What’s the world coming to when you no longer distinguish between a meme and well-crafted illustration rooted in rock-solid argument? One requires work: Time and effort to understand the story (and one would hope — the willingness to recognize how it’s impacted everything you see today). The other requires nothing but the desire to be Liked for sharing your concern (instantly understood from standard scrolling with ease).
In a world where easy is all the rage, slop is now considered precise as long as it’s slick. Anything Goes if it allows you to gloss over global issues of catastrophic consequences with snippets of certitude. For instance:
In the past 20 years we’ve seen the greatest failures intelligence experts (9/11 and the Iraq WMD fiasco), financial regulators (2008 financial crisis), and public health “experts” in my lifetime at least. Then they wonder why so many people don’t trust “the experts” anymore.
Conflating the biggest & most costly lie in modern history with the intelligence failure of 9/11 is as sloppy as it gets. Not to mention that adding WMD into the mix is politicizing expertise in the same way it was politicized in the first place: By people with a motive to manufacture truth from the flagrantly false — relying on the intellectually lazy who gleefully go along in the Gutter Games of Government.
The experts weren’t wrong — they just weren’t listened to. A lot of that goin’ around!
While I’m not qualified to debate public health or anything on the financial front: I’m wondering why people who can’t even get the self-evident straight (after 20 years, no less) — think they’re qualified on every controversial issue in America.
By Design
America Remains Mired in the Murky
What does it say to you: That on evidence claimed as components to build a nuclear bomb — the “debate” was hijacked by 10-second sound bites? Shouldn’t any debate establish what the debate is actually about? What does it say about a country that can’t even establish that much on a matter of this magnitude?
As I said in my doc:
All the sarin gas shells in the world would have no bearing on the aluminum tubes and other intel, but loyalists to logical fallacies are not burdened by the inconvenience of FACT.
They will nitpick over pebbles while refusing to even glance at the mountain of evidence that crushes their “convictions.”
— Richard W. Memmer: Act V
For the sake of argument: Let’s say Saddam had full-blown active WMD programs on chemical & biological weapons. The tubes would still be a lie — whether the war would have been justified in that scenario or not. I’ll go one further: Let’s say he had a uranium enrichment program in operation as well, but that the rotors were carbon fiber — not aluminum.
Once again, the tubes would still be a lie.
Getting lucky in finding something you didn’t know about — does not absolve you from a case that was woven out of whole cloth.
The road to reality is blocked by detours designed to keep you going in circles. Purveyors of poppycock reroute you with narratives that avoid detail like Black Death. The way out is to start with an inconsistency or two that’s narrow in scope:
And take the trail where it leads . . .
To ascertain the truth on any topic:
If you’ve got something concrete to go on — that’s your point of entry. By all means, keep the door open in every direction. But by nailing down the definitive first, it paves a clearer path to all the rest. This country does the exact opposite on everything:
Lumping it all together and never even approaching where you should have started in the first place:
I’m not here because I’m interested in talking about this topic. I’m here to do something about it so we can stop talking about it. I’ve got an idea — and it’s got teeth! All ya gotta do — is do what you say you do. And my idea is a framework for debate that boxes you in to do exactly that. You won’t like it — but here’s the deal:
Your opposition won’t either!
And who knows, you might learn to love embracing challenge, changing your mind, and the fruits from demanding across-the-board accountability.
This — is not that . . .
This is Broadcasting Beliefs About That
Worrying is a cheap replacement for caring. Complaining is a cheap replacement for fixing. Outrage is a cheap replacement for supporting. It’s easy to tear down. It’s much harder to build up.
That’s a snappy way of sizing up the shallowness of our times, but it’s meaningless without the work it takes to act on those concerns. And right on cue, out comes the “conversation” — the self-satisfied slinging 60 seconds of “concern” and calling it a day:
Or at least until the next “concern” comes along that strikes their fancy for a fix.
What I have in mind would change the dynamic of debate: Where clarity & accountability come calling and they don’t give a damn about Left & Right. In this world — a.k.a. reality: Your commitment to critical thinking would be based on the consistency of your actions — not your claims. And you’d take pride in acting on your concerns instead of advertising them.
Case in Point
While I wholeheartedly agree with this guy on the essence of what he wrote below — I spotted some problems inside of 60 seconds (starting with the title itself). To be sure, he did some solid work in his 11-page post (which I plan to read in full later).
But I don’t need to read it all to know what’s missing (as in — what matters most). All the more reason why his response is so striking to me:
“Great detail”?
There’s more detail in my illustration below than in his entire article (as in detail that matters most — the numbers):
My surgical specificity in this clip puts this lie in its place in 5 minutes alone. To take a story this complex and convoluted and boil its essence down to a few minutes was no small feat. Imagine what I did with 160!
Trillion Dollar Tube
“There is no skimming over the surface of a subject with [Hamilton]. He must sink to the bottom to see what foundation it rests on.”
— Major William Pierce (Ron Chernow, Alexander Hamilton)
Wouldn’t it be absurd to share that quote if my clip contained nothing but trite talking points? Some circles are not burdened by squaring their walk with their talk. They seem to think that advertising virtue equates to embodying it.
I’m not suggesting Mr. Moore goes that far simply by sharing a link, but his closing bit below rings hollow to me:
The truth, finally, was tortured until it was no longer recognizable. And the sons and daughters of America were sent marching off to war wearing the boots of a well-told lie.
If 20 years later:
The author of those words shared them with the only person on the planet who told this story in full (from every angle that matters most). And that instead of blowing right by my work so he could pointlessly point to his:
We’d combine forces to put this lie in its place once and for all.
How many laypeople have you ever come across who wrote and produced a documentary? In nearly 20 years of challenging people on these issues and others, I’ve never met a single one. And I defy you to find another doc that drills into all of America with surgical specificity that cuts to the bone.
What road have you taken to lose sight of such things deserving of at least a little respect? A modicum of courtesy perhaps? Doing your homework used to count for something. How about we just start with that?
Respect is not my concern . . .
But if you showed some — it might be just enough to crack open a conduit to this quaint thing called conversation.
If I came into this cold, on that image alone — I’d know it’s bigger than the WMD delusion. In the face of such craftsmanship and detail as follows: I’d know this guy’s not fu#kin’ around (not to mention I’d have to know what the hell he’s up to). But even if you’re not interested at all — if you don’t respect argument on the merits, why should anyone respect yours? If you stick around — you’ll find I’m fighting for the truth in all its forms (whether I like it or not is immaterial to my purpose).
DOE’s standard is to spin a tube at 20% above 90,000 RPM before failure — so 48,000 short is a pretty loose definition of “rough indication.” . . . Out of 31 tubes in subsequent testing, only one was successfully spun to 90,000 RPM for 65 minutes — which the CIA seized on as evidence in their favor.
One DOE analyst offered a superb analogy of that contorted conclusion: “Running your car up to 6,500 RPM briefly does not prove that you can run your car at 6,500 RPM cross country. It just doesn’t. Your car’s not going to make it.”
In an industry where fractions of a millimeter matter, these guys were playing horseshoes with centrifuge physics . . .
— Richard W. Memmer: Act II
In the face of someone so clearly in command of the material, the last thing I’d care about is the format of his website. And it seems like someone so concerned with the sons and daughters of America (and how the truth was tortured beyond recognition and still is): Would be interested in hearing me out on how the truth could finally see the light of day — and then some!
Negative, Ghost Rider
The pattern is full . . .
Until the rise of podcasts, twitter, and the various forms of independent media / journalism, people weren’t really aware how legacy media was influencing their thinking. I think people are finally waking up and may surprise you here, especially if more talk about it.
New formats for funneling information that caters to your cravings is not what I’d call enlightened. And those who couldn’t spot clearly dishonest actors before — think they’re wide awake now? The Twitter bio behind that quote begins with “Groupthink averse.”
It would never occur to him that everything in that Tweet is Groupthink 101.
On that note . . .
Indeed, nowadays, we tend to take in and repeat whatever the values and beliefs of those around us have rather than forming our own independent thought and stopping to organize and evaluate the information we are receiving.
That is not this . . .
A world where regurgitating garbage gets people to Like you — celebrating “victory” by clicking “bravo” to bad manners and bunk. A world where the rush is everything:
- The rush to respond
- The rush you get from responding
- The rush to roll out the next issue of concern
- Repeat and never reflect
Which is exactly what Mr. Moore did that day with his gift of “great detail.” Nowhere to be found was an atom of interest in mine (and how the merging of both could be the gift that keeps on giving). In responding to someone who commented on his piece called A Culture of Cowardice (which is fitting for how I feel) — I wrote the following (the numbers referencing the image that follows shortly):
- #1 is the same quote from my words below the doc image above: A degree of detail I doubt he’s ever seen on this subject. Few have!
- #2 provides a YouTube link to Trillion Dollar Tube. My money says he didn’t even click on it (and if he did — it would make his shallow reply even worse). Moreover — I point out that loose language like “incentivized” and “cherry-picked” has no teeth (even though it’s entirely true).
- #3 is a link to my post below (none of which is mentioned in his article)
To be fair — Mr. Moore’s article is from 2005, but still: This mountain of information was publicly available for over a year before he wrote it. At least he was in tapped into the tubes as being of paramount importance (which is a helluva more than I can say for Mr. Sowell). Not one word in his articles on WMD addresses the marquee claim on a mushroom cloud.
And all of this was available before he wrote Weapons of Crass Obstruction.
How do you reconcile that?
No need . . .
Right on cue . . .
I tend to believe Thomas Sowell. He is brilliant and has worked at a think tank for about 40 years. Sources matter! Yours is from a concerned citizen.
About those think tanks . . .
Nothing to see here either:
What’s Wrong With This Picture?
And this one . . .
Associated Press, October 3rd, 2004: Rice said she learned of objections by the Energy Department only after making her 2002 comments.
Richard W. Memmer: Are we to believe that the National Security Advisor of the United States was unaware of an intelligence dispute of this magnitude that had been going on for well over a year?
One Congressional investigator went so far as to call it a holy war. And doesn’t it strike you as suspicious that she didn’t bother consulting the DOE before serving up images of a nuclear detonation?
— Act II
Holy War
Then there’s this picture:
Even in the most unsophisticated years of my youth: It would have been unthinkable for me to pull that stunt (something so utterly devoid of effort, courtesy, and curiosity). To not investigate an offering of such seriousness from someone so clearly connected with my own concerns — would be like asking me not to breathe.
- #4 alludes to the idea I have in mind — and that it takes critical thinking to understand it
- #5 states a bare-minimum requirement for critical thinking: “stopping to organize and evaluate the information we are receiving.”
He had no such notion — and it’s almost impossible to find anyone who does anymore: Including the people writing about the importance of critical thinking.
I addressed this in great detail in a 2005 piece for Huffpost, if you are interested.
I’m interested in doing something about a culture that increasingly values bullshit as currency. I’m interested in getting people to understand the meaninglessness & destructiveness of sharing concerns without acting on them. In interested in learning from others just as I’m interested in them learning from me.
I’m interested in how we can harness:
a.k.a. learning!
To the uneducated, abstract ideas are unfamiliar; so is the detachment that is necessary to discover a truth out of one’s own knowledge and mental effort. The uneducated person views life in an intensely personal way — he knows only what he sees, hears or touches and what he is told by friends.
As the unknown sage puts it, “Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people.”
But more than ever, even the most educated minds act in an uneducated manner in service of their interests — and do catastrophic damage by doing so. Even the best of the bunch are part of the problem they’re trying to solve.
I KNOW . . .
That you know the answer to this question:
But you don’t want to answer it . . .
And I KNOW why:
The banner image above is all you need to answer that question, and the more you look — the worse it gets (and not just on Sowell). The story I’m out to tell takes both parties to task on the biggest & most costly lie in modern history — along with some other issues at the core of America’s decline.
Sowell is simply a conduit through which to tell that story.
And how his role within it could be harnessed for good. Compelling him to admit where he’s wrong will work wonders for where he’s right.
Wouldn’t it be something if an idea that threw you for a loop — piqued your curiosity to probe for more? But I’m mostly met with a culture that “insist upon on ‘affirmation independent of all findings’” (borrowing from Peck who borrowed from Buber).
You make it impossible to have this conversation within a single frame — let alone the bigger picture!
After all — you’re busy!
You’re always busy . . .
America’s in perennial pursuit of ideologies: Warfare waged with galactic levels of baggage & bullshit bolstered by
opinions lightly adopted but firmly held . . . forged from a combination of ignorance, dishonesty, and fashion
— Theodore Dalrymple, Life at the Bottom
As I’ve repeatedly said . . .
I’m not out to “DESTROY” Sowell — quite the contrary! Stick around, you’ll see. That aside: If he stepped into a debate with me on WMD, the beating he’d take would be biblical. If you think you can challenge me on that — I invite you to try.
I’ve been inviting you for a really long time.
And your answer to that challenge?
From one of Sowell’s finest . . .
And yeah . . .
I’m making fun of your childish YouTube titles like “DESTROY.” Speaking of titles — there’s not a chance in hell that I’d ever say anything like the “Little Tubes of Terror” on a matter of this magnitude.
It’s so cheap and diminishes the quality of his good work right out of the gate.
It’s ironic that he immediately follows the title with: “Journalism, like every craft and profession, needs to purge itself from time to time of diseased tissue.” It would never occur to him that his title is part of the cancer that America has become. That it was in 2005 speaks volumes for where we were going.
In and of itself, the title’s not a big deal.
Had he engaged in actual conversation, I wouldn’t have said a word about it. But in light of his flinging of a link in all of 10 seconds (the title suits his lack of seriouness and civility).
And that — is how it all begins . . .
Once you quit hearing ‘sir’ and ‘ma’am’ — the rest is soon to foller
10 years ago . . .
I set out to do something about that:
When I Saw the Writing on the Wall
I took on the automatons of the time (Left & Right). No one listened, and lo and behold — automatons exponentially multiplied. Those times were tame compared to today. The toxicity of venom has been taken to a whole other level with pride.
People want an authority to tell them how to value things, but they choose this authority not based on facts or results. They choose it because it seems authoritative and familiar — and I’m not and never have been familiar.
— Michael Burry, The Big Short
If that were not overwhelmingly true, this site would not exist. I would not have been practically spit on for 20 years of telling undeniable truth of mathematical certainty (painfully obvious deception shaped everything you see today).
If this title doesn’t tell you something my commitment to objective scrutiny, what would?
The rotor speed required to separate uranium isotopes doesn’t care who’s president, and when it comes to ascertaining the truth, neither do I. In order to maintain such speeds, the material properties of centrifuges are as critical as it gets. You don’t need to interview a world-renowned nuclear scientist to figure that out, but I like to be thorough.
To claim that Iraq WMD wasn’t a lie should be like saying we didn’t land on the moon. As I wrote and produced the most exhaustive documentary ever done on WMD, I would know.
No rational person would repeatedly deny the undeniable, and just minutes into any on post this site, you’d know something’s not right, but you find it’s with me:
[As] I’m not and never have been familiar
If I came across this and hadn’t done my homework, on the title alone — my first thought would be: “I must be missing something pretty big!”
You have other ideas . . .
Button your lip and don’t let the shield slip
Take a fresh grip on your bulletproof mask
And if they try to break down your disguise with their questions
You can hide hide hide behind Paranoid Eyes
In the last few years — I’ve seen savagery beyond anything that inspired the doc (and that’s what gave me the idea). Back then, it was about going up against institutions and putting up a mirror to all of America. Now, I just need to get to one man: A professional know-it-all with a cult-like following unlike anything I’ve ever seen. As I’ve been in the trenches battling hermetically sealed minds for decades, that’s saying something.
His disciples see him as some kind of saint-like Sherlock Holmes.
And that — is an opportunity!
As a distinguished scholar once said: “The first thing a man will do for his ideals is lie.”
— Thomas Sowell
The man’s a magician:
As I’m practically spit on by people promoting principles I followed to find he didn’t. Simply by virtue of writing those words, he couldn’t possibly do the same in service of his own ideals? And lo and behold — sleight of hand is how they pulled it off.
When you have absolutely no idea what’s going on here, on what basis are you so doubt-free?
Festinger would have a field day with the force field of fallacy that shields this man (who peddled partisan hackery on this fiasco for the ages that shaped all you see today). He’s worshipped for following the facts — never mind he didn’t go anywhere near ’em (flagrantly ignoring irrefutable evidence of mathematical certainty).
Following Facts Where They Lead
“Said so and so”? . . . that’s one helluva trip you took there, Mr. Sowell.
Stirring Defense!
How do we make people realize they’ve been lied to? You have to knock down one small pillar that’s easier to reach.
The people who Tweeted those lines I combined from a conversation I came across — had no idea that they perfectly captured the principle of my Clear the Clutter plan. I’ve got the perfect pillar:
As exposing Sowell is my bridge to expose it all!
Sowell’s hailed as a folk hero for calling out problems he helped create (and takes no responsibility for any of it).
A lot of that goin’ around too!
It’s pure fantasy to think that you can ignore key dimensions of a problem and magically solve it. The problems that plague America are interrelated, and anything short of addressing that is going nowhere. But everyone’s wrapped up in their wheelhouse — operating under umbrellas of interests that don’t account for complexities outside of them.
Repeatedly rehashing issues is not the mark of problem solving: It’s the mark of a market. All these channels are blunt instruments (including those I agree with). Like Black Lives Matter, you’re just pounding away at problems without any examination of the efficacy of your efforts.
But why bother when failure is a pretty profitable enterprise these days?
I didn’t get the memo . . .
When did acquiring knowledge become: “I don’t understand everything — so I can act like an imbecile who can’t understand anything“? Would you browse a textbook then blame the teacher for your failure to understand the material? If you’re gonna blow right by illustrations and clips at the crux of the story: Don’t complain that you can’t understand what you didn’t stop to consider.
A young man sittin’ on the witness stand
The man with the book says “Raise your hand”
“Repeat after me, I solemnly swear”
The man looked down at his long hair
And although the young man solemnly swore
Nobody seemed to hear anymore
And it didn’t really matter if the truth was there
It was the cut of his clothes and the length of his hair— Johnny Cash, What is Truth . . .
This nation has no remorse!
Not for relatively recent wrongdoing, anyway. It appears I’m more horrified by my typos than America is with dumb, dishonest, and delusional wars. And truth be told, those who landed on the right side on Iraq: Most of ‘em don’t know jack either. Just because you were right doesn’t necessarily mean you arrived at it intelligently — and being reinforced by casual conviction makes for increasingly sloppy & stupid thinking.
[W]e must accept responsibility for a problem before we can solve it
— M. Scott Peck, The Road Less Traveled
In a nation that incessantly blames and complains (seemingly for sport) — no one’s taking responsibility for anything. The ever-rising ocean of partisan pettiness is gluttony under the guise of concern. What would you call untold millions marching to a Twitter-rage parade on WMD — dishing on the deaths of Rumsfeld and Powell (and whatever anniversary marks the moment):
But too lazy to get off your ass to see what we can do about it. Of course, that would require holding your own accountable as well:
So there’s that
Happy 20th Anniversary!
Seize the day to be jacked up on fuel to fire off your fury and excuses in a nation that never learns: But loves to light it up in lip service to virtues.
Ever-so bold behind force fields of fallacy that butcher those “beliefs.“
Anyone wanting to know the truth would not behave in ways that make damn sure you never will. Defenders of the indefensible make it impossible to discuss even a single image — and yet have the temerity to bitch about my website. While you’re gleefully glued to tradition on format & formula:
The same formula that created this clusterfuck in the first place.
Heart Over Mind . . .
I love you so much that I can’t leave you
Even though my mind tells me I should
But then you make me think that you still love me
And all my thoughts of leaving do no good . . .You’ve got me heart over mind worried all the time
Knowing you will always be the same
You’ll keep hurting me I know but I still can’t let you go
Cause my heart won’t let my love for you change