High tech low tech lesson:
A knife was the first item used to kill during the September 11.
Danny Lewin, founder of Akamai was the first casualty.
According to the FAA, Lewin was seated in business class in seat 9B, close to hijackers Mohamed Atta and al Suqami.
According to the 9/11 Commission, Lewin may have been stabbed in the throat whilst trying to foil the hijacking, not knowing that al Suqami was sitting just behind him.
The positioning of a knife-attacker behind the high profile Israeli SF trained passenger looks rather like they planned it - Including Daniel Lewin’s seat with an attacker behind.
This is obviously a highly orchestrated crime - there is so much sprawling conspiracy, disinformation and corruption around the whole incident that mapping it out is deliberately difficult - [blinkenlights] - we may suspect that some of the larger intelligence gathering organisations may have “more information than I” on the subject.
This constitutes an anthropological scale crime, and one that directly reveals and connects some of the most sinister features of the Industrial Revolution.
Standard Oil is operating on all sides of WW1/WW2. It’s a company, not a government, and it is the de-facto premier influence on what became IG Farben and the Nazi Eugenics campaigns.
This is the chemical engineering, molecular biology and pharmaceutical drugs revolution. It’s a "big deal”.
9/11 was one of the defining mysteries which formed the internet, the traffic was monitored closely, so there is a “bloom” of sociographic importance, which also hold a great deal of information about the sources of disinformation - where the first examples of the propaganda were uploaded from can be detected by powerful mass-surveillance tools. The “911 truth” campaign and the many debates chronicle the discussions of everybody online contemplating the knotty issue, and confronting the shocking and expanding horror of the Global War on Terror – no longer a glossy promise filled with an air of victory - now looking much more like a real war.
A god-damned desolate fucked-up bodybag experience with big expense, big waste, and loads of appalling civilian casualties, and disruption of the majority of the areas involved. You can rest assured that the mineral reserves were sold off, an item which never made the news, and the Oil Fields in Iraq were often kept pumping by contractors while the war was raging. Big bucks were made flying in mobile equipment from GE and Siemens to access destroyed oil extraction facilities.
WTC was an explosive watershed event - it changed the world - and was accompanied by a blistering tidal wave of bizarre disinformation and hoax media, all obviously prepared by the same sets of software or groups of people.
To what extent the “NWO conspiracy theories” are verifiable or connected to fact is concerning whether truth or disinformation, or somewhere between the two, and as with the Nazi regime, attempting to "rearrange” the prior cultures of the world for “aggressive modern reform”, the propaganda of the GWoT and “Alex Jones” era saw a return to the types of propaganda which were famous in the Nazi and Communist regimes.
There is a lack of archival or indexing of tangible campaign materials to fully explain or co-ordinate the politics and networked multimedia rabbit-warren of different takes on “why the official story makes no sense to the public”.
It’s a very fishy problem, and on the most basic commonsense level - that is not one but TWO planes hitting towers in the center of a major city, and the video footage from the “something” that hit the Pentagon is still missing. It is not just implausible, it is highly indicative of foul play. The Pentagon crash damage does not look like a passenger jet went into it, and this is a military headquarters. The CCTV footage of the impact was all confiscated immediately by the FBI, and has never been seen by the public. These sorts of things are not supposed to be targets for an airborne attack, and hitting tall buildings with aeroplanes is quite difficult to do in a flight simulator.
The WTC complex attacks, subsequent to the Al Gore vs Bush Jr election is by far the most profound feature of the early internet. What we have today is defined by this event, and the political changes which underwrote it. The British Government has been petitioned a number of times suggesting that the WMD evidence on Iraq and Afghanistan was fraudulent, and that these are war ciminals - Tony Blair in particular has been branded as a War Criminal.
The Internet was in gestational form, and many people did not own a computer or a mobile phone in the year 2000. In the year 2000 Windows 98 or 2000 was bundled with WMV and Internet Explorer, and the transition from dial-up to DSL was transformed by the media campaign and the Patriot Act mass surveillance law amendments - complete with draconian penal codes for “terrorists” which exceed the incarceration powers of Nazi Germany - making it possible for undetectable kidnappings to be conducted worldwide by the “special renditions program” about which very little is officially revealed.
Certainly China was not pressured to reform its human rights policies, or to concentrate on environmentalism or social welfare as a priority over industrial exports, and the burgeoning consumer electronics industry - which employs a slew of chemicals of unknown preparations - adulteration is a monster problem in China - the monopoly government’s corruption enables any regulation to be broken or just unobserved if you so desire, and the difficulty of controlling the supply lines requires building factories that closely resemble prisons, with airport-style security. Worker welfare is not the priority, and exposure to damaging or toxic elements of the manufacturing process go publicly uninvestigated, to the point where these installations could and should be seen in the same light that the Nazi prison camps must be viewed as - experimentally dangerous high-technology chemically engineered factories which perform unconsenting scientific research on the disposable factory workers, who can be “replaced like lightbulbs”. The level and depth of unknown and unconsenting experimental toxicology and behaviour modification is unknown - human beings are complex, and it may be that most of the data is not being collected. Certainly the statistics available via the mass surveillance grid will be enabling a biomedical approach to urban life to be employed - and the loss to privacy may if properly handled mean a benefit to the public domain and the quality of medical assessment and data monitoring of the epidemiological landscape.
To what extent this is an experimentation program, and whether it is connected to larger-scale clandestine operations based upon scientific exploitation of the human and natural populations, there is no doubt that
This is “big motive” operations. “Grand conspiracy” is the term.
Knives - and pointy sticks - are something to [?_[S] ake] seriously, and are present in almost every kitchen.
Fearing the weapon is not the answer - the motive and the agenda are more concerning. With 9/11 the case is very complex.
The fact is that human beings are mostly very peaceful - there are knives everywhere but yet there is mostly a relatively low level of lethal.
The same idea should be applied to most hazards - and considered. Do we need the novel “safety knife” for “murder-free kitchens”, with a special plastic guard to stop you from cutting things thicker than a piece of paper? Or perhaps is the knife with a complex safety fence that’s hard to clean is more dangerous, when you consider the jamming and “blister pack rage”, the price, the mould and the botulism, and the price of being alive in the first place : “what’s your time worth”?
Too often we are seeking to solve psychiatry and motive problems by controlling or regulating the material world.
You can’t take the violence out of a person by removing handle of the knife, or putting a keycode on the gun safe. The problems are political, not technological.
The sort of disarming is associated with bullying - the idea that by controlling the access to force, the forceful can bully the subordinates, and are justified in doing so to “keep the peace”. The “enforcer” mentality.
Other hazards are not in any way like a knife. Guns shoot you quicker than you can blink. With many hazards they are so violent and so undetectable that have no time to react. Landmines in the road is a bad idea - and we got those plenty of places. Landmines are a “cut above” normal pollution in terms of a long-term expense and generally problematic idea.
Lots of the implements of warfare constitute devastating environmental hazards - and while destruction is the point, blades are quite clean, and fighting a war by modifying the landscape is inferior - poisons and biological agents were frowned upon in antiquity, and many of the civilisational collapses of the past may have been the result of such measures, and we are still suffering from the fallout of many famous environmental disasters without adding Fukushima’s peculiar nuclear legacy to the list.
Problems won’t go away - overkill and legacy is a problem to avoid. However 9/11 happened, we can assume that the towers did not start the conflict - it’s something rather older and larger, and more politically distrubed.
The fact that issues persist and escalate, and that enragement is the primary hazard of conflict, Sun Tsu absolutely prohibits any forms of gross dishonour - there must be no killing or punishing of prisoners of war, or treating people with disrespect - simply because of the dire cost of so doing.
Everything is expensive in warfare, and nothing is more corrosive to an organisation than dishonour which leads to killing or disastrous outcomes for subordinates or leaders. Sun Tsu even disparages the necessity for orders and management of troops - his analysis is that when the fog of war descends, you can forget about that working.
War is really difficult and very destructive - his analysis is that the art is in the computing of the most honourable and most effective methods, and also a true appreciation for the marvellous “no holds barred” nature of warfare and the wilderness. People have it in them to battle, and those forced to sacrifice their lives will fight the hardest, down to their last breath. “Dying Ground” is to be avoided - and is the author of the descent into warfare. It will make people do things that are unimaginable - if they are in the process of being killed immediately, they become capable in a different way.
On the most profound Taoist perspective, all who are mortal experience the conflict of being on dying ground. It is essential, but uncivil.
Nobody can say what will threaten the peace or cause conflict and incivility to the point of destructive outcomes.
When that happens - that deficiency - for whatever reason - just the sight of mortality in the mirror is enough to make people do the most preposterous things.
The last plane that was brought down by all on board? That was “dying ground”, and the passengers were working not for selfish reasons, but for honour. They sacrified their lives to bring down the plane, and that lends a very severe edge of determination and horror to the whole thing.
War is everywhere. War is real. War is life and death, and civilisation is a moderation by consent placed upon this necessary consideration. For an artist of this sort, the evidence is everywhere.
Everything is connected by living and dying - the only difference between the landscape that’s traversible without conflict or the violation of consent is the “submerged” - the civil. At any moment a person could steal, or commit violence.
Enforcement is part of civil life - the military concerns are pre-eminent in civil society, and mark the accent and style of the “tea service”, the “gong-fu”, the methods of conduct define the civilisation - as do the consequences for uncivil behaviour.
The necessity for the segregation between enforcement and civic administration and diplomatic bodies is underlined by Sun Tsu - warfare has no time to speak before acting. It’s the timing that makes consent unlikely - and so many companies are managed with this militaristic parsimony of command and information sharing.
We are losing our civil institutions in the public domain in the cybernetic era - they are becoming instruments of capitalism and class warfare, and “the commons” doesn’t exist in cyberspace, aside from technology standards.
The internet does not have “parklands” of free use infrastructure, it has commercially owned services crowded into the industrial infrastructure domain, and the Internet is largely commercially-owned.
Academic networks and resources are a mixed bag, but the provisioning and design of the systems is primarily commercial.
The languages, the hardware, it’s all private industry. The peer-review process of any particular item of hardware is suspicious, largely uncertified and undocumented.
Scientific systems might adhere to a far more rigorous set of standards, and permit any manufacturer to implement the apparatus to a certifiable degree. Computer systems are proprietary and closed, and their manufacturing and preparation systems are scientific and openly published, but the devices themselves are not connected to a system which cites the references of the supply chain including research, review, criticism, and development. The laboratories which have prepared these systems have varied in their thoroughness, but the openness of publishing has not been secured as a cybernetic apparatus at the foundation of telecommunications. We still do not have systems for scientific knowledge - which can be used for publishing, reference or experiment.
Maybe we need to consider a platform for “GOVERNMENT SYSTEMS”, “UNIVERSITY SYSTEMS”, “PUBLISHING SYSTEMS”, “ADMINISTRATION SYSTEMS”, “PERSONAL SYSTEMS” and “SECURE FINANCIAL SYSTEMS” rather than the contemporary doctrine of “it’s all just binary” and “these are all Wintel/DARPA/IBM systems?”.
The codecs and signal architectures can be much more finely engineered than just “hole or nothole”, and there is a strong argument for segregated purposing and function - general purpose computing and shannon/nyquist signal processing theory affords a vast landscape for designers, but in the real world performance criteria are sought after and are hard to engineer in. Some systems prioritise quality, others prioritise timeliness, whereas others prioritise security and encryption. These design considerations become obscure hardware engineering juggling acts for developers buying mass produced mass-engineered commodity components with designed-in and officially-denied back doors and engineers’ overrides, techniques which can be leaked as software packages that can be used conveniently by “script kiddies”, and when leaked then belong to everybody or anybody inclined to use them. Security in the Windows 2000 era was not "just crap”, it was “unbelievable”.
IBM resented the transition away from “truly digital” punchcard technology, and the analogue nature of volatile semiconductors and magnetic media is incontrovertible, and comprises a shocking “open box” security breech invitation.
Even if there is no network interface, “everything is a thermoelectric aerial (iser/o-tron)”, or “the universe is a holographic particle accelerator” makes security, leakage, noise, corruption, error and crosstalk serious issues.
This means that the cybersecurity landcape is porous and converged as a singular ethernet TCP/IP technology with specific organisations at the “top of the food chain”, and the proliferation of general purpose instruction sets for scientific vector maths and tabulated entries. The calculator is the model for everything, and it results in computational flavoured errors and problems.
The analogue, cognitive and “chaos theory positive” components of the process have not been encouraged or explored as desirable features or engineering advantages for the most part, and an analogue modulation element passes a signal the fastest. The gridlike design of roman encampments predominates the administrative and layout thinking of commercial designers - and this is not only laborious but inefficient.
A towerblock is designed as volumetric spreadsheet computer. A “computing deparment” of the US military was laid out very much like a modern computer chip, but operated at a much slower and more emotionally volumetric organisation - these were vast aircraft hangars filled with seas of people, sitting in perfect rows, operating babbage devices like portable fruit machines.
Civility is not only practical, it is survival. The refraint from coercion and violence within members of the society - a feature a military corps possesses as knowledge and “esprit” – stylistic form.
A lot of the working conditions and economics of our era while ostensibly civilly oriented can be seen as being hostile and aggressive, coercive and forceful, tyrannical and non-consenting, dishonest and malicious.
The conditions of war persist and inform, especially on the Internet - which itself has got a secret legacy in the military which nobody is aware of - not even the individuals who worked on it. It is a very big subject, and information systems are not only formed from the known - they are formed from the occult - the unknown domains and artefacts of knowledge are considerable. Abstraction or “not knowing” is a powerful source of maneuverability. Formlessness is valuable. Freedom is important. Arbitrariness is coveted in every organisation as a form of personal power - and so it should be. A pencil can be moved arbitrarily to make any picture, a screen can be arbitrarily arranged to display any image.
The computer systems for big business and the military were highly compartmented and concerned with features rather than engineering integrity, or long-term foresight about serious design issues, and the nature of the clandestine is to speculate, not to know. The murkiness is the fuel, it’s what makes it interesting. It makes the contemporary platforms a bafflingly complicated game with very psychological properties based on general purpose and programmable user modalities.
Free market economics for novel products in a naive customer base is not the best method of conducting engineering research or laying the foundations for scientific industry best practise.
Whichever company sold more boxes is probably not the maker of the best computers for the future - and you can prove this analysis with statistics. IBM used to own the whole of the industry - in some decades their market share was above 90%.
Patents are licenses to exploit as a monopoly owner, in effect, and the regulatory system has been used to carve out vast market shares by anticompetitive process - a form of “fortification by IP”.
Ruthless patent lawsuits and carnivorous patent-holding companies are a primary force in the development of technology - the concern of the public good is so often secondary.
None of the cybersystems have been designed as an open platform for scientific publishing apart from the WWW - it works for a reason. It’s from CERN, and Tim Berners Lee’s Parents worked on the Ferranti Mk1 - these people understand that companies can change hands or be subjected to hostile takeover. Immortal values are different to cashflow and the financial quarter statements, and the investment in scientific progress as a public good is profound - private or secret science is a legal problem - responsibility is dependent upon the reasonable supply of evidence. Covert High Technology afford the opportunity to act and victimise with impunity. We don’t know how many technologies are concealed or have aspects of their function concealed, or how different technologies can be interlaced to produce a network effect. Human temperament has a lot of room for the excusing of malice - the “greater good” often doesn’t include the “less than great”. Unfettered power is the primary existential threat to humans - none of the technolgies are particularly dangerous unless they can be wielded without legal consequence.
The scientific platform of the future has to be mutual, and that consideration of open access made the early internet very functional and easy to adopt, at the cost of publishing revenues and the ability to prosecute those who publish disinformation of slander. Cyberbullying and harassment have become a serious opportunity for those with deeper pockets than the consumer, and the systems are considerably more fragile and more porous than many expect.
A territorial “cash cow” vision of technology development is pernicious - scientific knowledge that’s hidden from public scrutiny works more like voodoo - the guessing game that we must play about the top secret technology complex has obscure properties which will often prove more rebellious and peculiar than expected. Confusion is a resource. IT’s got material. We’ve all got questions.
At the beginning of the Boer War the UK had an intelligence corps of 13 people, whose task was surveillance of military installations to support military campaigns. A mapping operation. SOE employed a board games manufacturer to produce concealed objects to facilitate escape from the Gestapo - the TOP SECRET classification was not used to perform high technology research which is concealed from the scientific community. The concealment of Turing’s AI and curtailing the the development of “disorganised systems” and machine learning for over 80 years is frankly scandalous - especially when considering the cost of programming, programming errors, and the laborious nature of ASCII coding.
The public domain has been diminished enormously by the growth of realtime highly automated proprietary and impossible-to-audit supercomputer trading systems, and the companies which go with them, which have conglomerated the majority of the world’s businesses into dysfunctional “big five” sprawling corporations, who typically move the manufacturing offshore, seeking higher margins by seeking the lowest unit cost, with labour standards being far less strict in totalitarian-government labour exporters such as China or Vietnam.
This profile of credit advantage - 0% interest for big capital for over 25 years - and human rights abuse was only one of the constituted hazards of working in the WTC’s aggressive capital markets and heavy industrial consumer export economies - The towers of the Rockefeller Plaza were not “just any office block”. The pigeons “came home to roost” in spectacular style - and nobody has seen anything like it before or since. The amount of records and data loss was unparalleled - the SEC was unable to prosecute a single case for 4 years - the biggest case prior to 9/11 was the Enron scandal.
The WTC disaster is a unique item in history. A spectacle of grandiose and shocking proportions, which set the stage for today’s InQTel/Facebook Internet, and the back-end collaboration deals for wholesale data sharing with the big-tech captial partners industries are underestimated - one “data request” can cover “all the data on everyone”, and the ISP and data warehousing corporations are obliged and permitted to sell the data. It is a legal obligation to service intelligence community requests.
Long lasting fallouts, whether landmines or excessive top secret classification of research science, or unsolved crimes with long-standing corruption within companies or organisations, the effects have a very long tail.
The concern about exploitation is serious - the lack of obligation to tell the public about what’s going on is suspicous. Data is routinely gathered and disappeared, constituting powerful metadata for analysis and the potential to generate significant scientific knowledge - this is harvested and permitted to be used by whichever corporation was contracted to provide such services to the corporate contractor soup of “we’re not really the government” in the secret high security bunker complex, or isolated TOP SECRET installation in a remote place, or that well-camouflaged office or hospital. The capability to remain hidden from public view is a serious advantage, and a hazard. The deformation of scientific research in the public domain during the postmodern era has got consequences. Consciousness and spirituality is under-researched, and the secular materialist model of society belies the items of importance and magnificence - the soulfulness and subtlety of things is so often their virtue. Coarsening and grossening the measures makes for a brutalistic method. Quantity and Quality are distinguished.
More or less, persistent or incidental - the materialism viewpoint overemphasises the value of fortifications and brawn. Sun Tsu’s theory of warfare and peacetime is that the trappings of warfare - the weapons and the buildings - should disappear and appear as required - you don’t want a huge military infrastructure sitting around and costing money or cluttering up the civilian qualities of the environment - streets should not be designed specifically for warfare at the cost of pedestrian welfare - or peppered with landmines. You can have a serviceable road suitable for any use, and have no problems. The civil is the key to success, in Sun Tsu’s analysis. His vision and doctrine places a high priority on peace. Warfare is a gratuitous expense, a catastrophe like a forest fire. It must be taken seriously or it spreads. It’s like a disease of desperation and death.
All warfare methods that are uncivil are inappropriate according to Sun Tsu - when considering the matter from a politically divorced blow-by-blow basis, you cannot consider the enemy to be the enemy - people are just people - the perceived enemy won’t remain so if you resolve the conflict, therefore the stuff left over from the war will be a problem if it’s still killing people after the enmity has disappeared. Allegiances are meaningless on a material basis it’s all “just stuff”. The general works for the living things against the grim reaper. Evil itself is the enemy of the martial artist - not the people who are necessarily or consensually influenced by it.
Often simple is best, and simple is strong.
The problems with towers are very well known. Tower blocks are mainly a way of saving money on ground rent. Traditionally in China according to Feng Shui thinking, you don’t want to create a building which a person cannot escape from by free climbing - the limit for any transition is about five storeys according to “black hat feng shui”. A terraced or stepped architectural structure is much more traversable than a vertical polished surface. Highrise monolith buildings with mechanised infrastructure are notoriously unsafe.
It is the intention and the motives which must be questioned - the whole design modality and the holistic elements, as well as the depth and scale of the destruction, and the fallout. It’s not just about figuring out who hijacked the planes - the issues are diverse and severe.
The Asbestos Towers of the WTF / Rockefeller Plaza were racking up a gigantic global bodycount daily. There were specific consultancies the world over which graphed the profit margins of most of the major wars and political coups of the postwar era, trading arms and defense company shares, and the reinsurance premiums. Companies such as Control Risks and Marsh McLennan, with the “automotive and energy” soft touch hardball services for billion dollar capital interests.
This Rockefeller Plaza, was the Standard Oil “crown jewels of wall street”. As such, one must consider the complex the property of war criminals - most large corporations are so global, where there is war, and crime, these conglomerates are wherever the problems go.
One must not forget that the silicone revolution is about highly toxic chemicals wafted onto glass sheets. The “doping agents” which make a material “electrosensitive” - capable of diffusing and holding a piezoelectric charge.
Consider what else these companies might not have disclosed about the influence of “doping agents” and the atomic / nuclear / electromagnetic domain industries - which showed the potential to create new and uncontainable forms of radiation and radioactive dissipation - subatomic energisation travels through materials and disrupts the fabric of the crystal lattice of the universe’s state, as well as potentially put the fossil fuel industry out of business, - radiation decays - but some chemical toxins persist. Industrial assets and consumer populations have become captive subjects enabling some fairly dubious “frankestein science”, various “dusting systems” and “smart technologies” which can be tracked, traced and automated using pervasive airborne and space based surveillance systems. All of us in the anthropocene have identifiably altered chemistry - our bones will all be radioactive. The bikini atoll tests scattered radiation isotopes which are not found naturally. We’ve all been “changed” - the question of responsibility is legal. Deliberate harm or unconsenting experiment would carry a high penalty - and the allegations are strong that there is a huge underbelly of “the whole world is our petri dish” abuse of experimental high technology.
Are we all just Lab Rats here?
This “Typo in the Garden” is not just* “any” Lab Rat
(*are you sure you can trust Marks & Sparks)
Most chemicals can be electrostatically charged or subjected to alterants which operate on a subtle and relatively undetectable basis. Lots of life’s most important processes are extremely non-physical - from day to day most of the living processes in the organism do not involve substantial chemical changes to the apparatus - the molecules mostly remain sticking together, it’s the way the molecules move that’s important.
Subjecting biological materials to complex interferences which are based on intelligent modification is the area of electromagnetic biology, the nuclear physics perspective. There are many concerns which would not benefit from a scientific appraisal of safety, and class actions for the proliferation of dangerous and untested technology with little to no official scientific monitoring in the field - whether tobacco or pesticides, the companies defend their revenues from the burdensome financial consequences of technology fallout - the nuclear industry is particularly notorious for its safety lobbying.
Any agenda to perform mass experiments on the public is officially denied, but whistleblowers may come forwards to reveal that a lot of the advanced radiological technology has existed in some form since the 1930s or before - this is the “animal magnetism” or “mesmerism” area which was so notorious, and the fears about rayguns and particle beams as well as robotics and automation were well-founded.