Anything by Thomas Sowell
Great! Let’s discuss:
Anyone wanting to know the truth would not behave in ways that ensure they never will.
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).
I’m Not Out to “DESTROY” Sowell
Quite the contrary! Stick around — you’ll see. That his followers instantly assume bad motives (issuing rapid-fire ridicule for satisfaction in full): Is in gross breach of the standards he espouses.
Ya know, like this gem . . .
America lost its way long ago (and you’re right about how some of that happened — and same goes for Sowell). But all that pales in comparison to the aftermath of 9/11. Every major problem in America was exponentially exacerbated because of that fiasco for the ages — which Sowell helped sell and got off scot-free.
They all did . . .
As they always do (Democrats & Republicans alike):
In a culture increasingly comfortable with ease, wrong is increasingly rationalized in the name of right. If only you could see the astronomical waste of time, energy, and money on matters that make you think you’re making progress. Never mind the damage you do along the way. Thanks to the internet and the cable clans paving the way for the onslaught of the utterly absurd — everything is poisoned by perception and hypocrisy now.
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
even 20 years later
Half the country still can’t get this straight:
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.
You’ve probably heard of yellowcake — how about uranium hexafluoride? Does calling someone a “Bush hater” strike you as a valid counter to that question? Never mind this story goes straight to the top with who’s in the White House right now — on very specific culpability to boot.
How so? How I’d love to live in a world where you’d ask not out of party-line pursuits — but because it’s on the trail to the truth.
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?
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:
Following Facts Where They Lead
“Said so and so”? . . . that’s one helluva trip you took there, Mr. Sowell.
Stirring Defense!
Professional know-it-alls throw 99 items of shit on the wall to make damn sure you never discuss what matters most. And how eagerly you comply with the contempt they conditioned you to have for anyone exposing the truth and how they gutted it with your help.
On what basis?
When you care more about mythologizing the man for promoting principles than abiding by them — the burden of basis has no bearing on faith-based belief. Wars have started that way . . .
The same wishful thinking that’s utterly oblivious to the counterproductive nature of endlessly beating issues into the ground in entirely transactional tactics. 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).
My idea takes this problem and turns it into a solution. If you’ve got a better idea on how to turn the tide . . .
I’m all ears — you’re not!
I’m sure it’s intoxicating to amass a following and feel like you’re making a difference. But I’m gonna weigh your impact partly as a reflection of your community: How people behave, not what they believe. If you can’t get that right, I don’t care how big your following gets — you’re taking this nation nowhere.
What’s more, you’re making matters worse and being rewarded for it. If you think you’re making progress because of ever-increasing attention to your concerns:
I suggest you reconsider
I’m going to show you how to fix the problem you don’t even know you have. And I assure you — the gains you get now pale in comparison to what awaits you. As Loury once called my writing “brilliant,” was “honored by it,” and “blown away” by my site and signed up — I suggest you refrain from assumptions. And if you were abiding by the principles they preach, should I really have to remind you of that?
You think I just came up with this imagery out of thin air?
Maybe when you’re done talking race, woke, and CRT for the ten-thousandth time — we can consider approaching problems in a more multi-dimensional manner? Just a thought!
Alas, Loury wasn’t too keen on the truth when I took his hero to task:
Sowell is a great man because of his books. I stand by that. you want to refute his books — go ahead. I’m listening.
— Glenn Loury
You confine his record to a box of beliefs that suit you — and stand by that.
How noble of you
So the rules of argument you espouse on a daily basis don’t apply to you and your ever-growing audience of dittoheads. You called my writing “brilliant” in I Don’t Do Slogans on The Yellow Brick Road — and you’re “blown away” by my site: As long as I don’t challenge you to live up to the principles you preach when it comes at a price.
Got it!
Sowell sold out to sell those books you stand by — and I wrote “Water is Not Wet — And I Stand by That” with the likes of Loury in mind.
You said they had no argument against your [R]ebuttal to Brown University’s letter on racism in the United States. Neither do you on your National Treasure. Instead of listening and learning on things you know nothing about — you let pride consume you. Maybe you don’t know Sowell as well as you thought you did:
And heaven forbid you hold him to the same standards pushing your popularity. Loury wasn’t about to look at undeniable evidence warranting that he change his mind:
So he changed the rules . . .
Right on cue | Never fails
Living up to his hero who did the same:
A Conflict of Visions
And then some . . .
That the reaction is not to think it through, not to question, not to assemble facts, not to make arguments — but instead to wave banners and spout slogans such that you could hardly distinguish what they were doing from a manifesto that would come out of [does it matter?]
— Glenn Loury, Tucker Carlson Today
When the context suits you, such words are solid gold. What you do when it doesn’t — determines the worth of your word.
Ripping on woke is all the rage . . .
And outrage industries of dish it but can’t take it — would talk about race and responsibility till the end of time. But heaven forbid we have a single conversation about war and responsibility.
Consequences matter or should matter more than some attractive or fashionable theory.
— Thomas Sowell
I couldn’t agree more
Except there were no consequences on the fiasco for the ages driven by this manifesto: The outcome of which fashioned a culture of no consequences.
At what point does it dawn on you and your beloved genius — that blind loyalty to that cause would be colossally counterproductive to your others? I’m not brilliant and I figured that out all by myself. The Right treating Bush like the Second Coming of Christ — set the stage for the rise of the Rock Star they spent the next 8 years railing against.
That doesn’t strike me as sound strategy. Dumb, dishonest, and delusional wars don’t either.
Nice work!
Sowell’s hailed as a folk hero for calling out problems he helped create (and takes no responsibility for any of it) — which flies in the face of the principles upon which he’s put on a pedestal. This man has a patently obvious history of hypocrisy & lies — and yet he’s worshipped as some kind of saint-like Sherlock Holmes.
Even in the most unsophisticated years of my youth, I would have never bought something so impossibly simplistic as Sowell’s “said so and so” — and the Right’s ubiquitous belief that “everybody believed Iraq had WMD.”
My mind would never allow me to accept something so easily (thank God).
I don’t know how people find the path of least resistance so satisfying — as I love the demands of difficulty and discernment. To not step up my game in the midst of opportunity or challenge — would be tantamount to treason upon my very existence.
Sowell’s disciples have no interest in such a demanding way of life — as defending the faith is all that matters in the religious-like following around Sowell. They spread the gospel by mindlessly countering with boilerplate beliefs that have no bearing on the issues in question.
What works with them would never fly with me.
If you oversimplify an issue that clearly calls for careful examination, I know you’re hiding something. If you constantly complain about the other side and defend your own at every turn — you’re not playing by the rules you rail on others for failing to follow. Occasional criticism of your own party doesn’t qualify as having a history faithful to objective scrutiny.
For all their brilliance you broadcast, you sure aren’t learning much. The Yellow Brick Road is the path of America’s predictably counterproductive pursuits.
Politicians & pundits are not gods . . .
When you treat them as such — you do a cosmic disservice to them, yourselves, the country, and the world as well. Oh my God, somebody’s not who they claim to be — that’s never happened before! With the mountain of childish & spectacularly stupid shit I’ve seen in defense of Sowell — you’d think his disciples really were born yesterday:
Automatons who act as though they have no understanding of how to process anything that doesn’t instantly compute in their favor.
A lot of that goin’ around!
A lie can travel halfway around the world before the truth can get its boots on.
That quote’s been around in various forms for over 300 years (evidently the original being from 1710):
Falsehood flies, and the Truth comes limping after it; so that when Men come to be undeceiv’d, it is too late; the Jest is over, and the Tale has had its Effect.
I know the feeling — all too well
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.
Behold my “hatred” of Thomas Sowell
Out of 31 tubes in subsequent testing, only one was successfully spun to 90,000 RPM for 65 minutes — which the C.I.A. seized on as evidence in their favor.
One D.O.E. 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
That sounds worthy of consideration — don’t ya think?
Not to Sowell’s camp
And their kin who came before them:
It is as though with some people — those who most avidly embrace the “we are right” view — have minds that are closed from the very get-go, and they are entirely incapable of opening them, even just a crack.
There is no curiosity in them. There are no questions in their minds. There are no “what ifs?” or “maybes.”
— Laura Knight-Jadczyk
Believing things that have no bearing on reality has become a plague across America — erosion of reason that took decades of denying the undeniable. Systematic oversimplification has taken over to the point where inconvenient correlations are condemned as convoluted. And any attempt to have a conversation on issues that clearly call for careful consideration — is hijacked by baseless beliefs beaten into your brain as bedrock fact.
The Right wants the Left and the black community to get its act together on matters deeply woven into the fabric of America’s long history of brutality and disgrace: Slavery, Jim Crow, lynchings, murder, decades of civil rights violations, questionable shootings, and so on.
While the Right won’t even look at the material properties of a tube. What’s wrong with that picture — and this one?
Hmm, so the dimensions exactly match the tubes used in Iraq’s history of manufacturing the Nasser-81 mm artillery rocket (a reverse-engineered version of the Italian Medusa)
“To learn to ask: ‘Is that true?’” . . .
Maybe there’s something to what she just said. Let me think about it. That’s interesting. Maybe I should change my mind.’” . . .
When is the last time you can honestly remember a public dialogue — or even a private conversation — that followed that useful course?
Sowell’s a well-mannered guy on the whole and his fanatical followers act like animals to “honor” him. I can’t imagine that’s the legacy he wants to leave behind. I don’t know much about him — but I’m betting he’d be embarrassed by what’s happening in his name.
The tragicomedy of it all . . .
Is that if you took the time to understand what I’m doing and acted on my idea, he’d leave a legacy for the ages. And it damn sure wouldn’t look anything like this:
On evidence involving artillery rockets and material properties of centrifuge rotors — the apostles of Sowell smugly cite his books on economics, race, and whatnot: Anything to glorify him as they abandon any notion of accountability:
Butchering his bedrock beliefs as they dance in delight behind their force field of fallacy.
These people do nothing but question my motives, mock my site, and assault my character — then proudly post quotes of Sowell looking stately as he condemns the very thing they’re doing.
- Repeat slogans: “Everybody believed Iraq had WMD”
- Question people’s motives: Bush hater, Bush basher, Bush Derangement Syndrome, Plamegate & plenty more. Adding to the arsenal of childish crap to continue the tradition: Snowflake, Libtard, Libturd, Cupcake, TDS, Demon-crat, Democrat Party
- Bold assertions: Russians said so, British said so, Bill Clinton said so, Leaders of both parties said so . . .
No coherent argument, Repeat slogans, Vent their emotions, Question people’s motives, Bold assertions . . .
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 treated with nothing but contempt for 20 years of telling undeniable truth of mathematical certainty (of world-altering consequence, no less).
If you don’t like my illustrations, go read the bone-dry reports for yourselves: And I’ve got plenty more material to add to your reading list. But that takes work — and why bother when you can just ridicule those who did it for you.
One picture is worth a thousand words:
When you don’t want the pictures and you don’t want the words — what would you have me do?
And once I did it
We both know your next move . . .
When protecting your interests, America’s into the newfangled ways of “argument” — where you furiously fire off some fashionable form of “You’re wrong!” and dish it all day long: Insisting on “affirmation independent of all findings” (borrowing from Peck who borrowed from Buber).
I never got on board.
You’re wrong — and here’s why
That’s the discipline — to have a work ethic in the way you think. Without “here’s why,” you’re just whistlin’ Dixie.
As with everything else in broadcasting beliefs these days — we have what I call the Critical Thinking Crowd. These people take endless delight in flooding the internet with claims about their immaculate critical thinking skills:
But don’t do any of this . . .
It’s time to start solving problems instead of endlessly talking about them and getting nowhere. And to do that — first we gotta clear the clutter that’s crippled this country. To do that, you don’t go after everything, you go after one thing that ties to everything:
And you do it by holding one man to his own standards:
8. Old information at the beginning of the sentence, new information at the end.
— Steven Pinker
How do you feel about no new information — anywhere?
In what parallel universe does this even remotely reflect anything like that:
A couple of 2-minute reads that never even mention the tubes that took us to war (or anything else of substance on this endless saga of absurdity). If you only apply the principles you preach when it serves your interests — they’re just empty claims on a cup and a meaningless mantra touted on a T-shirt.
Touting technicalities as “facts” doesn’t get it done: Especially when you make a living selling slogans and catchy quotes about careful consideration.
Everything that guy just said is bullshit!
And here’s why . . .
On a matter involving war in the Middle East in the aftermath of 9/11 — the stakes don’t get much higher. For a Maverick who’s worshipped for following the facts — wouldn’t he take the trail to where they matter most?
As in the marquee evidence used to manufacture this fraud?
I did — Sowell didn’t
If evidence claimed as components for building a nuclear bomb isn’t worthy of consideration, what is? Which one below looks like he’s on point? You know the answer — and anyone with an atom of objectivity would know by now that’s something’s not right.
But you find it’s with me . . .
[As] I’m not and never have been familiar
A force field of familiarity
And about that “mudslinging”:
Fact
truth verifiable from experience or observation
If you have a history of hypocrisy and lying — you are a hypocrite and a liar. If you don’t like being called those things, don’t do those things. But so typical of the times — nothing has meaning anymore.
Calling criticism “mudslinging” is just somethin’ to say to escape scrutiny.
And the irony is: I’ve received almost nothing but mudslinging for decades — by people who cry foul with counterfeit claims on what they do for real. And let’s face it: You need it to be mudslinging, because if it’s not — your binary beliefs are gonna fall apart.
Believe it or not, the best way to serve your interests is to first and foremost — hold your own accountable. If you wanna make the opposition look bad, try looking good.
If you wanna have the moral high ground, try earning it:
The moral high ground, in ethical or political parlance, refers to the status of being respected for remaining moral, and adhering to and upholding a universally recognized standard of justice or goodness.
The second you shun evidence that doesn’t fit the narrative you want — you have contaminated your judgment. Pay no mind to how many times we go backwards by the means in which you move forward. And there is no measure for how preposterous it is that people who can’t even connect the dots on This Does Not = That:
Have the bottomless gall to belittle me on making correlations in three dimensions while you wallow in one.
“Wut?”
In my youth, I could not have imagined a world in which even people with PhDs would act like imbeciles in the face of information they don’t instantly understand. That an entire country could take satisfaction in insulting your own intelligence on a daily basis just astounds me.
Adulthood is about spending the time to think before talking . . . Adulthood is about controlling our emotions, learning to take a deep breath and modulating our moments of anger or frustration.
“Wut?” — reflects a society tuning in to people who perpetuate problems under the pretense of seeking to solve them. Some are sincere (or at least started out that way). But they all lose their way in the adulation and rewards from feeding the frenzy. I coined Star Wars Syndrome to capture the plague of allowing nostalgia to create the illusion that a movie is far better than it actually is. In and of itself, wildly exaggerating the quality of movies is harmless.
But when it becomes habit in how you see everything: Either gushing with over-the-top praise or seething with over-the-top scorn:
That’s a plague!
Echo chambers across social media worship channel hosts as “National Treasures” — treating them like they’re some of the greatest minds to ever live. At the helm of these cesspools of certitude — are people who peddle repeatedly rehashed insight their followers praise like they split the atom. To be sure, some of it is insightful. But these “geniuses” are so full of wisdom that they’re oblivious to how they’re feeding the very problems they’re ostensibly trying to solve.
Isaac Newton and Einstein were brilliant — partisan hacks and high-minded influencers telling you what you wanna hear every goddamn day, are not.
You know what they say: Fail, fail again, fail better, succeed
They say other things too – like “work smarter, not harder.” By all means, keep trying — but examine the efficacy of your efforts and adjust accordingly.
This nation has no such notion . . .
Like many alternatives, however, it was psychologically impossible. Character is fate, as the Greeks believed. Germans were schooled in winning objectives by force, unschooled in adjustment. They could not bring themselves to forgo aggrandizement even at the risk of defeat.
— Barbara Tuchman
Unschooled in Adjustment
Then there’s this jazz:
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.
A rare response of reasonableness on Twitter (or anywhere, for that matter):
Your documentary was ahead of its time
I may be a nobody, but this nobody was way ahead of everybody. There’s nothing earth-shattering about my impeccable track record for the truth and seeing the lay of the land: I just see things as they are, not as I imagine them to be. 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
Taking on the entire country by myself is worlds away from what everyone else is doing. Explaining America’s decline over decades of delight in the Gutter Games of Government — is apples & oranges as it gets when compared to the transactional nature of news and social-media norms. Understanding how seemingly unrelated events impact one another takes time and effort to digest.
Conventional means have no chance of breaching the envelope of intransigence around armies of unreachables in the trench warfare of our times. Everyone is trying to plow through problems when you should be going around them. That you don’t have any ideas on how to do that is one thing. That you don’t listen to someone who does — is something else entirely.
The rules have changed, as in — there are none. By failing to recognize that, you cannot adapt to deal with it.
I’m not looking for followers, I’m looking for leaders
I’ve always hated Twitter and when I’m done doing what I gotta do — I’m never goin’ back. Until then, I’m sending out a certain set of messages looking for intelligent life (fiercely independent thinkers who want to solve problems — not endlessly talk about them).
Think of my signals as a poor man’s SETI:
Going by the galaxies filled with rock stars of reasoning across the social media universe — I should have no shortage of people eager to examine my idea and discuss how we could improve on it and proceed.
You tell me where those people are and I’ll gladly send out my signals to them.
If you’re not interested in hearing me out and having meaningful conversation — we have nothing to talk about and I wish you well. I’d just ask that you block me and politely move along. Incredibly, even that courtesy is too much to ask anymore.
Once you quit hearing ‘sir’ and ‘ma’am’ — the rest is soon to foller
But if you’re game for good old-fashioned conversation — please contact me through the site, Anchor.Press.gg@gmail.com, or DM (Direct Message) on Twitter: As I no longer respond to Tweets or superficial fragments of any kind.
There’s a classic scene in Seinfeld that delightfully illustrates the divide between declarations of virtue and delivering on them:
Agent: I know why we have reservations
Seinfeld: I don’t think you do. If you did, I’d have a car.
See, you know how to take the reservation, you just don’t know how to *hold* the reservation . . . and that’s really the most important part of the reservation — the *holding*
Anybody can just take ’em!
My surgical specificity in this clip puts this lie in its place in 5 minutes alone. As I said, I’m not out to “DESTROY” Sowell. But lemme put it in terms you’ll understand: If he stepped into a debate with me on this matter, 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.
Trillion Dollar Tube
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
“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.
Case in point
People who talk glibly about “intelligence failure” act as if intelligence agencies that are doing their job right would know everything.
— Thomas Sowell
D.O.E’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.”
And since the entire point of testing should be to replicate the conditions of centrifuges, one would think that the full-blown testing would be performed before the N.I.E. was completed.
— Richard W. Memmer: Act II
Between Sowell’s words and mine
Which ones strike you as glib?
And these are on the mild end of the savagery I’ve seen.
You couldn’t carry Sowell’s jockstrap!
Seriously? Get a life. It doesn’t matter what you say, he’s better than you basically in everything.
You deserved to be treated that way! You’re a moron and pathetic character assassin
Holy shit…. a video of a circle jerks with a nut in the center talking about RPMS. Yet somehow Thomas Sowell is a liar.
How do you reconcile that with this?
You introduce statements and arguments of people who aren’t Thomas Sowell
As this story is also
About the behavior of the echo chamber around Sowell — it’s kinda necessary to include other people to properly illustrate the problem. And I wouldn’t mind explaining everything — if you thought about anything.
Someone wonders
Not long before this Tweet — this Sowell supporter was condemning my efforts like all the rest that day (and every day).
And then he opened the doc . . .
What’s all the more impressive about that turnaround is that it was in response to this:
If you don’t wanna watch my documentary that’s chock-full of facts on this fiasco for the ages, that’s your prerogative. But don’t bitch about what you don’t see when you refuse to look.
He did what so few have the guts and integrity to do:
He looked!
In response to my appreciation, he replied with a sincere question that’s central to the whole story. Imagine — asking questions in the pursuit of truth & understanding. Not to mention the importance of politeness and the courtesy in following up (as I hadn’t seen it):
Glad to help. I don’t know if you saw my other comment — so I’ll post it again here. Why is it you chose to take Sowell to task on the WMD issue? Sowell is more well known for his positions on economics and sociology than he is for foreign policy. I was just curious.
“I was just curious” . . .
I don’t see anything of the kind coming from Sowell’s crowd or any other. Following facts going the direction you desire doesn’t count — anybody can do that. In loosely quoting from the book below to capture the spirit of discussion without the formality:
It illustrates the opposite of everything I’ve seen on The WMD Delusion for decades.
Socratic seminar is discussion where students listen closely to comments of others, thinking critically for themselves, and articulate their own thoughts and responses to others. They learn to work cooperatively and to question intelligently and civilly.
Where can I find a forum that’s even in the ballpark of that? Hell, forget the forum — how about a single person? How can you expect anyone to admit when they’re wrong if you won’t? And every time you allow emotion to run roughshod over reason, you further calcify habits at the other end of the spectrum from these:
Rather than assert that all opinions are equal, students in seminar learn to judge opinions on the basis of the reasons given for those opinions.
Nobody ever had to explain that to me. I’m sure you all feel the same:
And yet here we are
I’ll swim across a river of insults to get to a meeting of the minds on the other side. But we’d get there a helluva lot faster if you’d just show a little grace in the give-and-take of information. 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. 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.
In addition to interviewing world-renowned nuclear scientist, Dr. Houston Wood, I also corresponded with David Albright and Colin Powell’s chief of intelligence at the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research.
Greg Thielmann said the following in 2013:
It will be up to Iraqis to debate whether their country now has a brighter future than it otherwise would have had without foreign invasion and occupation in the first decade of the new century. But it is uniquely incumbent on Americans to understand who and what were responsible for an enterprise that proved so costly in terms of U.S. lives lost, money spent, international reputation tarnished, and a campaign against al Qaeda diverted.
Note:
I modified the Intelligence Community image above by overlaying CIA on top of Director of National Intelligence — to show how the IC effectively operated pre-9/11 and before DCI took center stage.
America just casually moved on
I didn’t — as I knew then what few know now:
The immeasurable value in the willingness to be wrong, understanding why, and looking to learn from it. And that not doing so — increasingly compounds the consequences of no accountability.
Look around!
More on this later . . .
But connecting the dots in the INR/DOE imagery above is central to the whole story. Powell unconscionably ignored his own intelligence bureau, because INR had the nerve to stick to its old-fashioned ways by agreeing with DOE:
As in, the actual experts!
The North Star
Mr. Sowell:
Could you tell me why the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) — got an equal say on the aluminum tubes for the NIE vote?
An agency that does imagery analysis of the Earth . . .
Same for NSA . . .
And other agencies that had no expertise in centrifuge physics. And why wasn’t JAEIC allowed to weigh in?
What’s JAEIC? Allow me.
And for all those who pooh-pooh expertise these days:
Lemme remind you that you had no trouble appreciating the importance of material properties in comparing this toy vs. a craft like Cameron’s.
Stockton Rush’s name will never be forgotten for his folly that took 5 lives in a contraption doomed to fail. That same wishful thinking in totally unsuitable material — was held by a CIA/WINPAC analyst named Joe Turner:
Who provided a path to war that cost countless lives, unspeakable destruction, trillions of dollars & counting, and poisons political discourse to this day and probably generations to come.
Never heard of him
I’m not surprised . . .
If you understand baseline information on material properties in one context: Shouldn’t you be able to grasp the exact same principles in another? If I did cartwheels on TikTok to tell this story — you’d take issue with my form. We’ve created a culture that gripes over “flashy graphics” while worshipping liars in the images. Constant complaining has become a virtue — where everything of value is in the gain you get in the moment:
And easy is all the rage!
They just made it up
Red Team Paper: Nevertheless, by September 2001, the matter had more or less been settled. There was no serious debate within the intelligence community. One stubborn WINPAC analyst does not constitute a debate.
Richard W. Memmer: Then 9/11 happened — and whad’ya know, the tubes were resurrected.
— Act I
For two decades
America has made it impossible to have that conversation: Painfully obvious deception that shaped everything you see today. But we’ve got all the time in the world to talk about Titan:
Strikingly similar — don’t ya think? . . .
I’m a retired engineer, electrical not mechanical. You are absolutely correct about technical limits on materials such as this sub design. It’s insane this guy took the sub to its breaking point. It’s sad but a good lesson to future explorers. Don’t push the physical limitations of the materials and design.
— YouTube user
The more I learn about the sub, the more it sounds like a 50/50 coin flip suicide expedition than exploration.
Lots of intelligent commentary floating around on Titan. It’s refreshing to see all the sound analysis I’ve seen on the sub. And from experts to casual observers — most everyone recognizes reality on Rush.
Who doesn’t?
The same people who always refuse to see something for what it is: Those too close to the situation to objectively evaluate it (invariably with motive in some form — innocent or otherwise). I realize Cameron’s craft was designed to go 3 times deeper than Titanic:
But it’s just a striking contrast on the look of seriousness alone.
And so’s this . . .
So you found one small crack in Sowell’s character where he defended Iraq having WMD, does that hurt his credibility?
This man muddied the waters of debate to serve himself: On a little matter of war in the Middle East in the aftermath of 9/11. On top of unconscionably ignoring irrefutable evidence mathematical certainty (of world-altering consequence, no less) — he has a habit of toeing the party line. Not only did Sowell flagrantly fail to follow the facts on all-things Iraq — he brazenly ignored the debauchery in his own party to politely pounce on the other.
In light of his history being wildly out of sync with his sanctimonious claims: That “one small crack” is a wide-open window into his character and credibility.
I wouldn’t care if Sowell cured cancer:
You don’t get a pass for basking in baseless beliefs that cripple the country — and have the bottomless nerve to preach responsibility & accountability to boot. That is a cancer of its own. The poison he pumped into the atmosphere helped destroy the internal organs of America. So we have very different standards as to what qualifies as a National Treasure.
A person who shows independence of thought and action, especially by refusing to adhere to the policies of a group to which he or she belongs.
The self-importance of people like Sowell just kills me — how they sit there acting like they’re Senators from Krypton. That’s not knocking appearance just for kicks:
As the look and the language is all part of . . .
The Presentation
I couldn’t agree more
But there’s another reason why so many people misunderstand so many issues.
Professional know-it-alls like you pull stunts like this while peddling lines like that as cover: To whitewash your record of patently obvious hypocrisy and lies.
You walked into the party
Like you were walking onto a yacht
Your hat strategically dipped below one eye
Your scarf it was apricot
You had one eye in the mirror
As you watched yourself gavotte . . .
Well I hear you went up to Saratoga
And your horse naturally won
Then you flew your Lear jet up to Nova Scotia
To see the total eclipse of the sun
Well you’re where you should be all the time . . .
And all the girls dreamed that they’d be your partner
They’d be your partner and . . .
One Voice Became Two 