courage to voice an educated opinion ...
I want to thank those who have it.
_
Around the time of September 11 attack, I was not tied to any television set anywhere - had decided to gather my own "news" years previously, so I was not dependent on some "analyst" to "interpret" events for me.
Because of complaints from others, I was acutely aware that television was showing images of falling towers repeatedly, and I wondered why.
At that time, I did not yet know what has been revealed in years since about so-called "intelligence failures" - without which 911 would not have occurred.
Convenient tag: "intelligence failures"
Point blame at Intelligence gatherers, tell public the Intelligence community did not do their job - they let us all down.
I only wonder in which "think tank" that idea originated.
FBI and CIA and NSA and other agencies have made it quite clear since 3000 and more Americans lost their lives, going about their business and duties on a regular work day, that there was NO "intelligence failure" at all.
The amount of money alone that was and is spent to fund those agencies would require a massive dereliction of duty among the majority of personnel for there to have been no one who knew what was going to occur September 11, 2001.
Only if one believes in coincidence (I do not) could anyone accept both a supposed "failure of intelligence" and the oh-so-perfect setup of multiple "air defense" exercises and other emergency drills, along with a never before authorized change of NORAD command ...
... not to mention other emergency drills which had been conducted in days and weeks prior at the Pentagon and other sites, specific to the very sort of attack which was witnessed by Americans on 911 (how did they know?), or the fact that something crashed into the ONLY newly reinforced section of the Pentagon.
Coincidences
Yet our Administration still wants us all to believe that "flying aircraft into buildings" was something no one considered likely to happen.
_
In those days I was still my old self, thinking America would awaken from slumber some time, object to failures in government, lack of representation, increasing corruption, etc. - still of the opinion that everything would balance out over time, that people generally would "do the right thing" and we would all survive.
Families of 911 victims wanted answers, wanted to know what happened that day, why their loved ones were lost.
How could things go so terribly wrong.
The "911 Commission" - officially the "National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States" - was supposed to provide those answers.
When it did not, I was already noticing increasing argument primarily between Right and Left - not people debating issues, but utter nastiness.
People going after blood, tearing into each other, as if issues themselves no longer mattered - only blood lust of shredding a victim.
_
About that time I was fed up with not getting a straight story from government or "news" - unable to find others who made sense, seemed to know what happened - I was hearing too many conflicting versions of events.
Realizing people generally did not know what happened that day, what happened to their country and to their way of life, could not grasp the enourmity of it, I began reading everything I could get, buying books on a limited budget, googling every lead I came across, spending most of my time for several months reading more than I had read in years - thankful to have time to do it.
Reading and researching will continue indefinitely for me now, because I still do not know enough, and because the more I learn the more I want to know.
What I gained is ability to present an informed opinion
- with confidence.
I admit my opinion(s), in present form, about any one subject, are not perfect, and I am willing to stand corrected when someone presents more accurate detail - yet what I can tell now is often nearer truth than I hear generally from others.
Today I find very few people with courage to state an opinion based on facts they have gathered themselves.
I hear opinions which are regurgitated "talking points" or too often a "party line" explanation, but seldom a personally developed analysis or details of a particular event based on having followed the history of that event through the mind of someone who participated directly.
From one author to another, one has to be careful of the perspective presented - not enough to take everything said at face value.
Only after working through enough material relative to one topic is it possible to form a picture of who is "spinning the tale" in a particular direction, who is telling it like it happened, who is making it up ... and eventually it is possible to decide WHY an author would make something up, or spin it, as authors themselves become a larger part of the overall "tale" being pieced together.
So I have come to realize the frustration people have, because most simply do not know, cannot readily decide whether a solid opinion is factual or more deception or falsehood - no time to do the homework required.
_
Now when I present my case relative to a subject - give them my opinion - I do so with confidence I have learned enough about the topic so I can more easily fill in gaps which appear, and proceed.
What I receive in return increasingly captures my attention.
Some respond as if there is no hope left in this world, nothing can be done - problems are simply too complicated and overwhelming ... maybe best just wait for the Rapture - Let God as they say.
A variation of the "overwhelming" type of response is the "What is your plan?" question, which seems intended to subtly shift blame for others' wrongdoing to the speaker.
I am never quite sure how to answer that question until I get to know the person asking well enough to decide if they really want to know - because I do not feel compelled to tell others how the world should be.
More curious are those who want to talk about history, but disconnect it from the present - as if current events have no cause based in what happened over decades and centuries between groups which are now in conflict with each other.
Another variety of folks "respond" to opinions in a very different way:
ignoring evidence presented, this latter group attacks the presenter - character assassination, labelling, name-calling, cursing - anything goes ... which leads me to believe what is said to them must be too close to truth.
Those who attack the messenger in that way I find comical, because they seem to deny existence of real people who report real events - as if what is true could not be true since it does not fit the tidy universe they created, so they refuse to believe, want to make sure anyone who would "make up" such things is to be seen as mentally unstable or "one of them" (whoever "them" is to that person).
Rarest of all is the response I am most eager to find:
Someone who has done the homework, who can say to me,
"Yes, but this part is actually a little different than you stated ... "
I APPRECIATE individuals with courage to voice an educated opinion.
Congratulations !
Careful with whom you share that opinion.
.
_
Around the time of September 11 attack, I was not tied to any television set anywhere - had decided to gather my own "news" years previously, so I was not dependent on some "analyst" to "interpret" events for me.
Because of complaints from others, I was acutely aware that television was showing images of falling towers repeatedly, and I wondered why.
At that time, I did not yet know what has been revealed in years since about so-called "intelligence failures" - without which 911 would not have occurred.
Convenient tag: "intelligence failures"
Point blame at Intelligence gatherers, tell public the Intelligence community did not do their job - they let us all down.
I only wonder in which "think tank" that idea originated.
FBI and CIA and NSA and other agencies have made it quite clear since 3000 and more Americans lost their lives, going about their business and duties on a regular work day, that there was NO "intelligence failure" at all.
The amount of money alone that was and is spent to fund those agencies would require a massive dereliction of duty among the majority of personnel for there to have been no one who knew what was going to occur September 11, 2001.
Only if one believes in coincidence (I do not) could anyone accept both a supposed "failure of intelligence" and the oh-so-perfect setup of multiple "air defense" exercises and other emergency drills, along with a never before authorized change of NORAD command ...
... not to mention other emergency drills which had been conducted in days and weeks prior at the Pentagon and other sites, specific to the very sort of attack which was witnessed by Americans on 911 (how did they know?), or the fact that something crashed into the ONLY newly reinforced section of the Pentagon.
Coincidences
Yet our Administration still wants us all to believe that "flying aircraft into buildings" was something no one considered likely to happen.
_
In those days I was still my old self, thinking America would awaken from slumber some time, object to failures in government, lack of representation, increasing corruption, etc. - still of the opinion that everything would balance out over time, that people generally would "do the right thing" and we would all survive.
Families of 911 victims wanted answers, wanted to know what happened that day, why their loved ones were lost.
How could things go so terribly wrong.
The "911 Commission" - officially the "National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States" - was supposed to provide those answers.
When it did not, I was already noticing increasing argument primarily between Right and Left - not people debating issues, but utter nastiness.
People going after blood, tearing into each other, as if issues themselves no longer mattered - only blood lust of shredding a victim.
_
About that time I was fed up with not getting a straight story from government or "news" - unable to find others who made sense, seemed to know what happened - I was hearing too many conflicting versions of events.
Realizing people generally did not know what happened that day, what happened to their country and to their way of life, could not grasp the enourmity of it, I began reading everything I could get, buying books on a limited budget, googling every lead I came across, spending most of my time for several months reading more than I had read in years - thankful to have time to do it.
Reading and researching will continue indefinitely for me now, because I still do not know enough, and because the more I learn the more I want to know.
What I gained is ability to present an informed opinion
- with confidence.
I admit my opinion(s), in present form, about any one subject, are not perfect, and I am willing to stand corrected when someone presents more accurate detail - yet what I can tell now is often nearer truth than I hear generally from others.
Today I find very few people with courage to state an opinion based on facts they have gathered themselves.
I hear opinions which are regurgitated "talking points" or too often a "party line" explanation, but seldom a personally developed analysis or details of a particular event based on having followed the history of that event through the mind of someone who participated directly.
From one author to another, one has to be careful of the perspective presented - not enough to take everything said at face value.
Only after working through enough material relative to one topic is it possible to form a picture of who is "spinning the tale" in a particular direction, who is telling it like it happened, who is making it up ... and eventually it is possible to decide WHY an author would make something up, or spin it, as authors themselves become a larger part of the overall "tale" being pieced together.
So I have come to realize the frustration people have, because most simply do not know, cannot readily decide whether a solid opinion is factual or more deception or falsehood - no time to do the homework required.
_
Now when I present my case relative to a subject - give them my opinion - I do so with confidence I have learned enough about the topic so I can more easily fill in gaps which appear, and proceed.
What I receive in return increasingly captures my attention.
Some respond as if there is no hope left in this world, nothing can be done - problems are simply too complicated and overwhelming ... maybe best just wait for the Rapture - Let God as they say.
A variation of the "overwhelming" type of response is the "What is your plan?" question, which seems intended to subtly shift blame for others' wrongdoing to the speaker.
I am never quite sure how to answer that question until I get to know the person asking well enough to decide if they really want to know - because I do not feel compelled to tell others how the world should be.
More curious are those who want to talk about history, but disconnect it from the present - as if current events have no cause based in what happened over decades and centuries between groups which are now in conflict with each other.
Another variety of folks "respond" to opinions in a very different way:
ignoring evidence presented, this latter group attacks the presenter - character assassination, labelling, name-calling, cursing - anything goes ... which leads me to believe what is said to them must be too close to truth.
Those who attack the messenger in that way I find comical, because they seem to deny existence of real people who report real events - as if what is true could not be true since it does not fit the tidy universe they created, so they refuse to believe, want to make sure anyone who would "make up" such things is to be seen as mentally unstable or "one of them" (whoever "them" is to that person).
Rarest of all is the response I am most eager to find:
Someone who has done the homework, who can say to me,
"Yes, but this part is actually a little different than you stated ... "
I APPRECIATE individuals with courage to voice an educated opinion.
Congratulations !
Careful with whom you share that opinion.
.
posted by JamesB | 8:53 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home