It's absolutely certain that the man on the right is the Lee Harvey Oswald accused of killing President Kennedy, and it is equally certain that the man on the left is the figure in the doorway of the Altgens photo. And it is also plainly obvious that they are wearing the same clothes. The very idea that Billy Lovelady could have been dressed the same way on that day and looked that much like Oswald is utterly and completely preposterous. It represents a stunning degree of irrationality especially considering that this is the 21st century, and the year is 2014. How much knowledge has been accumulated, and how much rational thought did it take to get us to where we are today, scientifically and technologically? Yet, the un-reason involved in refusing to recognize Oswald as Doorman is staggering to behold.
On the website of the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, there is an article by a psychologist, Frances T. Shure, part of a series of articles actually, about why good people become silent-or worse- about 9/11, meaning 9/11 truth, the fact that we are being lied to about what happened. Obviously, those buildings didn't fall because of office fires, though that is what NIST tells us.
Ms. Shure:
"When we are faced with information that is too uncomfortable to accept, we reject this information outright or we minimize its importance. This is the psychological defense mechanism known as denial."
Although Ms. Shure was writing about 9/11 truth, it applies just as much to JFK truth. The thought that the US government murdered President Kennedy and has been lying about it for 50 years is too painful and too distressing for many people to bear. So, they go into denial about it. And that denial extends to the image realm; they will deny what their eyes can see, like Oswald in the doorway.
Ms. Shure:
"We resort to denial to avoid cognitive dissonance, that uncomfortable and sometimes disturbing feeling of losing our emotional equilibrium when faced with new information that challenges our worldview, or when we hold beliefs that are contradictory to known facts. The discomfort motivates us to either change our behavior, change our cognition, or justify our behavior by acquiring a secondary cognition. This dynamic is common to us all."
"The term “cognitive dissonance” was coined by social psychologist Leon Festinger and his colleagues.[2] Festinger infiltrated a small UFO cult,[3] led by a Chicago housewife, Dorothy Martin, who had experimented with automatic or channeled writing. To protect her privacy, the study gave her the alias of “Marion Keech.” The members of this in-group were informed through Keech’s channeled, automatic writing that the world would end through flooding before dawn on December 21, 1954. However, this small group of believers, according to her channeled writing, would be rescued from this apocalypse at a specific time by aliens in a flying saucer from a planet named 'Clarion.'"
Leon Festinger"Social psychologists Festinger et al. accurately predicted the behavior of this group when the aliens did not show up. When at the appointed time there was no sign of any alien, the cognitive dissonance (tension, fear) created by the challenged belief (a sacred myth for this small group) was resolved by another automatic-writing message from Keech that God had spared Earth from destruction due to the light spread by this little group of true believers. Thus, a secondary cognition was created to mitigate the cognitive dissonance caused by the disconfirmed belief. As Festinger and colleagues predicted, the group initiated intensive proselytizing, rather than responding more logically by reconsidering the validity of the original belief (changing cognition) and then acting accordingly (changing behavior)."
"The followers of Keech may have been severely psychologically wounded people who needed to believe they would be saved. Although most of us would not have been swayed by a Keech-type figure with such a delusion, we might well be swayed by another charismatic leader skilled in more subtle use of manipulation and/or with a less obvious delusion."
"When 9/11 evidence contradicts the official account (a sacred myth of our culture), we observe that some people try to resolve the tension of cognitive dissonance by devising secondary beliefs as did the Marion Keech followers. One ardent George W. Bush supporter enthusiastically reported to me that since she could no longer deny the reality of controlled demolition of the three WTC buildings, she had an explanation: I know how this happened. During the reconstruction of the WTC [North] Tower after the 1993 bombing, explosives were planted in the Twin Towers by members of Bill Clinton’s cabal.”
"But hold on. From the other side of the political aisle, a woman said to me, “Obama surely did not know about this 9/11 evidence before he was elected.[4] Maybe he knows now, but he can't say anything to us. If the country knew the truth about 9/11, there would be chaos; the stock market would plummet. He would probably like to tell us, but he cannot.”
"Devising secondary beliefs to attempt to reconcile cognitive dissonance is common, and so is having trust and naïve faith in presidents. It behooves us, whether or not we are 9/11 activists, to recognize the importance of our own goal of becoming genuinely autonomous, individuated humans, so that we become more psychologically secure, and therefore less vulnerable to these unconscious reactions. We must also cultivate a discerning mind, so that when we encounter evidence that does not support an “official story” or what a charismatic leader may tell us, we can find the courage to speak out with solid information."
"Standing alone with a radically different opinion in a group of one’s like-minded peers—especially when challenging a sacred myth—can often take far greater courage than confronting those perceived as a shared enemy. Our fears of rejection, alienation, and ultimately banishment from those we love and value are probably among the greatest human fears we have. As we will see in the Asch conformity experiments described next, these types of fears might have caused the behavior of the subjects, who yielded their own correct perceptions to the wrong answers of their peers."
RC: Likewise, the belief that Oswald killed Kennedy is a sacred myth of our culture. It is part of our state religion- and statism is definitely a religion. And the pressure to accept official doctrine of this religion is enormous. Really, it's like a litmus test: if you are a loyal American- if you are one of us- you believe the official story of JFK and the official story of 9/11. Of course, there are plenty of other official state stories, but those two may be the most highly perched.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.