Bcc: contributors Note: URLs at bottom have changed.. this may fix some problems that people enountered when accessing archives. ============================================================================ Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 04:40:15 -0800 (PST) From: Dustin Mikiska <•••@••.•••> Subject: Re: The real Regime Change... To: •••@••.••• I have been reading your writings for the past 2 or so years...and this last one I must say is weak [snip...] narrowing down a group of people as more or less a " us and them" scenario is not true.. everyone plays their role in life ,,,sure people learn,,but there is no machine running our world..no giant capitalist larger than life machine that is for or near to against us..is just a lack of communication in many different ways... [snip...] peace from Boone Nc.. =============== Dear Dustin, I have heard many people, some very well informed and widely read, who share your belief that 'no one is in charge' (to put my own label on it). I suppose you folks see a 'plurality of forces', political and economic, pushing this way and that... a kind of chaotic system where 'surprises' such as 9-11 can knock everything off balance, refuting any earlier predictions... etc. "How _could anyone be in charge in any real sense?" ... "How _could anyone, or any group, make and carry out reliable, long-range plans??" Such beliefs are not surprising, among the general public, since this is the view that is taught in schools and communicated over the mass media on a daily basis. The 'consensus' view of Word War I, for example, is that no one really knows how it started, apart from the consequences of an unpredictable assassination of an Archduke. It just kind of 'happened', because lots of nations had treaties that entangled hem... "actually no one really wanted it", etc. etc. Those historians who challenge this (or any other) 'consensus' view are called 'radical' or 'alternative', or even 'revisionist'. Those who value tenure at their universities (which is the overwhelming majority) therefore do not stray from the 'consensus' path. And how many folks want to read 'alternate' histories (boring subject!) after they escape from school? But if you read good historians (such as Zinn or Parenti) who try to get at the truth, which inevitably moves them off the 'consensus' path, then you find a quite different history. World War I, for example, was inevitable within the context of imperialism. Not because of unfortunate treaties, or assassinations, but because the 1000-year-old Ottoman empire was crumbling. Lots of territory and resources were up for grabs, and Germany was eager to get its own economic sphere, which Britain, France, and the USA had previously accomplished. Germany had only recently unified and industrialized, and it needed markets and resource for growth. The existing imperialist powers did not want a new rival, and were eager to divide the new territories among themselves -- which is precisely what they did after they won the war. That's what it was all about, and that is not mentioned in mainstream sources like "Guns of August". Imperialism does not exist within the matrix. The same scenario repeats for almost any historical event you want to look at. There is always the 'consensus' version, and then there is what actually happened. The 'consensus' version talks about the actions of nations and presidents, and omits the elite machinations which have always driven events from behind the scenes. Parenti's "History as Mystery" is a very interesting study of a variety of historical episodes over the past 2,000 years. He shows how the historical record has been warped and censored, beginning at the time the events occur, and then warped further over time to suit the needs of current elites. There have always been elites running things, since about 10,000 years ago. When they were called Chiefs and Kings and Emperors this was obvious. What changed with the advent of 'democracy' was only the propaganda. In fact, 'democracies' were designed to empower not the people, but the wealthy. By getting rid of monarchies and church power, they eliminated those hierarchies of power which competed with the wealth hierarchy. The establishment of republics was simply a power coup by one elite, overcoming its rivals. The best treatment of this topic I've seen is Fresia's "Toward an American Revolution", which is on our website (http://cyberjournal.org). It takes a bit of work, but if you begin to get an accurate sense of history then the useful questions are never, "Are there elites running things?", or "Are there any conspiracies?", but rather "What are they up to now?", and "Who will gain what from this latest development?". Or, as they said during Watergate, "Follow the money." This was true with Nixon, it was true a thousand years ago, and it is true today - even more so. best regards, rkm ============================================================================ Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2002 23:11:06 -0600 Subject: Your year 2000 article, "Escaping the Matrix" From: C To: <•••@••.•••> We thoroughly enjoyed your article, "Escaping the Matrix". It was superbly crafted to give the reader a concise and complete historical analysis of the red and blue pills that lead to today's matrix and the reality that is conceals. And I am amazed that you wrote this even before 9/11! Most of took the red pill just after that date. Unfortunately, I have grave doubts about any positive changes taking place until the shit hits the fan hard enough to splatter all over the matrix and and destroy it. The media has become the major automatic matrix maintenance server, and too many of us continue on their blue pill habit. That's not to say that we should get off the red pill. But we need to keep the reality alive stealthily, much like the camp where the protagonist of "Fahrenheit 441". As you know, everyone there memorized a book and all participated in reciting those books as a means of keeping them alive. That is similar to what those outside the matrix will need to until the numbers have grown sufficiently and the multitudes began to gag and barf on their blue pills when the matrix loses enough of the power needed to maintain itself. Who knows when? Thanks again for your entertaining and enlightening article. ============== Dear C, As I said to Dustin above, I've heard many folks express your viewpoint, which is basically, "When things get bad enough, then the people will finally rise up and demand changes." I don't see any evidence for this. Our situation is that of the proverbial lazy frog. If thrown into boiling water he jumps out; if heated up slowly he allows himself to be boiled. The deterioration of our societies happens incrementally, and at each step the propaganda is refined to accommodate the new conditions. It is never the system which is at fault, but always someone else (usually the victim). Unemployment is because people don't bother to get the right training, or they don't take available jobs. Crime is because certain people are inherently anti-social. Our civil liberties are gone because of terrorists. We make war all the time because of evil rogue nations. If bad conditions can be blamed on someone else, then those conditions do not cause anyone to 'rise up'. No matter how bad the conditions get. For you, the events of 9-11 were evidently a 'line that was crossed', and you escaped from the matrix. For many, globalization has been such a 'line', and those are the ones who make up the anti-globalization / anti-capitalist movement. But for many others, especially those at the bottom economically, fear and anxiety cause them to seek security. They want the regime to treat them better, but the idea of changing the regime only increases their fear and anxiety. As Morpheus put it, "They will fight to the death to preserve the matrix." Consider the 60s. That was a time when the majority of the population was demanding (and creating) radical changes in society. And it was a time of unprecedented prosperity. We had it very easy in those days... less crime and homelesness, lots of employment, houses affordable, police less fascist, etc. It seems that good times may be more conducive to radical thinking than bad times. So I don't agree that 'things getting worse' can be a source of hope for us. Escaping from the matrix does not happen because of a change in conditions, but rather from a change of perception, a change in perspective. Rather than biding our time while we "keep the reality alive stealthily", we need to be finding ways to encourage a shift of perception in our societies. regards, rkm ============================================================================ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 09:50:46 -0600 From: M To: •••@••.••• Subject: important question re: Wellstone Richard, I read your dispatches with interest and with a healthy amount of skepticism, which I try to apply democratically to all information. As a Minnesotan and huge Wellstone fan, this recent comment caught me eye: rkm> Whenever some kind of resolutions appear (from the UN and also from Congress) which can be interpreted (or misinterpreted) so as to provide legitimacy -- then the onslaught will begin. If bombs must be set off in Bali, or Senators assassinated, in order to create a 'climate of legitimacy', then that must be done. As Kissinger put it, commenting on a similar scenario, "You can't make an omelette without breaking eggs." I assume you refer to Sen. Wellstone's untimely demise. What have you got in terms of evidence for the "Senators assassinated" part? Thanks for whatever additional comments you may have regarding this. All the best, =============== Dear M, There is considerable evidence, both physical and circumstantial, to indicate that Wellstone was assassinated in order to help consolidate Bush's control over Congress. Below is an article (thanks to Brit Eckhart) that enumerates some of the physical evidence. As in the two exchanges above, I want to say that I've heard many people who share your viewpoint. Whenever a conspiracy situation arises, they always say "Where is your proof?" I suggest that this is the wrong question to be asking. I suggest that a more useful question is, "What is the most likely explanation for Wellstone's death?". Here is someone who was explicitly targeted by the Republican Party as the #1 person to defeat in the next election... and his defeat at the polls was unlikely. Then he dies in a mysterious plane crash just before the election... and the media immediately adopts an unlikely explanation and sticks to it. Proof? There is no 'proof' for any explanation of the crash. Certainly the media explanation - crash due to bad weather - is far from proved. Indeed, it is close to being disproved. I don't _know what happened, but for my money the most likely explanation - given what we do know - is that he was the victim of a hit ordered from the top. The fact that the media immediately adopts a pat answer, with little evidence to support it, adds to the likelihood of this explanation. This is the standard pattern for cover-ups. If a genuine accident / surprise happens, there is much more speculation and investigation by the media - solving a mystery helps sell papers. To accept media explanations as 'likely', while demanding 'proof' of other possibilities, gives one a very distorted perspective on reality. The image that comes to my mind is of a sheep wearing blinders, dutifully following the shepherd to the slaughter. all the best, rkm ============================================================================ From: "Brit Eckhart" <•••@••.•••> To: <•••@••.•••> Subject: Fw: Fears confirmed? Articles on Wellstone plane crash Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 03:24:09 -0500 -----Original Message----- >From: Dorothy Henaut <•••@••.•••> To: •••@••.••• <•••@••.•••> Date: 4 novembre, 2002 13:07 Subject: Fears confirmed? Articles on Wellstone plane crash Hi peacelist! there was a commentary on the CBC this morning about the Wellstone crash, mentioning how bizarre it was that the media were not interested in investigating this crash. Let's hear it for our (threatened) democracy. cheers, dorothy Subject: articles on Wellstone plane crash Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2002 04:34:04 -0000 Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 00:19:09 -0800 Subject: [Aftermath] Wellstone murder: Remote control takover and simultaneous radio blackout -- like several others Received from Will Holmgren: Wellstone Plane Was Out Of Control - Media Survey Wednesday, 30 October 2002, 11:06 am Article: Rick Ensminger The following is a summary of the facts available at this time via the media, surrounding Senator Paul Wellstone's airplane crash of 10-25-02. Judge for yourself, was this more likely an assassination or an accident? *************** >From the 10-27-02 Sunday edition of the St.Paul Pioneer Press: "They were no longer in control of the aircraft." said Don Sipola, a former president of the Eveleth Virginia Municipal Airport Commission, who has 25 years of experience flying at the airport. "That will be the $64 question---what occurred in the last few minutes that distracted them or caused them to wrestle control of the aircraft." "Something caused them at low altitude to veer off course," Sipola said. The angle of descent also indicates an out of control flight, Sipola said. The normal approach for the aircraft is a descent of 3 degrees, he said. But Siploa said the NTSB investigators told him Saturday that the plane was descending at 30 degrees. "This was a real steep bank, not a nice, gentle don't-spill-the-coffee descent," Siploa said. This is more like a space shuttle coming down. This was not a controlled descent into the ground." *************** >From the Minneapolis Star Tribune 10-26-02: The state of Minnesota operates two King Air 100's. Jesse Ventura uses the planes. Tom Kirton, an associate professor at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University in Daytona Beach, Fl. said he flew a similar King Air model for five years as a corporate pilot before joining the school, which also has one. "The King Air is the finest airplane I have ever flown," he said. "The engines were totally reliable." "Performance on take off and landing was suberb. I mean, its got power to spare," Kirton said. "You take off and lose an engine, most folks could bring it down very, very easily on one engine and land a perfectly normal landing." Jeff Johnson, an associate professor in the aviation program at St.Cloud State University, said he has flown about 500 hours in King Air 100's as a private pilot. He said the planes are forgiving, stable and reliable. Johnson noted the King Air 100 has a flexible, boot-like device on the leading edges of the wings that the pilot can make "expand like a balloon to break ice off." He said he was told that only one pilot is required to fly the plane, two were hired because a Senator was on board. The pilots of Wellstone's plane... Conry had nearly 5200 hours of flying time and the highest certification a pilot can attain, his company said. Guess had 650 hours and was certified as a commercial pilot; he graduated from UND's aeronautics program. The weather at the Eveleth airport was a mix of mist and light snow at the time of the crash. Greg Spoden, assistant state climatologist said that at the Eveleth airport visibility was about 3 miles at the time of the crash. End of Star Tribune article. *************** As CNNFirst Reported: Breaking News. The crews on the ground found two large sections of plane. The tail section was intact. The weather did not have anything to do with the crash, said the on the scene reporter. Wolf Blitzer tried to correct her. He said, "The plane was flying into the storm of freezing rain, right?" There is no evidence that weather had anything to do with the crash. The on-the-scene reporter stuck to her guns. *************** >From the 10-29-02 Minneapolis Star Tribune: However, the team was able to make this significant discovery: the plane's landing flaps, which allow a slower and steeper approach to a runway, were extended 15 degrees on EACH wing. This information tends to discount the possibility, discussed by some local pilots, that one flap may have malfunctioned, putting them in different "asymmetric" positions and causing the plane to slowly turn 90 degrees from its westward approach to the runway in the moments before the crash. According to Executive Aviation, which operated the plane, Capt. Richard Conry flew his second-to-last flight Thursday, to Bismarck, N.D. His co-pilot on that flight told the NTSB that Conry didn't seem sick or tired on that flight. Conry spent much of Wednesday undergoing a required test of his flying proficiency, the Star Tribune has learned. Executive Aviation spokeswoman Mary Milla said Monday that Conry passed the so-called check ride, which was administered by a company pilot designated to conduct the exams by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The proficiency checks are required of commercial aviators every six months to maintain licensure. "He passed the check with flying colors," said Conry's wife, Johanne, on Monday. She also said her husband was in good health and well rested for the Wellstone flight. *************** >From the 10-29-02 St.Paul Pioneer Press: "Investigators...have ruled out physical problems with the pilots and one important piece of equipment." Dr. Thomas Uncini, St.Louis County's chief medical examiner, said Monday his preliminary conclusions are that the two pilots were in good physical condition and there were no signs that they suffered a heart attack or stroke. "No, it didn't happen," he said of medical problems. "It looked pretty straightforward." Frank Hilldrup, lead investigator for the NTSB said the landing gear appeared to be down but was too damaged by fire to determine if it had been locked into place. Another pilot who landed a slightly larger twin engine plane at the airport on Friday, a couple of hours before Wellstone's plane crashed, said in an interview that he experienced no significant problems. Veteran pilot Ray Juntunen said there was very light ice, "but nothing to be alarmed about. It shouldn't have been a problem." He said he ran into moderate icing conditions at 10,000 feet and requested permission to drop to 5,000. At that altitude, he had only light icing. When he dropped to 3400 feet, to begin his approach, "the ice slid off the windshield," he said. According to the NTSB, Wellstone's pilots received warnings of icing at 9,000 to 11,000 feet and were allowed to descend to 4,000 feet. Juntunen said he was able to see the airport from five miles out, and another pilot landed a half-hour later and told him the clouds were a little lower, but still not bad. Radar tapes indicate the plane had descended to about 400 feet and was traveling at only 85 knots near the end of its flight. It then turned south, dove at an unusually steep angle and crashed. *************** From the 10-26-02 edition of the St.Paul Pioneer Press: The weather Friday was dismal, gray, foggy, with light snow, but the landing should have been routine, said Gary Ulman, assistant manager of the Eveleth Virginia Municipal Airport. Shortly after 10 a.m., Ulman heard the pilot's voice on the radio and saw the landing lights flash on after the pilot clicked the signal from the cockpit. But the plane didn't land. "After a while, I thought to myself, 'Where the hell are they?' " Ulman jumped into his own private plane and took off in search of the missing aircraft." *************** Summary: If the icing conditions were so bad (which they weren't) why would Ulman take his own plane up? They had just radioed in that they were coming in for a landing. They were only about 7 miles out. They gave no indication of any problem. The NTSB has confirmed that several times. There was no problem with icing at the altitude they were flying. Airport manager Ulman even took his plane up proving that icing was not a problem. The landing gear was down. The plane was "forgiving, stable and reliable." The engines were "totally reliable." You could land it "very, very easily on one engine." "Performance on taking off and landing were superb." The pilots were experienced veterans in good health and well rested. Only one pilot was required to fly the King Air A100 but they had two as an extra precaution for safety. Bush had made it his number one priority to get Wellstone out of the Senate, presumably thru the election process. Bush himself had come to Minnesota to stump for Republican Norm Coleman. "Americans for Job Security", a Republican controlled "tax-exempt" group pumped over one million dollars into ads against Wellstone. Wellstone had voted against Bush's Homeland Security. He had voted against some of Bush's judicial appointees. He pushed stronger environmental programs while Bush pushed the opposite way. Wellstone pushed hard for genuine measures to counter corporate fraud while Bush pushed for cosmetic ones. Wellstone pushed hard for an independent 9-11 investigation over Bush and Cheney's strongest objections. Wellstone voted against giving Bush a free hand to invade Iraq and it actually increased his popularity in Minnesota. He was pulling ahead of Coleman and it looked like he would win re-election. .AND THEN... They lost all control and all communications in his plane instantly, without warning during a landing approach. Is this sabotage, assassination or an accident? You be the judge. ==================== Hear Christopher Bollyn (Am. Free Press) and Dick Eastman discuss five previous remote-control murder crashes. Radio Free America (RealPlayer needed) http://www.rfausa.com/Audio1/audio1.html Scroll down to the 11/25/01 broadcast. These crashes are discussed in great detail -- the similarity to the Wellstone murder will be obvious. =================== + =================== Support Antiwar.com http://antiwar.com and the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space http://www.space4peace.org. + STOP STAR WARS - KEEP SPACE FOR PEACE + =================== + ==================== -- ============================================================================ cyberjournal home page: http://cyberjournal.org "Zen of Global Transformation" home page: http://www.QuayLargo.com/Transformation/ QuayLargo discussion forum: http://www.QuayLargo.com/Transformation/ShowChat/?ScreenName=ShowThreads cj list archives: http://cyberjournal.org/cj/show_archives/?lists=cj newslog list archives: http://cyberjournal.org/cj/show_archives/?lists=newslog cj_open list archives: http://cyberjournal.org/cj/show_archives/?lists=cj_open subscribe addresses for cj list: •••@••.••• •••@••.••• subscribe addresses for cj_open list: •••@••.••• •••@••.••• ============================================================================
Share: