Shoutwire as COINTELPRO

[foofighter]

I'm wondering how much they are getting paid to do this kind of stuff, COINTELPRO jobs that is. Is it a well-paid job to do it, or are they expected to get the sheer pathological satisfaction as part of the "payment"? Also, are they only paid by one organization, like Mo**ad, or can they offer their services to many COINTELPRO contractors at once? Do they have like a COINTELPRO job agency to broker the assignments, such as this editorial, or..?

I have no idea how these critters get their jobs, and how it all works, but it would be interesting to know. Maybe they're all just stuffed into a hall with computers and are regularly fed diet coke (sure to fry your brain given the right quantities) and donuts and that's all the "pay" they get. Vinnie did seem to have a problem with complexion, so that would make sense.

So many questions...

 

[Ruth]

there is a method to that madness then ... hmmm ... I wonder how they screen 'objectionable material'?

Anything that gets too close to a truth they don't want presented to the public?

Some material can have a very violent reaction, the closer it is to a truth that they don't want people to see. Unfortunately this is usually a sign that the cat is out of the bag. Its unfortunate because sometimes the reaction is so violent and it is also very much of a shock because nobody realised how close to the truth it was.

 

[the rabbit]

%#?'! the lot of U im right and you are all ?=#

 

[kenlee]

I get the impression from reading Shoutwire that their administration delight in generating "flame wars" on those political issues that they don't want discussed which goes contrary to whatever covert hidden agena they might have. The readers will hypnotically stare at the flame wars and forget about the issue. I don't get time to read shoutwire much but that's just the impression I get . It kinda reminds me of #12 in the Protocols and especially the phrase that was used in it..."When a pulse quickens."

From:
http://laura-knight-jadczyk.blogspot.com/2006/03/abovetopsecretcom-project-serpo-psy.html

"12. All our newspapers will be of all possible complexions -- aristocratic, republican, revolutionary, even anarchical - for so long, of course, as the constitution exists .... Like the Indian idol "Vishnu" they will have a hundred hands, and every one of them will have a finger on any one of the public opinions as required. When a pulse quickens these hands will lead opinion in the direction of our aims, for an excited patient loses all power of judgment and easily yields to suggestion. Those fools who will think they are repeating the opinion of a newspaper of their own camp will be repeating our opinion or any opinion that seems desirable for us. In the vain belief that they are following the organ of their party they will, in fact, follow the flag which we hang out for them".

 

[Alana]

I was thinking last night that things have been "quiet" on the forum in regards to attacks lately, and the minute the thought crossed my mind i immediately thought "oh, no, another one might be cooking up!"

It happens usualy when things begin to feel normal and we can all come here (those of us who care to learn and discuss) and do just that: learn, discuss, inquire, read, joke... you know, without troll interference. There were the attacks by completely brainless trolls on SW, proving their brainlessness in their own words and comments, but there were also comments from people who reported reading the SOTT articles, especially those on JFK and now the Litvinenko editorials. Someone obviously did not like that. The SW editorial is OBVIOUSLY an attempt to divert people from ever reading SOTT material, especially with their use of word "cult" and the connotations it bears on the minds of people nowadays. If it's not a "terrorist" one, then it is a "cult member"! Feed the brains of people with these two words accompanied by hellish pictures/associations, and then you can use these two words on anything and anyone you wish to defame, and like Pavlovian dogs the brainless readers will begin to "drool". In this case, seems the Trolls are drooling as part of their job description. Fortunately, yes, there are some who can think for themselves.

In Wave III green book, i was reading the other day an excellent editorial that Joe wrote on Cults. I wonder if anyone could post it here, for those who missed it to read. The search function for the SOTT archived articles does not work for some reason.

I guess the SOTT team begun "misbehaving" again, researching and making connections that are true, digging through the lies (SAfrican/Israeli relationship, apartheid states) Shame on you guys, going after Truth like this, tsk tsk (shakes head) :P

But, hey, take it as compliment, this SW attacks prove you were right all along!

 

[Ryan]

My impressions from my participation on Shoutwire is that it is run by a bunch of kids.

"OMGWTFBBQINTERNETLOLZ!!" is about the standard of the average comment posted there. It's good for a laugh, but I really hope Bulshoy and Virek don't expect to be taken too seriously.

And yeah, it was certainly interesting to watch how many flames the articles critical of Israel got, versus the ones that were on other topics. Even the Bush defenders don't froth at the mouth as much as the Zionist crew.

 

[Nathan]

I know there's no point picking this article apart, as it is probably the poorest attempt at attack made to date. But I couldn't resist commenting on some bits. They are just too amusing to ignore!

Instead I hope to teach you about this cult

Please, Virellek, teach us what you know about this cult. All 0.1% of it.

It is hard for me to define all their beliefs as it would take an entire book to cover it all, thus I can only highlight a few of the more off note beliefs they have.

Or is it hard for you to define because you don't know what they are? Or maybe because you've missed the point completely. SOTT do not advocate any "belief". To believe something is to decide that the world is a certain way and adhere strictly to that view, despite any contradictory data one may come across.

You are also able to see how they view anyone who does not fall into their line of thinking as sub-human...

Yes, Virellek, mix in a few outright lies and no one will notice.

The eye represents Laura. She has her eye on every part of the cult.

Uh, what?

If I have not yet convinced you that this is a nutty cult, than either you are a part of this cult already, or you enjoy living in a fantasy world where whatever you and a few of your friends believe becomes the truth.

OK, now that's drawing the line. I'm sorry, Virellek, but you're suggesting that if I am not convinced of your "research", then I must be either a nutty cult member or someone living in a fantasy world? That's ridiculous. Why can't I be both?

Laura doing her research. If her room is as sloppy as her 'research' I can see why she is so wrong on things.

Have you considered a career in comedy?

If you are upset because what I quoted came across as a nutty cult - THAT'S BECAUSE YOU ARE A NUTTY CULT.

I don't understand how you drew that conclusion. And I also don't understand how someone with an IQ of 12 knows how to turn on a computer and type.

Ah, the wonders of our strange reality.

 

[Laura]

Just noticed something interesting on Shoutwire. On this page:

http:(2slash)www(dot)shoutwire.com/comments/41002/Israel_Ups_The_Stakes_in_The_Propaganda_War

There was a comment by Dorothy from a couple of days ago that has been edited.

I distinctly remember that comment contained a quote from Douglas Reed's Controversy of Zion...

I guess that the best solution to show how and what Shoutwire is editing and changing things is to make document images of the comments at various times.

Anyway, the comment from Dorothy that remains, after the most relevant material was deleted is the following:

bulshoy wrote:

{{ Well they're doing a piss-poor job, aren't they?

There are approximately 100 Zillion anti-Israel articles on SW every day, and only a few people have had the balls to try to defend Israel. They should hire better trolls 'cause the ones they have now suck. }}}

I don't know if I would say that. Obviously, they are not going to ignore Shoutwire, so the only question is to figure out what their strategy is. And here, we aren't talking about just ordinary citizens who have been called on to write letters and post pro-Israel defenses, either.

One would not think that a serious Israeli propagandist would always appear as "anti-Palestinian" or "pro-Israel". That would tip their hand.

It might be helpful to read the SUPPLEMENTARY DETAILED STAFF REPORTS ON INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES AND THE RIGHTS OF AMERICANS, BOOK III, FINAL REPORT OF THE SELECT COMMITTEE
TO STUDY GOVERNMENTAL OPERATIONS WITH RESPECT TO INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES UNITED STATES SENATE

(Not shouting, just copied and pasted the title which was in caps)

...which is located here:

http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/cointelpro/churchfinalreportIIIa.htm

... to get a few clues.

Then, there is COINTELPRO: The Untold American Story which is a lot easier to read than an official government report.

It's located here:

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/FBI/COINTELPRO_Untold_Story.html

What is clear is that one of the major ways to "defend Israel" is to set oneself up as a "free and democratic online BB" and then do not discuss issues, just simply flame and defame.

Then, of course, we see the real "humanity" and agenda of Shoutwire in this comment:

bulshoy wrote:

"I DON'T GIVE A RAT'S ASS. Why the hell should I care about a -flicking-g decades-old land dispute halfway around the world? "Oh, but the children are dying" you'll say. Well, if their parents weren't idiots, maybe they'd still be alive. Both side could have had peace a long time ago, but nobody is willing to compromise. It will be tit-for-tat violence until both sides grow the -flick- up, sit down and negotiate. And I mean REAL negotiating, not the bullshit that's been going on for the past few decades. Until then, they can wipe each other off the map for all I care. -flick- 'em."

Spoken like a true psychopath.

One poster over on Shoutwire saw through the whole game and made this interesting post:

rcg wrote:

propaganda

Manipulation of information to influence public opinion. Misleading statements and even lies may be used to create the desired effect in the public audience.
- Britannica

systematic manipulation of public opinion, generally by the use of symbols such as flags, monuments, oratory, and publications.

(SNIP)

In addition, certain refinements of the propaganda technique have developed, most notably brainwashing, the intensive indoctrination of political opponents against their will. {my note: Think Fanatic Republican neoCons}
-Columbia university press Encyclopedia

Full Source: http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery?s=Propaganda&gwp=13
-------------

Techniques of propaganda generation (Most explanations have been clipped - go to source for that.)

* Ad Hominem:
* Appeal to authority:
* Appeal to fear:
* Appeal to Prejudice:
* Argumentum ad nauseam:
* Bandwagon: Bandwagon and inevitable-victory appeals attempt to persuade the target audience to take the course of action that "everyone else is taking."
o Inevitable victory: invites those not already on the bandwagon to join those already on the road to certain victory. Those already or at least partially on the bandwagon are reassured that staying aboard is their best course of action.
o Join the crowd:
* Black-and-White fallacy:
* Common man: The "'plain folks'" or "common man" approach
* Demonizing the "enemy":
* Direct order: This technique hopes to simplify the decision making process. The propagandist uses images and words to tell the audience exactly what actions to take, eliminating any other possible choices. Authority figures can be used to give the order, overlapping it with the Appeal to authority technique, but not necessarily. The Uncle Sam "I want you" image is an example of this technique.
* Euphoria: The use of an event that generates euphoria or happiness in lieu of spreading more sadness, or using a good event to try to cover up another. Or creating a celebrateable event in the hopes of boosting morale. Euphoria can be used to take one's mind from a worse feeling. i.e. a holiday or parade.
* Falsifying information:
* Flag-waving:
* Glittering generalities:
* Intentional vagueness:
* Obtain disapproval or Reductio ad Hitlerum: This technique is used to persuade a target audience to disapprove of an action or idea by suggesting that the idea is popular with groups hated, feared, or held in contempt by the target audience.
* Oversimplification:
* Quotes out of Context:
* Rationalization: I
* Red herring:
* Scapegoating:
* Slogans: A slogan is a brief, striking phrase that may include labeling and stereotyping. Although slogans may be enlisted to support reasoned ideas, in practice they tend to act only as emotional appeals. For example, "blood for oil" or "cut and run" are slogans used by those who view the USA's current situation in Iraq with disfavor. Similarly, the names of the military campaigns, such as "enduring freedom" or "just cause", may also be regarded to be slogans, devised to prevent free thought on the issues.
* Stereotyping or Name Calling or Labeling:
* Testimonial: Testimonials are quotations, in or out of context, especially cited to support or reject a given policy, action, program, or personality.
* Transfer:
* Unstated assumption:
* Virtue words: These are words in the value system of the target audience which tend to produce a positive image when attached to a person or issue. Peace, happiness, security, wise leadership, freedom, etc. are virtue words. See ""Transfer"".

See also: doublespeak, meme, cult of personality, spin, demonization, factoid

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda

 

[Scottie]

Ah well, another one bites the dust.

The following is the e-mail exchange I had with Bulshoy of Shoutwire fame:

It has come to our attention that several staff members of SOTT post multiple submissions to ShoutWire on a daily basis. These same members immediately shout it to the front page, effectively bypassing the regular users and (frankly) abusing the shout system. For example, one particular article was posted on Tuesday. Within 5 minutes, the article had over 10 shouts. An examination of the profiles of those who shouted it shows that the users in question all registered at roughly the same time, only shout SOTT articles, and never participate in other aspects of the site. These same users often post positive comments under SOTT articles, presumably to give SW staff the impression that SOTT articles are popular with SW users.

As an experiment, I deleted the article in question. Sure enough, it was reposted moments later, but by one of the shouters instead of the original submitter (scott3535). To me this proved conclusively that SOTT staff are going to great lengths to immediately promote SOTT articles to the front page without allowing SW's users to make that decision. This results in a front page that is sometimes totally dominated by SOTT articles. Users have begun to complain. They seem to agree that if SOTT isn't following the rules, then some sort of action must be taken.

After consulting with the SW staff, an appropriate action was agreed upon. We all agree that the SOTT website has a professional layout, is easy-to-navigate, and usually has thought-provoking content. However, it is not in the site's best interest to see SOTT articles promoted to the front page without allowing SW users to make that decision.

In order to continue posting articles to ShoutWire, the following conditions must be met:

- A ShoutWire banner must be placed in a visible location on the SOTT site.

- The artificial promotion of articles by SOTT staff / conspirators must stop. A list of the suspect shouters' accounts has been made, and these users will be monitored to ensure compliance.

Again, we believe that SOTT has a place on ShoutWire, but we cannot tolerate abuse of the shout system. Please respond as soon as possible so that we may resolve this issue.

Regards,

Bulshoy

ShoutWire Staff

To which we responded:

Hello,

Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention.

In re-reading the Shoutwire Terms of Use, we do not see anything that states it is not appropriate for users to shout articles from one particular site to the exclusion of all others. We did inform our readers that our original material was being placed on Shoutwire. Many of them signed up for ShoutWire accounts and began shouting our content. Whether or not they shout other content is not under our control. If you have checked your logs, you are certainly aware that contrary to what some ShoutWire users are insinuating in their comments, we are not using any kind of bot or other automated process to boost our rankings. The shouts come from a variety of IP addresses, because our readers are spread all over the world.

In addition, you may have noticed that there are numerous comments on our ShoutWire submissions about SOTT and Prof. Jadczyk and Mme. Jadczyk that are libelous in the extreme. We at SOTT have neither the time nor the inclination to defend ourselves against such ranting. From what we know, and what follows from our own documented research, our "opposition" is organized and consists of documented psychopaths. So it is not an "ordinary situation". As you might imagine given some of the content of our site, there are many people who don't like what we are saying and would do all what they can to shut us up. Such rants are nothing new to us. But most interesting are comments such as these:

---

www(dot)shoutwire(dot)com/comments/37813/Post_Election_Reality_Check

*Replicant000 <http://www(dot)shoutwire(dot)com/profile/Replicant000>*, on 11/8/2006 12:48:36 PM
Total Posts: 4, Joined: 3/15/2006

I've been doing some research about Arkadiusz Jadczyk and his wife Laura Knight Jadczyk, the owners of the site Signs-of-the-Times.org and head of a cult called the Cassiopaeans based on a farm in France and this is what i found:

www(dot)maar.us/laura_knight_jadczyk.html
www(dot)cassiopaeacult.com/jay_weidner_cult_freak.php

Next time you visit signs of the times go to the bottom of the page and read the copyright statement.

---

Switchace's comments are also rather interesting, since they also amount to little more than personal attacks of an emotionally charged nature. Call someone crazy, say they started a cult, call them an anti-Semite, et voila! They're banned based on nothing more than emotional rants.

Here's one of our posts that seems to have generated discussion by people who do post comments a lot:

www(dot)shoutwire(dot)com/comments/30940/Signs_Economic_Commentary_For_September_25_2006

We have three Shoutwire accounts, and one of us will post and shout our original content. Since we all share the same IP address, we at SOTT can only give one shout to any of our content. It is therefore impossible for us to "immediately shout it to the front page". If our readers shout our submissions to the front page, then that's that. We can't tell our readers to stop shouting our content. It is also unreasonable and against the whole idea of ShoutWire - as we understand it - for us to request that they shout other articles just to avoid being banned. If they only like, or want /or have time/ to shout SOTT material, then should they be penalized for this?

Many of our readers wrote to us and asked for a format that makes it easier for them to get the day's news as quickly as possible, because they are all apparently busy people. We complied. We also put the shout button on our editorial pages to not only link to our ShoutWire submissions, but to advertise the fact that we use your service and to drive traffic to your site. If our readers don't take the time to shout other articles, or to post comments on our submissions, then that can hardly be viewed as shocking or suspicious.

Furthermore, we have up to 15,000 readers a day spread all over the world. Thus if we get ten shouts in five minutes, we're not terribly surprised. If they are always the same ten people shouting, then that means that those ten people have decided to take the time to support our work. Many others don't shout because they are either too busy or simply can't be bothered, and that's their choice.

You wrote:
> To me this proved conclusively that SOTT staff are going to great lengths to immediately promote SOTT articles to the front page without allowing SW's users to make that decision.

The problem is that there is no conclusive proof; as we have already explained, the people promoting our material on ShoutWire ARE SW users. What they choose to shout or not shout is not under our control. If you want to force people to shout a variety of articles, then there is no point in SW existing at all because it would not be an accurate representation of the popularity of the content posted. Furthermore, scott3535 does post most of our original content. That's because he is one of the editors of SOTT. Surely this is not at all unusual, because you provide a script to include the SW button on users' web sites, which obviously would need to be modified by one of that site's administrators - and that means one of SOTT's editors will be submitting SOTT content to SW.

We would obviously like to resolve this situation amicably.

Looking forward to your reply,

Scott Ogrin
Henry See
Joe Quinn
Editors, Signs of the Times

He replied:

Thank you very much for your refreshingly professional response.

We certainly do not want to discourage your readers from shouting your submissions. If you are encouraging your readers to shout SOTT articles, then that's perfectly fine. Thank you for bringing that detail to my attention, as it explains a lot. As long as people aren't creating multiple accounts for this purpose, then it's fine.

I have been following the "Post-Election Reality Check" thread. I did notice the comments that you quoted. You are correct when you say that people might go to extraordinary legnths to discredit a site like yours. Most readers realize this. Users like Switchface destroy their credibility with the SW community when they post comments like that. I've seen it happen time and time again.

Regarding comments about bots, there has never been an occurance of bots shouting articles. I believe that SW has some sort of countermeasures in place to prevent bots from submitting or shouting articles. Rest assured that the SW staff don't believe for a moment that SOTT would use bots to promote submissions.

So if there is no conspiracy to shout SOTT articles to the front page, and SOTT staff do not register multiple accounts for the purpose of shouting, then we don't really have a problem. However, I WOULD be interested in striking a deal with SOTT.

What I propose is that SOTT place a SW banner in an easily visible location on the site. I have attached one to this document, but you can reduce its size slightly if it is too large to fit in anywhere. This way, both of our sites can benefit. In return, I would do two things:

- We'll allow SOTT articles to be posted to SW without risk of deletion by admins (who are instructed to delete articles posted by people promoting their site or blog) , as long as you try to limit the number of submissions to no more than 4 or 5 per day (try to space them out if you can so that they don't appear one after the other). If your users shout it to the top in 5 minutes, then fine. There will be no interference from SW admins.

- I will personally delete the slanderous comments left in the thread that you quoted from in your last correspondance, as well as my own comments regarding SOTT's submissions. We generally don't delete comments unless they contain overt racism, but i'm willing to make an exception for the purpose of this arrangement.

I hope that you find this arrangement acceptable, as both sites will surely benefit.

Regards,

Bulshoy

After a brief e-mail explaining what banners we were putting where on the Signs page, he replied:

Sounds great. You already have the ShoutWire "ShoutThis" button, so the addition of two extra banners would certainly please SW's editor-in-chief. I'll try to track down a 170px-width banner for you.

On a non-official note, I checked the "Post-Election Reality Check" thread again, and it seems that some users are now on a crusade against SOTT. Cult accusations are being thrown around, and one user went so far as to post an article about the Cassiopaeans:

(www(dot)shoutwire(dot)com/comments/37972/Who_Are_The_Cassiopaeans_)

Of course it's nowhere near the front page, but it was entertaining to read some of the comments. The pro-SOTT users are accused of being cultists, while the anti-SOTT users are accused of being CIA agents (or something to that effect). Might as well let them fight it out, since they'll eventually get tired and fall asleep as most over-excited children do :)

Anyways, I appreciate your civility in these matters. I will mention our arrangement to the other admins.

Regards,

Bulshoy

Then several days ago, Bulshoy wrote this:

Writing For An Online Audience: The Guide

www(dot)shoutwire(dot)com/comments/40414/Writing_For_ShoutWire_The_Guide

[...]

3. Polarize Your Readers

If you're a comment -jezebel-, writing a polarizing piece is a great way to rack up hundreds of comments. It's as simple as choosing a topic
that roughly half of your audience will agree with. This way, a battle will start in the comments. It's the pros versus the cons. This technique, when used in conjunction with the others that I have listed, will get your work noticed. [...]

So it seems they simply want articles that generate comments, and are not concerned about signal/noise ratios. The whole point seems to be to get everyone riled up, which has absolutely nothing to do with spreading the truth and getting people to think for themselves. Like the majority of "alternative news sites" out there, Shoutwire's intentions and tactics are pretty standard and unimaginative.

The funny thing is that we expected this to happen; it was pretty clear what they were up to in Bulshoy's last reply in the e-mail exchange above. What we didn't expect was that it would be done in such a juvenile, unprofessional manner. The whole point was no doubt to get a huge argument going on Shoutwire. They use SOTT to get more traffic in order to generate flame wars that get people coming back to Shoutwire for more. Polarization is good according to Bulshoy, right?

In the end, Shoutwire bought us some time. The enemy you know is better than the enemy you don't know. We'll have a few surprises for ya'll on the Signs page in the days and weeks to come. Stay tuned...

 

[Mr. Premise]

the reptile claims, or the grays, or any of the other nonsense that is cited in that article?

You make it sound like a negative thing!

 

[Windmill knight]

A common complaint we've seen on Shoutwire was that SOTT's and Cass's articles were "toooo long!" That should give us a clue about the IQ of the average reader over there. It's the video-game, comic book, Jack-ass, Hollywood generation. Whatever happened to those days when people actually read entire books and would not pass judgment until they patiently got the idea after reading every page and meditating about the information? Now they expect everything to come in boxes and pre-packaged. If it's too big or complex to fit in any of their pre-established boxes, maybe they'll just pick one of those conveniently provided by the media. Did they mention 'UFOs' and a 'ouija board'? Fit it in the 'cult' box, then. We don't have time for reading the whole thing nor for thinking. Much less to do our own research and cross with different sources.

Something else which I found curious was that Shoutwire posters would attack SOTT - even under articles that were from other sources and were posted by other people. No mention of SOTT, but wait - those articles happened to be critical of Israel. So instead of defending Israel, which is often indefensible, the trolls decided to attack SOTT. Are the Zionists really so afraid of the information presented here?

 

[Laura]

Something else which I found curious was that Shoutwire posters would attack SOTT - even under articles that were from other sources and were posted by other people. No mention of SOTT, but wait - those articles happened to be critical of Israel. So instead of defending Israel, which is often indefensible, the trolls decided to attack SOTT. Are the Zionists really so afraid of the information presented here?

Seems to be so.

Like I said, overall, it looks like it was a set-up from the beginning.

I did notice that the original defamatory article that was posted there, after several days, only had 9 shouts. (I've saved doc images of it before they deleted it.)

NOW, all of a sudden, they are able to get almost a hundred "shouts" on almost the exact same trash along with just scads of comments...

Methinks they are diddling with their system behind the scenes to give a false image. Talk about "bots"!!!

 

[henry]

I just went to Shoutwire and the story isn't on page one. It doesn't even figure among the stories on the six pages of editorials.

However, Joe, who is on a computer two feet away from me, shows it listed as story number three on page one. So there is something funny in the way Shoutwire presents articles to the public.

There is, however, another article by Vireliek about Israel that contains the following:

Palestine, originally the property of Germany before WW1, was captured by the allies and responsibility of the area was given to the newly created League of Nations, basically the Allied Powers of WW1. This group created the British mandate of Palestine which gave the job of administration to Britain. When the League of Nations was dissolved, the British government claimed governance over the land for as long as the mandate remained in effect.

In his historical resume, Vireliek conveniently ignores the entire history of Palestine prior to the 20th century, and then he slides in that it belonged to Germany! What a way to completely ignore the Palestinian people themselves who had been on the land for thousands of years -- living peacefully with the very small Jewish population. He also doesn't mention that the existing Jewish population in Palestine was against the Zionist programme of a Jewish state, as Reed discusses in detail in Controversy of Zion.

It also reveals his complete acceptance of the colonial mindset -- "it was the property of Germany" -- which fits in with his Zionist colonialism.

Finally after much discussion, on November 29, 1947, the United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution which called for a Jewish state to be created in the land of Palestine. The Jews used that resolution to start work on their new state. By May 14th, 1948 the state of Israel was officially declared a nation - 1 day before the British mandate of Palestine was set to expire. The land owned by the Arabs (45%) was supposed to become a Palestinian state, while the crown added the land it possessed to what the Jews owned to give them a bit over half of the land (55%).

This is where things started to get violent.

What about the Jewish terror organisations like the IRGUN that were carrying out attacks on the British and the Palestinians prior to the imposition of Israel? The Zionists had been "working on their new state" for decades, through blackmail and terror. Not a word on this from Vireliek. I have added a new thread with a UN Report on Zionist Terror in Palestine just to point out several hundred Zionist terror attacks from 1944-1948.

http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=4208.msg28006#msg28006

Keep an eye out for "Israel: Victim or Aggressor? - Part 2 - The Aggression Begins". I hope you enjoyed the first part of the editorial. If you agree with my article I encourage you to comment as I have a feeling I'll have quite a few racists and anti-semites crying foul. So let's drown them out with some positive feedback.

So anyone who disagrees with his interpretation is either a racist or an anti-semite. Typical ADF name-calling.

The entire article is a completely falsified description of the history of Zionist control of Palestine. There is no discussion of the behind the scenes manoeuvering of the Zionists, the blackmail, the pressure exerted on politicians to get them to back the plan. There is no discussion of Zionist collaboration with the Nazis. The article is a joke from the historical point of view.

Either the guy is a paid tool or he is a useful idiot. An idea of how little he understands about the way we are controlled through the use of words and propaganda is shown in his discussion of his use of the term anti-semitism.

I realize some people believe anti-semitism can be used to refer to other groups of people. So I checked it out by searching high and low on the internet for the meaning of anti-semitism. Turns out the way I use it is the only accepted definition of the word. So I'll continue using it the way it was meant to be used. Sure the original meaning hundreds of years ago may have been something else. But the origin of the word is not always the definition of a word. Please check the dictionary to confirm this for yourself.

So the entire question of power, of defining how people think by defining and redefining words, is irrelevant for Vireliek. The entire process of pathocratic double-speak, where the process is consciously used by pathological types, doesn't factor into his account. The control of the press by people who support Israel isn't mentioned.

So the guy is, effectively, an open Zionist agent. And we see that Shoutwire, whether it was consciously started as a front or not, has been brought into the fold, it is part of the system. That ties into the article and thread here:

http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=4162

which discusses the conscious use of trolls by Israel to promote the Zionist cause, to flood websites with pro-Israeli propaganda. It is very easy to see how Shoutwire, regardless of its original intent (which, as Scottie points out, was to create as much noise and conflict as possible and to revel in it), could become easy pickings for an organised creaw like that sent out by Israel.

So either Shoutwire was set up initially with that in mind, or because of its ignorance in how the world really works, coupled with an attitude that it doesn't matter what they say as long as they are fighting it out on Shoutwire, they were quickly taken over. An example of ponerology in action because the intitial premise -- get people fighting each other -- is pathological. There is no concern for truth, for honest, careful and critical debate leading to a goal. With such an attitude, what might have been a useful tool has become just another Zionist mouthpiece, in spite of the abundance of anti-Israel articles it carries. That becomes the first-level meaning that is seen by sincere people. The pathocratic double-speak is the reality behind that mask.

 

[Nathan]

A common complaint we've seen on Shoutwire was that SOTT's and Cass's articles were "toooo long!" That should give us a clue about the IQ of the average reader over there. It's the video-game, comic book, Jack-ass, Hollywood generation.

Unfortunately, this is the typical attention span for younger readers (and for many not so young readers too). And that's a problem we face. I've printed out reams of material (both SOTT and Cass) for friends to digest. Some have no problem getting through the material, others lag and lose interest. I've found myself summarising and highlighting key points to garner interest.

I think figuring out how to present such dense information to the video game generation is quite important, at least initially until the seekers from this generation learn to gradually extend their attention span to accommodate such dense subject matter. This generation is extremely visually orientated, which is why the Pentagon Strike has been so successful.

Anyway, I've already gone off on enough of a tangent for now. This Shoutcast situation is very interesting, yet another excellent source of learning ;)

 

[ark]

This is not just "young readers" that are mindless. Evidently their "Directors" are mindless as well. Perhaps they are "young", some of them, I suspect, are not so young. But even being young is not an excuse for being mindless. Even if I once wrote personally to "Bulshoy", I never posted on Shoutwire - as I suspected the trap. Now we have my suspicions confirmed. Shoutwire is just a tool for COINTELPRO operations on a grand scale, operated by mindless "activists". The least they care about is "truth". One more COINTELPRO operation exposed - and that is good, even if the don't care about it :)