopian reality if you want, but at the end of the day you're making a mockery of several thousand murders. This isn't fiction we're talking about here. Similarly, it would be absurd, not to mention dangerous, for you to base your whole personal world view on what amounts to an unfounded bit of grim make-believe.
 
Sounds to me like the OP is using 9/11 as an excuse for his or her own personal amusement.

You can fantasize a distopian reality if you want, but at the end of the day you're making a mockery of several thousand murders. This isn't fiction we're talking about here. Similarly, it would be absurd, not to mention dangerous, for you to base your whole personal world view on what amounts to an unfounded bit of grim make-believe.

Assuming the poster is sincere it only bolsters my contention that what drives 9/11 and other conspiracy theorists is a political world view that requires vast , overly complicated conspiracies undertaken by an evil shadowy extra-governmental organization.

No wonder the ' James Bond' movies did so well.
 
Assuming the poster is sincere it only bolsters my contention that what drives 9/11 and other conspiracy theorists is a political world view that requires vast , overly complicated conspiracies undertaken by an evil shadowy extra-governmental organization.

No wonder the ' James Bond' movies did so well.

Yes, or that they simply concoct world views first and then look for the evidence after.

And that 9/11 Truth is often just "intellectual" masturbation.
 
Hi, I am new to this forum.

I've read through many threads and I realize this topic is mainly dominated by anti-Truthers. However, I am interested not in debating what conspiracy narrative is the valid narrative to explain the collapse of the World Trade Center towers but the ideology which is behind an operation I personally assume was carried out by a rogue network belonging to the State intelligence apparatus, be it as it may.
... .
Since you lack knowledge on 911, you fail and are self-debunking. Knowledge, your knowledge of what happen on 911 is nil, you based your failed assumption on your beliefs, which are based on nothing but your personal bias warped by some unknown need to make up fantasy. As you don't seem to realize, your beliefs can be right when you lack knowledge, but in your case for 911, your beliefs have failed to land in the truth zone; big time.

You arrive like a WTC without a core (no practical knowledge on 911), and a damaged shell (biased belief system, and the need for CTs), and collapse faster than free-fall. You have a failed belief system, and now armed with a faulty faith based conspiracy theory you apply a "theory of knowledge", knowledge science and forgot to bring the knowledge. Double fail, thinking you are debunking proof, and you debunk yourself in the first few sentences.

Did it take 9 years to fail this big? You spew nonsense about who did it, and offer zero evidence, just your faith based nonsense.

Welcome, to a skeptics forum
 
He he. He said masturbation

I hear the no-planers, the planers, the LIHOPers, the MIHOPers, the themiters, the thermaters, the nanothermiters, the superthermiters, the Jews-dunniters, the Bushadmin-dunniters, the NWO-dunniters, the Masons-dunniters, the DEW-dunniters and Alex Jones will be assembling for the Annual 9/11 Truther Mass Debates next Valentine's Day.
 
Last edited:
He he. He said masturbation

what?? you thought that was funny but you don't think 'Episiotomy' was funny?
I'm hurt. Well not hurt because of an Episiotomy, that's not possible for me. I'm hurt because my dsylexic misreading was less funny than 'masturbation'.

No wait, 'masturbation' is funnier than 'Episiotomy' any day.
.
.
.
....never mind.
 

Back
Top Bottom