How about starting your own meteor thread and that way you won't have to worry about what the rest of us think. I'm sorry I have to say this, but meteors have absolutely nothing to do with AQ, OBL, Iraq, the Middle East, or actual, threatened, or potential acts of terrorism, although I'm sure some of you can bootstrap a connection to justify the meteor and similar posts, no matter how silly and kooky it makes you look. Please don't misunderstand me: I'm also facinated with meteors, aliens, biblical prophecy, and the like, but that stuff doesn't belong on this Thread. And BTW, I'm not some "johnny-come-lately" interloper trying to mold the TM Thread into my ideal, but rather I've been here since day one and have watched the downward evolution of the Thread from an intelligent source of information and a clearing house of ideas related directly to terrorism to what is best described as a cross between Art Bell and the National Enquirer.
I consider it minimal wisdom to include as much info, as many puzzle pieces as possible--especially at these stages relatively early complexity and flexibility of forces and issues in terms of eventual actions and results.
I don't consider it a bootstrap connection at all to realize that should
ANY
natural disaster or man-made disaster occur which impacts significant numbers of people, cities etc. in the USA and/or western world,
IT IS OBVIOUS that Jihadi's would be gleefully eager to take advantage of such and to maximize the damage
AND
to maximize the Jihadi's benefit from the natural disaster.
Any TM or other group purporting or even attempting to be maximally informed and prepared for such eventualities would be foolish to ignorant to blind to ignore
ANY
significant
FACTOR(S)
which Jihadi's might remotely be construed to consider or use in their efforts to do us damage.
What about this is so hard to wrap one's understanding around???
Regardless of how early I lurked on the TM thread vs posting or how early I posted or whatever, I'm NOT a Johnny come lately.
I am given to extensive thinking outside the box. THAT 'OUT OF THE BOX' mentality has HISTORICALLY HAS BEEN DEMONSTRATED TO BE OF AT LEAST POTENTIAL GREAT BENEFIT IN ALL MANNER OF CRISES. Sheesh.
I'm sorry your construction on reality re TM seems to so stridently insist on narrow definitions, narrow sensibilities . . . . and quite logically therefrom, narrow understandings, interpretations and narrow results.
Personally, when it comes to safety--of my home, community and nation, I want the
BROADEST
POSSIBLE
considerations, postulations, contingency scenarios.
Sigh.
Agreed.
There is a "snowball effect" where a tolerance for diversity of opinion has degenerated into "anything goes". This is not just one recent topic, but a handful that go back weeks. Also, it is dangerous when mainstream media sources are denigrated in favor of "alternative media". That is the conservative version of being "politically correct". And to say that conservatives cannot practice "political correctness" is the same as some academics who say that it is impossible for minorities to be racists because they are on the short end of the power structure.
Not all information sources are created equal. And while it is a law of nature that the profession of journalism tends to attract those who have a tendency towards political liberalism (just as the military and law enforcement professions tend to attract the more conservative-minded), it is ridiculous to throw the baby out with the bathwater and then begin to gravitate towards fringe media (internet/newspaper/radio/etc).
If my plumber wants to yammer about how he hates the current occupant of the WhiteHouse, I'd prefer he didn't in my house, but what I care about is that he can fix my broken shower drain, not whether he has his head on straight politically. If I need a lawyer to draw up a contract or a will, I don't care if she is a tree hugger, so long as she does her job well. When I want a job done right, I want a professional. Why should it be different with information?
I don't care that 90% of media professionals are liberal in their private lives. I just want to know that when they are telling me something blew up last night in Iraq and X number of people are dead, that the information is timely and accurate. I can ignore the spin just as I can the plumber or lawyer. "Just the facts ma'am."
It is tempting to hope that an alternative media source is going to uncover the nugget of information that the "lamestream" media ignores (Iran-Contra broke in a small, anti-American Lebanese rag and Lewinsky was revealed by the Inquirer), but the cost is too high. For every nugget of gold you get tons of sewage, and if you use unreliable sources to buttress your arguments, you discredit yourself. Homeruns are a lot more sexy than singles or walks, but getting on base is what is important. Swinging for the rafters all the time will get your batting average in the basement.
"Connecting the dots" does not have a magic shortcut. It is tedious and excruciating and going to sources who promise a hidden scoop is to follow a Pied Piper. I am not trashing all the stations, sites, and papers who are "cutting edge". All I am saying is that tolerance does not require an abandonment of rationality.
When a group of people (a thread, a party, or a nation) adopt a relativistic view of truth, it always ends in disaster. Not all stories/facts/opinions/ideas are created equal. When linking to a site or referencing a source, it is a worthwhile to go back over not just weeks, but months and years to seeing what their "batting average" is. They might have been the first to break a story, but over the years, they may also be peddling lies. Worse than pretending all sources are created equal is to suggest that because most who choose journalism as a profession share opinions contrary to ours, the "professionals" with their reporters around the globe gathering information, editors sifting fact form trash, and columnists who since the founding of our country have enlightened the national debate, should be discarded entirely.
Tinfoil is ok once in a while. 9/11 on 9/10 would have sounded "tinfoily". But it is like declaring a nationwide "orange alert", if you do it every time you see a threat, you defeat the purpose by discrediting yourself. Conventional "lamestream" sources are not sexy, and it is harder to have to take the dots and connect them one by one over time than to buy into fantastical/fanatical theories that purport to pull all the dots together to form a grand picture. But the hare did not beat the tortoise. The tortoise beat the hare.
This has become the "Tinfoil Matrix", not the "Threat Matrix".
Two questions one should ask before posting:
1) Is the source I am using more accurate in reporting facts on their best day than the New York Times is on its worst day? (Over time, do the assertions of an information site/source bear themselves out as truth at a higher rate than the least respected source of conventional news) For a large portion (maybe even a majority) of the sources referenced lately on this thread, the answer is "no". (Reporting what jihadis are mouthing in their media is different in that it comes with the disclaimer that much of it is disinformation, most is unreliable, it has an agenda (more than any liberal here in America), and the sources not only are politically imbalanced (extremely), but exhibit signs of mental imbalance as well.)
2) If I stood up and read my post to a group of my friends and family, would they attempt an "intervention" and seek to have me involuntarily committed to a windowless institution with padded walls and nice doctors with white lab coats?
It, like everything in life, is a balance. Too little of the "cutting edge" and things become dull, narrow-minded, and tunnel-visioned. Too much "cutting edge" and everything falls to pieces.
It's remarkable how little tension (relatively speaking) is present on this thread, but perhaps the reason is that there is such an absence of self-criticism. The "tolerant" environment on this thread (that "anything goes") like appeasement, encourages aggression (against the truth and even sanity).
Like I said, this is not about the last few days, but something that has been developing over weeks if not months. A good thread that was a "market" for trading diverse information has become so cluttered with the bizarre and the extreme that it risks no longer being part of "the market of ideas" and instead becoming the "bizarre bazaar".
Again, I am not directing this at any particular person or topic, but others have remarked in recent days that the thread is going into the ditch. Just making some general observations and (hopefully)constructive criticisms. If I didn't respect the people on here or cared where the thread goes from here, I wouldn't have wasted my time typing this.
My two cents and a good day to all.
Perhaps you could enlighten me . . .
WHAT EXACTLY
is NOT
terrifying
about massive deaths from meteors/quakes/ . . . . [insert calamity of choice] . . .
alone . . .
as well as
followed by massive stirring of the chaotic pot afterward by Jihadi's???
I think we veered off track after trying to analyze the bin Laden composites. ex. from the pic of Binny and the Sun/Venus pic...the transit of Venus....was it a go signal? Was it? I don't think we really know.
What's certain is that we've done some excellent dot connecting in the past and I agree that it's time to get back on track. I'm to blame for part of the meteor discussions because of the "blast" that I heard. I apologize.
Judging from my Freepmail and other posts, the meteor detractors are conspicuously few in number. Points to consider:
1) If the recent meteor phenomena are within the range of normal occurrences, or a short-lived cluster, the reports will soon die out and the issue will become moot.
2) If the reports indicate a significant increase in meteorites (impacted meteors), and the activity is sustained, we all want to be apprised of it, WOT or not.
3) As others have commented, celestial occurrences of all kinds are of great significance to Islam (religion and culture). To filter out this aspect of their sociology would be like doing a report on transportation but leaving out trains and planes. Celestial events have provided a scheduling or synchronizing mechanism for earthly events in the past. Read any translated Islamic literature whatsoever if you need to be convinced of their obsession with the sky.
4) Perhaps one of the reasons for the deterioration of the thread, in your opinion, is that hard information on terrorism and terrorists is pretty sparse, if you exclude the ME. Much of what there is is recycled or pure speculation. If the availability of real info improves, the thread will naturally move back in that direction.
Okey Dokie, but what if UBL is hiding in space behind one of the rocks?
Why don't you use your scroll button?