9/11 and a social psychology experiment
On 9/11/01 America was psychologically locked down for 3 days by a grounding of flights while the world was barraged with the repeated image and sound of attack. After 3 days President Bush made a simple speech to the U.S.
In social psychology/advertising one creates conventional wisdom by repeating an idea through various mediums.
In the experiment, with the fear of attack in play the people are told by a trusted authority that they are good and the attacker evil. In 3 days the subjects relinquished their previous animosities and create a unified animosity against the new enemy (Social Psychology professor Metro State College, Denver 1970), One thing is for sure, judging from America’s reaction, the process works great.
This letter has not been edited.
John,
Excellent letter. However it will be lost on most people without critical thinking skills...
Posted by Karl Cheney on October 4, 2007 02:14 PMWow, your "Metro State" professor was a modern day Einstein...
Perhaps the American people finally came to realization that there are large numbers of people around the world who don't like them or the liberties they enjoy because of the freedoms and liberties they enjoy.
So which is it? Is Bush the village idiot or the evil master mind of all these conspiracies and master plans to control the world?
What a stupid "letter"...
Speaking of lying, how come the right wingnuts abhorred the lies that clinton told, but are willing to accept, as if it was truth from heaven, the lies told to start the iraq war, and the lies being told to foment war against iran. Any of you right wingnuts want to answer that?
Oh, I know...the lies of the judeo-christian supremists are easier to swallow.
2:19,
The dumbest line I'ver ever heard from the right is "They hate us for our freedoms and liberties" Ya, they just can't stand that, it probably has nothing to do with our forien policy and military bases on their holy lands, imposing ourselves upon their customs and religion, yep it's gotta be because we are free and have liberties to enjoy. Talk about a stupid response 2:19.
Anyone willing to buy the line of hogwash that people hate us for our freedom and liberties has no business calling anyone or anything stupid.
Posted by flimflam on October 4, 2007 02:35 PMKarl, here's a quarter, go by a clue. Oh great "critical" thinker...
Posted by on October 4, 2007 02:36 PMwow a social psychology liberal professor giving great wisdom to those willing to accept everything they said as the truth. did he pass the pipe around also
Posted by on October 4, 2007 02:49 PM2:36,
Actually I need more than a quarter because Bush has devalued our dollar so much they cost more now. Conservatives do not like education, notice how 2:49 immediately assumed he was a liberal becasue he was a professor of psychology. Apparently any educated professor is a liberal. And yes I consider myself a critical thinker.
Posted by Karl Cheney on October 4, 2007 02:57 PManyone who is educated is going to be a liberal. Moderate at the very least but certainly not a conservative
Posted by Obvious on October 4, 2007 03:07 PMThe "liberal" association was a no brainer. Anything that far out of reality had to come from a liberal.
Keep drinking the koolaid. Click your heals 3 times, repeating, "there's no place like home"...
Posted by on October 4, 2007 03:09 PMA twoofer with a vocabulary is still a twoofer. Take off the tin foil hat and join the real world. No airflights for 3 days does not equal being locked down.
Posted by Late Night Radio on October 4, 2007 03:11 PMLate night Radio,
Ever taken a psychology class? For that matter any of you slamming this letter taken a psychology class? Perhaps if you did you would understand it is the study of the human mind and it's functions under certain conditions in a given context.
Gobbly-gook! Bush is simply the "DEVIL", with a very funky "sulphur" smell. He and USSC Affirmative Action (AA) Judge are also UCMJ-felons; AWOL, deserters, and guilty of illegal separation and duscharge). Bush, Blair, Cheney, Lott, Powell, Rice, and Hastert, should be handed over to an international court of law, convicted of war crimes, and given the send-off, we (world)had planned for Adolf Hitler.
Posted by draftdodgingisntafamilyvalue on October 4, 2007 03:23 PMObvious,
When you grow up you may understand just how stupid that staement was.
Posted by truthy on October 4, 2007 03:37 PMAh me.
drafdodgingisntafamilyvalue makes me sigh with longing for the old Compuserve twit filter. One click and all that person's messages are invisible.
Most of the posters here are communicating ideas whether sensible or not. Your own opinion will be the judge of which is which.
ddinafv is merely cut/pasting his diatribe over and over. Not that I read him any more. First line or the everpresent UCMJ-felons is enough to save me the time. Just wish I didn't have to see that much.
So, what would the professor have said about the US reaction after Pearl Harbor? That Americans were being paranoid when confronted with an Impirial Japanese attack across the Pacific?
Perhaps it's coincidence, but when my country and fellow citizens are attacked and murdered, I tend to be a little uppity about it regardless of how many days the planes are grounded. You may find this baffling, but when a large group of armed angry people state that they want to kill Americans, go about killing Americans, and then celebrate killing Americans, many Americans get upset. It doesn't take a conspiracy, social experiment, or other drek to get people angry at people who are killing them.
Posted by Neal5x5 on October 4, 2007 04:45 PMJohn Hoffmann
Most of psychology is a crock and most psychiatrists need a psychiatrist. That means the content of your letter is to be discounted as intelligent and you Sir may also be hitting the couch here real soon if you keep writing such Baloney!
Posted by Perfectly Clear on October 4, 2007 05:38 PMHoly Batman, if an unnamed professor from a state college said it forty years ago, it must be true. They must have been a real memorable person to not even be worth the trouble of posting his/her name. I bet they even actually performed this highly unethical experiment to be able to teach their students about it, rather than just spouting untested hypotheses. Or are you referring to the famous Stanford prison experiment, which is similar but not the same as what you are trying to say? You may not know this, but most research is kept on file, is there a reason you chose not to provide a reference to this "famous experiment? Aren't you "educated" types trying to argue that this is social "science", which should be peer-reviewed and in the body of literature? Please provide the reference, unlike what some posters may think, a critical mind looks at the data and then makes conclusions, they don't just accept other's interpretations of data.
Posted by on October 4, 2007 05:56 PMI remember a wise professor saying that when others resort to insults and name-calling, you've struck a nerve.
I would assume that in the days following Pearl Harbor, shock and outrage also unified America. The biggest difference is that the Germans and Japanese clearly emerged as an imminent danger to our country.
A group of terrorist thugs pulled off a horrific attack on 9/11, but the failure to capture Bin Laden and the phony build-up to the attack on Iraq have left us divided and questioning the sacrifice of thousands of American troops and tens of thousands of civilian deaths.
Posted by Michael R on October 4, 2007 05:59 PMMichael R.
Nice post, your professor obviously had to be a liberal because education has a liberal bias. Bush wasted what could have been one of the most Unified times the US has seen since Pearl Harbor. But Bush had his own agenda and it was a bigger pay off to hit Iraq and control the oil flow, Much more strategerie in that, so as usual the Bush admin. uses a tragedy to further an agenda. I do find it interesting how the Bush supporters don't care at all about getting Bin Laden but they sure were excited about Saddam.
Posted by Karl Cheney on October 4, 2007 06:32 PMOh. well, no big check to Metro State this year. The inmates are in control.
Posted by Hank on October 4, 2007 06:33 PMKarl, you were mostly right, a few knew what the letter writer was saying.
Are most anonymous posters men?
I`ll bet they are.
Posted by Sharon B. on October 4, 2007 08:02 PMSo 9/11 was a psychology experiment? That's pretty good conspiracy theorizing.Here's more:All the flaming of and by liberals and conservatives on every blog everywhere is really done by a small group sponsored by the Pope, Osama bin Laden, and the Premier of China, assisted by Raul Castro,Vicente Fox,and Hugo Chavez.Their objective is to make us fight with each other-and they're succeeding!
Posted by Jimminy on October 4, 2007 08:53 PM"locked down for 3 days by a grounding of flights while the world was barraged with the repeated image and sound of attack".
Who repeated these images and sound of attack? I assume he is talking about the press/media of the world. I might be wrong?!
"confining people on a base for 3 days while producing conventional wisdom that they are under attack."
I know I wasn't "confined" or anyone else I know. Is he saying that we were not under attack or at least not by evii people?
Posted by on October 4, 2007 09:16 PMthe post at 9:16 PM is from brain, sorry it was a remembered name and I didn't realize that it was now gone.
Posted by brain on October 4, 2007 09:23 PMno possibility of reasonable intelligent discussion of differing ideas when all anyone wants to do is call names & insult anyone who disagrees with them
Posted by Carol on October 5, 2007 08:07 AMI'm not sure we should bother responding to anyone who doesn't at least post a name or some sort of title. If someone is going to astroturf, at least make them do the work of putting in "Your name" and "E-mail address".
People need to stick to the story and the facts, not resort to name calling. That proves you have no facts to back up your opinion.
Posted by Roger on October 5, 2007 11:24 AM"People need to stick to the story and the facts, not resort to name calling. That proves you have no facts to back up your opinion."
Saying it's so doesn't mean that it is. Would you kindly offer your proof of this statement, I really don't see how someone being a rude jerk "proves" anything about what knowledge they may or may not possess. Is there some sort of current fad about assuming that one's interpretation MUST be the only one?
Posted by on October 5, 2007 01:18 PMDemocrats lust for the United Soviet Socialist Republic of America, where all of the bankrupt dreams of the Left erupt like maggots. Anyone who believes the government could conspire to keep the media tuned into 9/11 for three days while the Bush administration concocted a tale of deceit should change his drugs. The media obey no one--unless it's a leftie in 1960's drag.
Posted by Richard J Sides on October 5, 2007 01:40 PMDemocrats lust for the United Soviet Socialist Republic of America, where all of the bankrupt dreams of the Left erupt like maggots. Anyone who believes the government could conspire to keep the media tuned into 9/11 for three days while the Bush administration concocted a tale of deceit should change his drugs. The media obey no one--unless it's a leftie in 1960's drag.
Posted by Richard J Sides on October 5, 2007 01:40 PMDemocrats lust for the United Soviet Socialist Republic of America, where all of the bankrupt dreams of the Left erupt like maggots. Anyone who believes the government could conspire to keep the media tuned into 9/11 for three days while the Bush administration concocted a tale of deceit should change his drugs. The media obey no one--unless it's a leftie in 1960's drag.
Posted by Richard J Sides on October 5, 2007 01:40 PMNeil5x5: YOU ARE PROOF POSITIVE THAT the letter writer was correct and the experiments and their results were quite valuable in the success of the Bushies in 'this post-9/11 world'.
Posted by Sheila on October 5, 2007 02:01 PMI had read an article sometime last week explaining how the masses could be psycologically influenced just as effectively as a single person.
And the repeated showings of the planes crashing, and the repeated statements that Muslim extremists were responsible was part of the method of persuading the masses that what they were told about 9/11 & what they saw was 100% true fact. Sorry I don't have the link at hand to share.
I believed the whole administration story for almost 2 years after it happened. Then, while searching for news on the 'next' potential event, I began reading many different opinions and articles about the whole 9/11 event. After reading thousands of articles from both sides of the argument over the past 5 years, I have come to the conclusion that 19 idiots who couldn't have flown a Cessna, let alone land one, could never have flown those jets that effectively. Also, I have never seen any credible evidence of a crashed 757 in the Pentagon. My conclusion: the whole story about HOW 9/11 happened is a lie. And I don't hate Bush, I was dumb enough to vote for him twice. Does that make me a conspiracy theorist. Do I need to take off, or put on my tinfoil hat?
The media was complicit as well. How else could you explain a major international news network (BBC) reporting that WTC7 had fallen, 20 minutes before it did, even though it had not been hit by a plane and only had a few small fires inside. Why did the owner say on tv that he "told them to pull it"? Why did they stop recovery attempts after they recovered all the gold bullion? Why were all the verticle beams just long enough to fit on flatbed trailers to be hauled away quickly? Why did some cars paint melt off of them while adjacent cars were undamaged? How could 1 clean passport of one of the alleged hijackers be found on the street, but the black boxes were never found? Why were all the network shots of the towers from so far away? Why did dozens of firemen report hearing many explosions in rapid succession just before the towers fell. Why were so many firemen told to shut up or they would be fired and lose their pensions? I could go on and on. Get my drift?
RP McMurphy
Sounds like you were and Rosie O"Donnell had the same Fantasy dream. I hear that Lunesta will do that. Maybe the terrorists took some and were sleep flying those airplanes.
Better stick to warm milk before bedtime.
Posted by on October 5, 2007 05:11 PMI've asked it way too many times of you conspiracy theorists without getting an answer, and I don't really expect one now, but could you please provide a reference to some physics research which supports the idea of a controlled demolition? And I don't mean one with words and bright pictures, I mean math. Cause I seem to recall that the NIST found no evidence to support the demolition theory, and, no, I don't buy that all those scientists were bribed by the Bush administration.
Posted by on October 5, 2007 06:25 PMForgive them Lord, for they know not what they do.
Show them the questions, although they refuse to ask.
Provide them with light, so that they might see.
Thank you for the truth
And please help them answer the questions they have been tasked with
Jimminy asked ” So 9/11 was a psychology experiment?”
Yep, the technical term is a “natural experiment”.
Look it up.
Hank said ” Oh. well, no big check to Metro State this year.”
Whereas you usually send them a big check every year?
Ha, right.
Why are Conservatives so scared?