new blogs

ck; also,

Monday, September 21, 2015

Academic hack, gate-keeper utterly fails for theorizing upon 9/11 strike, false-flag....

Below-copied essay by ap first published at comments,

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Roth Does Excellently, While Fetzer Has Much To Answer For As Theorist
(Apollonian, 21 Sep 15)

It's important not to get bogged-down in minutiae. Fetzer's proper job and duty is to INDUCE (generalize) to the proper and necessary overall consp. theory entailing the genuine "outrageous" nature of it all--SATANISM, entailing extreme subjectivism. So what, Fetzer, do u have to say about this cultural satanism?--how does it fit in?

Regarding Roth, perhaps she does give Fetzer a little too much credit and publicity--which Fetzer really LOVES for all the attn. he gets. But note Roth gives an out-standing perspective fm the flight attendant's view, and is capable of commenting in significant fashion.

And Roth does excellently for researching as she does into the deep back-ground of these players--like Barbara Olson being Jew, her husband, Ted, being the lawyer for Jew spy, Jonathan Pollard.

So Roth much deserves credit for her thoroughness for her perspective (a), and (b) for her general research, and then (c) for the emphasis and info about the Flight Termination System remote-control hi-jacking--this is HUGE issue.

And don't forget: Fetzer has at least one serious weakness, aside fm his gross failure of induction and theorizing, that being his partiality for Pharisaist moralizing and "good-evil" subjectivism, providing premise and pretext for satanism, this along w. his weakness for cultural analysis regarding Christian philosophy embedded within Christian literature, Christ = TRUTH, Gosp. JOHN 14:6. So Fetzer has a good deal to answer for.

1 comment:

  1. [Fetzer has since responded to above comment by ap:]

    * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

    James Fetzer September 21, 2015 at 10:51 PM

    This comment seems baseless and pointless. Morality does not require religion. I have elaborated criteria for assessing alternative theories of morality that are parallel to those for assessing alternative theories in science. To get some sense of what it's all about, see "Abortion Debate: A Muslim, A Catholic and An Agnostic", JAMES FETZER: Abortion Debate: A Muslim, a Catholic and an Agnostic

    ----------------apo responded to above in below-copied----------------

    Typical Obfuscation, Evasion By Fetzer
    (Apollonian, 22 Sep 15)

    "I have elaborated criteria for assessing alternative theories of morality...." This is perfect example of the typical corrupt academic babble which dis-credits Fetzer. "Morality" is simply logic btwn means and ends. For to accomplish ends, one merely chooses most appropriate means which don't contradict ends.

    Importance of Christian philosophy is it sets the metaphysics for any ethics, the objective (Aristotelian) reality, basis of Christian TRUTH (= Christ, Gosp. JOHN 14:6), humans being sinners, incapable of salvation on their own, requiring God's grace, humans being creatures of will, necessarily following self-interest.

    So the problem is moralism/Pharisaism rejects science and objective reality, assuming subjectivism, pretext then for satanist extreme subjectivism, hubristic making oneself God the creator of reality (subjectivism).

    Fetzer's above comment then just demonstrates his penchant for obfuscation of otherwise simple issue--and note how he uses it for evasion of the satanist issue which he doesn't even mention in regard to the culture, context for the outrageous 9/11 consp.