September 24, 2017

Well Worth The Read

 

This of course means or should mean all subject material available to everyone, legalism’s, sciences, suspect sciences, environmentalism, pseudo environmentalism, beliefs versus knowledge.. Real History not the pseudo history taught in the free this is your “great” education welfare schooling brainwashing system of alleged teaching that has turned out masses of DUDs, Dumb Until Death people..

EVERY SINGLE GROUP IRREGARDLESS OF THE “SIDE” THEY ARE ON HAVE BEEN INFILTRATED BY DO GOODER AND NEFARIOUS NOT SO CLEVER DISINFORMATIONALISTS.. SOME OF THOSE TYPES USED TO PRETEND TO BE OUR FRIENDS HERE.. THE QUESTION YOU SHOULD BE ASKING YOURSELF IS CAN YOU SPOT THEM?

Twenty-Five Ways To Suppress Truth: The Rules of Disinformation {Includes The 8 Traits of A Disinformationalist

by H. Michael Sweeney
copyright (c) 1997, 2000 All rights reserved
(Revised April 2000)

Permission to reprint/distribute hereby  granted for any non commercial use  provided information reproduced in its entirety and with author information in tact. For more Intel/Shadow government related info, visit the Author’s Web site:
<http://www.proparanoid.com>

 Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation

Built upon Thirteen Techniques for Truth  Suppression by David Martin, the following may be useful to the initiate  in the world of dealing with veiled and half-truth, lies, and suppression of truth when serious crimes are studied in public forums. This, sadly, includes every day news media, one of the worst offenders with respect to being a source of disinformation. Where the crime involves a conspiracy, or a conspiracy to cover up the crime, there will invariably be a disinformation campaign launched against  those seeking to uncover and expose the truth and/or the conspiracy. There are specific tactics which disinfo artists tend to apply, as revealed here. Also included with this material are seven common traits of the disinfo artist which may also prove useful in identifying players and motives.

 

The more a particular party fits the traits and is guilty of following the rules, the more likely they are a professional disinfo artist with a vested motive. People can be bought, threatened, or blackmailed into providing disinformation, so even “good guys” can be suspect in many cases.

A rational person participating as one interested in the truth will evaluate that chain of evidence and conclude either that the links are solid and conclusive, that  one or more links are weak and need further development before conclusion can be arrived at, or that one or more links can be broken, usually invalidating (but not necessarily so, if parallel links already exist or can be found, or if a particular link was merely supportive, but not in itself key to) the argument. The game is played by raising issues which either strengthen or weaken (preferably to the point  of breaking) these links. It is the job of a disinfo artist to interfere with these evaluations… to at least make people think the links are weak or broken when, in truth, they are not… or to propose alternative solutions leading away from the truth. Often, by simply impeding and slowing down the process through disinformation tactics, a level of victory  is assured because apathy increases with time and rhetoric.

It would seem true in almost every instance, that if one cannot break the chain of evidence for a given solution, revelation of truth has won out. If the chain is broken either a new link must be forged, or a whole new chain developed, or the solution is invalid and a new one must be found… but truth still wins out. There is no shame in being the creator or supporter of a failed solution, chain, or link, if done with honesty in search of the truth. This is the rational approach. While it is understandable that a person can become emotionally involved with a particular side of a given issue, it is  really unimportant who wins, as long as truth wins. But the disinfo artist will seek to emotionalize and chastise any failure (real or false claims thereof), and will seek by means of intimidation to prevent discussion  in general.

 

It is the disinfo artist and those who may pull their strings (those who stand to suffer should the crime be solved) MUST seek to prevent  rational and complete examination of any chain ofevidence which would hang them. Since fact and truth seldom fall on their own, they must be overcome with lies and deceit. Those who are professional in the art of lies and deceit, such as the intelligence community and the professional criminal (often the same people or at least working together), tend to apply fairly well defined and observable tools in this process.However, the public at large is not well armed against such weapons, and is often easily ledastray by these time-proven tactics. Remarkably, not even media and law enforcement have
NOT BEEN TRAINED to deal with these issues. For the most part, only the players themselves understand the rules of the game.

 

For such disinformationalists, the overall aim is to avoid discussing links in the chain of evidence which cannot be broken by truth, but at all times, to use clever deceptions or lies to make select links seem weaker than they are, create the illusion of a break, or better still, cause any who are considering the chain to be distracted in any number of ways, including the method of questioning the credentials of the presenter. Please understand that fact is fact, regardless of the source. Likewise, truth is truth, regardless of the source. This is why criminals are allowed to testify against other criminals. Where a motive to lie may truly exist, only actual evidence that the testimony itself  IS a lie renders it completely invalid. Were a known ‘liar’s’ testimony to stand on its own without supporting fact, it might certainly be of questionable value, but if the testimony (argument) is based on verifiable or otherwise demonstrable facts, it matters not who does the presenting or what their motives are, or if they have lied in the past or even if motivated to lie in this instance — the facts or links would and should stand or fall on their own merit and their part in the matter will merely be supportive.

Moreover, particularly with respects to public forums such as newspaper letters to the editor, and Internet chat and news groups, the disinfo type has a very important role. In these forums, the principle topics of discussion are generally attempts by individuals to cause other persons to become interested in their own particular position, idea, or solution — very much in development at the time. People often use such mediums as a sounding board and in hopes of pollination to better form their ideas. Where such ideas are critical of government or powerful, vested groups (especially if their criminality is the topic), the disinfo artist has yet another role — the role of nipping it in the bud. They also seek to stage the concept, the presenter, and any supporters as less than credible should any possible future confrontation in more public forums result due to their early successes. You can often spot the disinfo types at work here by the unique application of “higher standards” of discussion than necessarily warranted. They will demand that those presenting arguments or concepts back everything up with the same level of expertise as a professor, researcher, or investigative writer. Anything less renders anydiscussion meaningless and unworthy in their opinion, and anyone who disagrees is obviously stupid — and they generally put it in exactly those terms.

So, as you read any such discussions, particularly so in Internet news groups (NG), decide for yourself when a rational argument is being applied and when disinformation, psyops (psychological warfare operations) or trickery is the tool. Accuse those guilty of the latter freely. They (both those deliberately seeking to lead you astray, and those who are simply foolish or misguided thinkers) generally run  for cover when thus illuminated, or — put in other terms, they put up or shut up (a perfectly acceptable outcome either way, since truth is the goal.) Here are the twenty-five methods and seven traits, some of which don’t apply directly to NG application. Each contains a simple example in the form of actual (some paraphrased for simplicity) from NG comments on commonly known historical events, and a proper response.[examples & response- http://www.proparanoid.com/truth.html]

Accusations should not be overused — reserve for repeat offenders and those who use multiple tactics. Responses should avoid falling into emotional traps or informational sidetracks, unless it is feared that some observers will be easily dissuaded by the trickery. Consider quoting the complete rule rather than simply citing it, as others will not have reference. Offer to provide a complete copy of the rule set upon request   (see permissions statement at end):

Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation

Note: The first rule and last five (or six, depending on situation) rules are generally not directly within the ability of the traditional disinfo artist to apply. These rules are generally used more directly by those at the leadership, key players, or planning level of the criminal conspiracy or conspiracy to cover up.

1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil.  Regardless of what you know, don’t discuss it — especially if you are a public figure, news anchor,  etc. If it’s not reported, it didn’t happen,  and you never have to deal with the issues.
2. Become incredulous and indignant.  Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus  on side issues which can be used show the topic  as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the  ‘How dare you!’ gambit.
3. Create rumor mongers.  Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method which works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public  can learn of the facts are through such ‘arguable rumors’. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a ‘wild rumor’ from a ‘bunch of kids on the Internet’ which can have no basis in fact.
4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent’s   argument which you can easily knock down to make  yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges.  Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule.  This is also known as the primary ‘attack the messenger’  ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as ‘kooks’, ‘right-wing’, ‘liberal’, ‘left-wing’, ‘terrorists’, ‘conspiracy buffs’,  ‘radicals’, ‘militia’, ‘racists’, ‘religious fanatics’,  ‘sexual deviates’, and so forth. This makes others  shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet  and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism, reasoning — simply make an accusation or other  attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent’s viewpoint.
7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal  agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.
8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough ‘jargon’ and ‘minutia’ to illustrate you are ‘one who knows’, and simply say it isn’t so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.
9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.
10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man — usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with – a kind of investment for the future should the matter not be so easily contained.) Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually then be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues — so much the better where the opponent  is or was involved with the original source.
11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions.  Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the ‘high road’ and ‘confess’ with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made — but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, ‘just isn’t so.’ Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later, and even publicly ‘call for an end to the nonsense’ because you have already ‘done the right thing.’ Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for ‘coming clean’ and ‘owning up’ to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.
12. Enigmas have no solution.  Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to lose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.
13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic
which forbears any actual material fact.
14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best with issues qualifying for rule 10.
15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions.  This requires creative thinking unless the crime  was planned with contingency conclusions in place.
16. Vanish evidence and witnesses.  If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won’t have to address the issue.
17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys  listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can  ‘argue’ with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can’t do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how ‘sensitive they are to criticism.’
19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the ‘play dumb’ rule.  Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant  and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.
20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations — as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed
with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.
21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other  empowered investigative body. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed and unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed. Usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim.
22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.
23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable  events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.
24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of theircharacter by release of blackmail information, or merely by destroying them financially, emotionally, or severely damaging their health.
25. Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid  the issues, vacate the kitchen. .

Note: There are other ways to attack truth, but these listed are the most common, and others are likely derivatives of these. In the end, you can usually spot the professional disinfo players by one or more of seven (now 8) distinct traits:

Share

Log Public Lands? Or Sierra Club Public Lands

 

The public lands blackened silt and ash heaps prove you Sierra Club Western Watersheds Wildlife “News” Center for biological Diversity Clones are winning….Choking on raw natural resources all over the west=priceless…The rewild the western states pseudo science club has been handing out whoppers that are far more preposterous than anything any sane individual could ever dream up…The theatre of pseudo environmentalism is very convincing for those who wish to remain naive and deluded.  Logging hunting and grazing is destroying the earth.. Right, any method of raw materials management is destroying the earth.. So let it burn down…

Share

“Look, I can see the curvature of the earth!” Always complete the circle to spot the lie.”

We can’t destroy disinformation completely but we can expose the mechanisms that make it function and in doing so, marginalize it. And we can stay on message with the strongest and most undeniable evidence. One of the ways “we can expose the mechanisms (of disinformation) that make it function and in doing so, marginalize it”, is to rebut disinformation with the “strongest and most undeniable evidence.”

Anti-Propaganda…

Share

Science Alleged Knowledge Falsely So Called

“Instead of making the Bible agree with science, science must agree with the Bible. If it does not, it is only because it is “science falsely so-called,” and not real science. Scientia is the Latin word for knowledge. Whereas very much of what goes by the name of “science” today is not science at all. It is only hypothesis! Read man’s books on this so-called science, and you will get tired of the never-ending repetition of such words as “hypothesis,” “conjecture,” “supposition,” etc., etc. This is the reason that such theories, which are falsely dignified by the name of science, are constantly changing. We talk of the “Science of Geology,” or of “Medical Science;” but read books on geology or medicine, for example, written fifty years ago, and you will find that they are now quite out of date. But truth cannot change. Truth will never be out of date. What we know can never alter! This of itself proves that the word science is wrongly used when it is applied only to hypotheses, which are merely invented to explain certain phenomena. It is not for such theories that we are going to give up facts. It is not for conjectures that we are going to abandon truth.”—E.W. Bullinger (1837-1913) —Number in Scripture, p. 103

The science say’s this and the science say’s that… So it must be truth… Hmmmm… They say this and they say that… So it must be truth… Some people say this and some people say that so it must be true… Simon say’s this and Simon say’s that so it must be true.. Those people professing superior knowledge about anything say this and those people professing superior knowledge about anything say that, and it must be true… And if this or that sounds good the gullible believe it..

Share

Far Greater Than Pointing Out the Obvious

Because of a friend, I often read articles written by Richard Fernandez, “Wretchard.” He is, perhaps, one of the best, if not the best, in my set-apart way of thinking, in observing the obvious, and sometimes not so obvious, and then pointing it out while at the same time offering interesting historical perspective and sometimes a varied commentary on the obvious. I like his style and his technique, however…. Isn’t there always a however?

However, like most journalists, with their own thoughts or being an echo chamber for whatever blows one’s dress up, he falls short in providing answers, or even suggestions as to what and/or whom is behind the obvious and not so obvious events spinning at rapid pace throughout our society.

In the article I read this morning, Wretchard says it all began back in 2005 when Larry Summers, then president of Harvard, dared point out the possibility that there might be differences between a man and a woman’s aptitude.

I can’t say “it” all began back in 2005. A Bible scholar, that is a real one not a manufactured product of the Vatican, might argue that “it” began back in the Garden of Eden. But let’s not get sidetracked.

So what is “it” and why is it so important?

As Wretchard points out that it became criminal to call a spade a spade, i.e. to call an “illegal” immigrant, that is someone residing in this country illegally, an illegal immigrant. This has been followed by Same Sex Marriage ins and outs, morphing into the most rapid promotion of homosexuality, transgenderism, lesbianism, bisexualism, gayism and queerism ever witnessed in this world’s history when it comes to the promotion of the destruction of a society.

Within this rush to immorality, people are now allowed to be any sex they want to at any moment in time and as such, I suppose it must be troubling and discriminatory that someone so messed up in their clouded, manipulated minds that they can’t, in a moments notice, when headed for the bathroom (or whatever that room is called now), make up their minds to be a man or a woman and so transgendered bathrooms are in hot demand.

Racism is so out of control that sick, perverted, insane and mentally ill people insist there is no such thing as a race. Instead we are all social constructs. How nice.

The latest out-of-control assault on anything normal is things attacking statues. Tear them all down. They represent hate, we are being told. People hate it when things remind them of hate and so they become hateful and destroy those images…well, that is only those that cause them to hate. Other hateful things can remain because that’s the totalitarian way of doing things. Geez, I hate that.

These are all obvious things and are being well pointed out by Mr. Fernandez. But why are they happening? Is this just some random event, the result of a random existence of masses of people? I think not. So why doesn’t Wretchard and other journalists dig beyond the obvious and even beyond the not so obvious? Are they incapable? Do they not suspect? Do they fear the truth? What are the reasons?

I suppose one would have to be vacant any kind of independent thought to at least ask themselves if all of these events, all designed to destroy what has existed, is some part of a plan that goes beyond ___________(you fill in the blank with the organization that is running on red alert full of hatred.)?

The statue bashing has been going on for quite some time. Today it is at a fever pitch. What puzzles me to no end is that these people doing the statue bashing, don’t know anything about the particular statue in question or any other statue, regardless of where it sits. In their heads, all statues represent hate. Well, hell maybe they do. But is this how we address the issue? Evidently. Fight hate with hate. Smart.

My brother told me today that people are so blinded and willfully ignorant – but mind you I shouldn’t be saying this because it will only cause more hate – they think they are tearing down and protesting statues of either the history of the “Right” or the history of the “Left,” even though they don’t know whose is whose. They are clueless that these statues are all images of “the history of the U.N.’s occult dominance in all affairs.” What the U.N.’s Occult Dominance in all affairs is, is the root of all evil in this world and a subject that can only be covered by someone who is seeking the truth as a way of gaining an accurate understanding of why I have to share a bathroom with someone who, at this moment, decided to be of the male gender.

Unless you live completely off the grid, which I wish I did, it is obvious these things are happening all around us. We read someone’s perspective on what’s happening but never why, or who is behind it and why.

My brother also told me that “‘I don’t believe anything,’ is the new normal.” People have become manufactured to disbelieve in the real God because he just doesn’t exist. And yet, they are exceeding quick to believe in all things Satan. If Satan exists then how can you deny the existence of our Creator? Without that existence what is the reason that Satan would need to exist?

In Yehwah’s Word, He warns us that all of these things going on in the world today must come about before He returns again. Often forgotten, is His promise to take care of those who are his followers. He told us not to get worked up over these events. And so there’s the best answer because it is God’s answer and not man’s answer.

As a follower of Yehwah and His Son, with the Spirit of Truth living in you, guiding your life, you are set apart from all of this. It helps to have wisdom and knowledge about the whos and whys behind these hideous, evil, events driving our society today.

Ephesians 6:12 tells us: “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, and against the worldly governors, the princes of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness, which are in the high places.”

That verse definitively tells us who is behind, and has been behind, all the earthly events which have and are driving this nation to, excuse the accurate expression, hell.

Share

Class Structure In The Good Ole U.S.A.

It isn’t just the money it is all of the natural resources wealth..

Elites’ United Nations Eugenics and Depopulation Agenda Policies include convincing people that living with wolves bears cougars coyotes and eating poisonous GMOs is safe…

U.S. government sourced figures show that the US population is expected to drop from 316+ million now to only 69 million by the year 2025… Hmmm… Where will you and your family line be?

Short and sweet for the attention deficit disorder syndrome crowds…

 

Share

Columbus and the Liberty Valance effect

Share

EYE Phone Wireless Warfare

Share

For What It’s Worth 1967 To 2017 – Political Evolution

Share

Who Is And Who Owns The Crown temple

Share