Shoutwire as COINTELPRO

[Mrs. Peel]

If they really are open to discussion I encourage them to allow me to become a part of their school. No I will not read your books; instead I wish to be a free thinker, untainted by your teachings.

Obviously you have not read ANYTHING or you would be laughing as uproariously as I am over that statement.

"So what exactly is The Cassiopaeans Experiment? I've said a lot about it without actually telling you in detail what they believe. It's hard to get an exact list of what this group believes as their writings are long - very, very VERY long."

Speaking of reading something, try this:

http://www.sptimes.com/News/webspecials/exorcist/

Might answer a few of your questions about the Cassiopaean Experiment, written by a Pulitizer price winning journalist from the St. Petersburg Times. But wait, it is waaaay too long for you, I bet!

 

[gaelen]

If they really are open to discussion I encourage them to allow me to become a part of their school. No I will not read your books; instead I wish to be a free thinker, untainted by your teachings.

Obviously you have not read ANYTHING or you would be laughing as uproariously as I am over that statement.

Yes, its laughter tinged with boredom to be honest. It is so easy for people to be paid to write lies or to simply do it for egotisical kudos with their peers and for so many idiots to believe it. It gets so boring and tedious. Like waves of mediocrity and bile flooding the gates.The whole article is a juvenile example of how NOT to think freely and to appeal to the herd mentality of the terminally ignorant. In that sense, it's done its job very well.

Clappers, parasites and paid CoIntelpro goons - it's all a drain and all in abundance at Shoutwire it seems. There really is nothing that isn't ponerized by Zionist lackys.

G.

 

[dhess31]

A few interesting things pop-out to me in regards to this topic.

The first thing is that while they went to great links to attack Laura & the SOTT readers personally, there was never a critique done of the actual CONTENT of the articles. That was the first warning sign to me.

Another thing that stood-out was the public/private face we keep seeing with these "individuals". We saw it with Kaminski, we saw it with Bollyn and now we see in the emails between Scott and the "editor". Calm, rational and understanding in the email, but then at the flip of a switch juvenile, childish and intentionally trying to be divisive? He even admitted it in the article! Now think about this for a second. If you didn't know the names of these various posters and read the content of what they say...It all seems to be the SAME does it not? As soon as they get scratched it's like they are all Borg. Now why might that be? Maybe, underneath it all, they ARE the same? That gives, to my mind, a lot of credence to certain topics discussed here. And we can observe it in real-time.

That was the second warning.

The third warning for me was they didn't seem to make any attempt to stop the flaming and foul-language. Way too high of a noise-to-signal ratio for me.

Don

 

[bulshoy]

I have gotten a good laugh out of the following recommendation form the Shoutwire's guide to writing for the online audience:

If you've written enough solid work, you begin to get a reputation. People love you, hate you, or even want to kick your ass. Once you start receiving threatening emails, you know you're on the right track.

So, apparently, SOTT was doing everything right even by the Shoutwire standards of online-writing-for-the-cat-fight-entertainment. The SOTT articles 'polarized readers' very nicely, livening up the place, this is what was wanted, right? Why such uproar then?

My guess is, perhaps, that it is because SOTT is really NOT about this kind of empty discussion, where one could argue one side of the point and than do a backflip and argue the opposite side, just for the fun of it. SOTT has a point based on solid research, and they write about what really matters and is serious, to them and to others who are asking questions.

And perhaps this is the reason why SOTT articles are, content-wise, a few notches above anything else posted to Shoutwire, which is I'd say at about 75% pop-culture regurgitation (no offense, Shoutwire). The lack of appreciation of this fact is only your loss.

Yeah, I guess SOTT DOES do an OK job. SOTT discussions are polarizing, and there are always loads of comments.

There's nothing wrong with writing to elicit a response. That's what editorial writers do. Remember, ShoutWire writers are unpaid, and do what they do for the fun of it. So yeah, I'll write something that will piss off (can I say piss off in here?) about half of the readers in order to start a lively debate. It works, too. Ann Coulter, Margaret Wente and other writers do the exact same thing and it works great for them.

Man, so many comments that i'd like to address in here... I don't want to clog up your forums too much though. Let me put it this way: if you have a question regarding ShoutWire, its writers, readers, content or policies, now's your chance to get an honest, professional response.

Oh, and for the paranoid among you, I assure you that i'm not a propoganda agent, Mossad spy, or anything else. I'm a 28 year-old metallurgical engineer in a Northern Ontario mining town who likes to write. So no more accusations, please.

 

[domi]

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.

Let's not forget that there are venture capitalists out there that are "pushing" certain companies and/or ideas.

 

[Mark]

Yeah, I guess SOTT DOES do an OK job. SOTT discussions are polarizing, and there are always loads of comments.

There's nothing wrong with writing to elicit a response. That's what editorial writers do.

No, that's not true across the board. Some people write editorials to elicit thought, which is a form of response, but not the form you're suggesting.

Remember, ShoutWire writers are unpaid, and do what they do for the fun of it. So yeah, I'll write something that will piss off (can I say piss off in here?) about half of the readers in order to start a lively debate. It works, too. Ann Coulter, Margaret Wente and other writers do the exact same thing and it works great for them.

That's called manipulation and it's natural for specific mentalities, as evidenced by yours and Coulter's personality...

Man, so many comments that i'd like to address in here... I don't want to clog up your forums too much though. Let me put it this way: if you have a question regarding ShoutWire, its writers, readers, content or policies, now's your chance to get an honest, professional response.

Seems to me we've already gotten plenty of evidence. The cat's out of the bag now. Shoutwire is naked around here...

Oh, and for the paranoid among you, I assure you that i'm not a propoganda agent, Mossad spy, or anything else. I'm a 28 year-old metallurgical engineer in a Northern Ontario mining town who likes to write. So no more accusations, please.

If I can offer another observation: You're a useful idiot. That's not intentionally derogatory. It's just what happens to people when they don't see what's going on around them. You might consider watching the movie Arlington Road to see a useful idiot in action and the grave consequences, in case you can't see yourself.

 

[Beau]

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..

Yeah, that kind of spells it all out right there. They don't care about informing people. It seems politics and the talk about "stuff halfway around the world" is reacted with a roll of the eyes and a shrug of the shoulders. They just want people busy arguing amongst each other and wasting time on debates that are worthless, other than to waste people's time.

You see how this is exactly the tactics that COINTELPRO uses? Whether or not SW is COINTELPRO is pointless, as the effect is the same. People are driven away from any real understanding of the state of the world and why it is in the state it is in. It's not to be forgotten that the really hate-filled comments on their board were on the articles talking about Zionism.

 

[genero81]

I was dumb enough to think I could bring some reason to the comments there. But it was a very good lesson; not only did I get a first hand look
at how they twist and flame through "paramoralisms," and emotional accusations. (Which they don't back up, because it's cleary and end in itself)
I got to observe the reactions in myself as well. I will be better equiped to deal with similar situations in the future. Or at the very least be able to recognize them.

 

[ark]

I'm a 28 year-old metallurgical engineer in a Northern Ontario mining town who likes to write. So no more accusations, please.

You have forgotten to add something that is, perhaps, not important at all for YOU, but it is important for us and for this planet. You have forgotten to add:

And I do not care for the TRUTH. If I would care for the truth - I would lose my job.

 

[Beau]

Yeah, I guess SOTT DOES do an OK job. SOTT discussions are polarizing, and there are always loads of comments.

There's nothing wrong with writing to elicit a response. That's what editorial writers do. Remember, ShoutWire writers are unpaid, and do what they do for the fun of it. So yeah, I'll write something that will piss off (can I say piss off in here?) about half of the readers in order to start a lively debate. It works, too. Ann Coulter, Margaret Wente and other writers do the exact same thing and it works great for them.

Well, if you truly read and understood the editorials that get posted on SW by Signs of the Times, then you would understand why just posting something for debates and comments isn't very useful right now. It serves no purpose than to keep people occupied. Pissing people off for the fun of it sounds like something a socipath would do. Sounds as though you don't really have any connection with your readers at all. As you can see, the writers at SOTT are not at all about just engaging in energy-draining debates.

Then you have the nerve to call us a cult.

Looks like COINTELPRO from here, but Mark is probably right. You are a very useful idiot.

 

[bulshoy]

Yeah, I guess SOTT DOES do an OK job. SOTT discussions are polarizing, and there are always loads of comments.

There's nothing wrong with writing to elicit a response. That's what editorial writers do.

No, that's not true across the board. Some people write editorials to elicit thought, which is a form of response, but not the form you're suggesting.

Remember, ShoutWire writers are unpaid, and do what they do for the fun of it. So yeah, I'll write something that will piss off (can I say piss off in here?) about half of the readers in order to start a lively debate. It works, too. Ann Coulter, Margaret Wente and other writers do the exact same thing and it works great for them.

That's called manipulation and it's natural for specific mentalities, as evidenced by yours and Coulter's personality...

Man, so many comments that i'd like to address in here... I don't want to clog up your forums too much though. Let me put it this way: if you have a question regarding ShoutWire, its writers, readers, content or policies, now's your chance to get an honest, professional response.

Seems to me we've already gotten plenty of evidence. The cat's out of the bag now.

Oh, and for the paranoid among you, I assure you that i'm not a propoganda agent, Mossad spy, or anything else. I'm a 28 year-old metallurgical engineer in a Northern Ontario mining town who likes to write. So no more accusations, please.

If I can offer another observation: You're a useful idiot. That's not intentionally deragatory. It's just what happens to people when they don't see what's going on around them. You might consider watching the movie Arlington Road to see a useful idiot in action and the grave consequences, in case you can't see yourself.

I apologize for the long quote, but it helps me remember. Let's start at the top and work our way down, shall we?

You're right, some people do write to elicit thought. Not me, though. I write because I enjoy it. It's a hobby. I found a site (ShoutWire) that allowed its writers to write on any subject, no matter how controversial and inflammatory. I was intrigued and asked if I could also write for them. They said yes, and here we are. That's it. There's no alternative motive or hidden agenda. I like to write. That's it.

Are you comparing me to Ann Coulter? That's a pretty big insult. She's a hard-core conservative, whereas i'm as liberal as one can get. There is no comparison. However, if we're getting into psychology here, I DO enjoy hearing people's opinions. It is very interesting to write an editorial using my opinions and see what the reaction is from people all over the world. If that makes me a psychopath in your eyes, then fine. Luckily, I don't have to care. I don't know you and will never meet you, so your opinion of me simply isn't relevant.

You state that you have plenty of evidence. Evidence of what? Please, share it.

You have called me a "useful idiot", and claim that I should not be insulted by that term. You've just made this a lot more personal than you should have.

I could go ahead and call you an arrogant fool who thinks that they're enlightened and knows better than everyone else, when in reality you are paranoid on an almost insane level. You see conspiracies around you that don't exist. There is a medical term for that condition. It's called schizophrenia.

I have a movie suggestion that YOU should watch, too. It's called "A Beautiful Mind"

 

[ark]

I found a site (ShoutWire) that allowed its writers to write on any subject, no matter how controversial and inflammatory.

Still, you care for your "hobby", but you do not care for the results your hobby brings to other people. Some people have hobby shooting other people. then they say: it is FUN!

So, I repeat, you do not care for the truth. If so - you are a disgrace for this planet. But, you can say to yourself: "I am not the only one". And you will be right.

 

[anart]

Are you comparing me to Ann Coulter? That's a pretty big insult. She's a hard-core conservative, whereas i'm as liberal as one can get. There is no comparison.

Pardon the quick interruption, but you compared yourself to Ann Coulter in your first post.

However, if we're getting into psychology here, I DO enjoy hearing people's opinions. It is very interesting to write an editorial using my opinions and see what the reaction is from people all over the world. If that makes me a psychopath in your eyes, then fine. Luckily, I don't have to care. I don't know you and will never meet you, so your opinion of me simply isn't relevant.

If his opinion isn't relevant to you then why respond to what he said so emotionally? You're contradicting yourself.

You state that you have plenty of evidence. Evidence of what? Please, share it.

I think the evidence of which he speaks is written all over your web site - no need to share it with you - it came from you.

You have called me a "useful idiot", and claim that I should not be insulted by that term.

This is actually a technical term for someone who is unaware they are being used by others to bring about a certain result in a situation - it is actually much more a statement on one's lack of awareness than 'idiocy' per se.

You've just made this a lot more personal than you should have.

This sounds like a threat. That's unfortunate.

I could go ahead and call you an arrogant fool who thinks that they're enlightened and knows better than everyone else, when in reality you are paranoid on an almost insane level. You see conspiracies around you that don't exist. There is a medical term for that condition. It's called schizophrenia.

I have a movie suggestion that YOU should watch, too. It's called "A Beautiful Mind"

You just mentioned above that his impression about you is irrelevant, yet, again you're emotional about it - which is it? Also, as a side note "A Beautiful Mind" is actually about a stone cold psychopath with schizophrenia - John Nash's Game Theory is used to this day by psychopaths in power all over the world - interesting you would suggest that.

 

[ark]

I could go ahead and call you an arrogant fool who thinks that they're enlightened and knows better than everyone else, when in reality you are paranoid on an almost insane level. You see conspiracies around you that don't exist. There is a medical term for that condition. It's called schizophrenia.

I have a movie suggestion that YOU should watch, too. It's called "A Beautiful Mind"

You just mentioned above that his impression about you is irrelevant, yet, again you're emotional about it - which is it? Also, as a side note "A Beautiful Mind" is actually about a stone cold psychopath with schizophrenia - John Nash's Game Theory is used to this day by psychopaths in power all over the world - interesting you would suggest that.

Indeed, bulshoy perhaps will like to read Adventures With Cassiopaea Chapter 30

 

[Hildegarda]

You have called me a "useful idiot", and claim that I should not be insulted by that term. You've just made this a lot more personal than you should have.

There is indeed nothing to be insulted by.

from Wikipedia:

Idiot is a word derived from the Greek ἰδιώτης, idiōtēs ("layman," "person lacking professional skill," "a private citizen," "individual"), from ἴδιος, idios ("private," "one's own").[1] [..] "Idiot" was originally used in ancient Greek city-states to refer to people who were overly concerned with their own self-interest and ignored the needs of the community. Declining to take part in public life, such as (semi-)democratic government of the polis (city state), such as the Athenian democracy, was considered dishonorable. "Idiots" were seen as having bad judgment in public and political matters. [..]

'Useful idiot' is a term that harks back to the original meaning of the word:

In political jargon, the term "useful idiot" was used during the Cold War by anti-communists to describe Soviet sympathizers in western countries (particularly in the United States) and the alleged attitude of the Soviet government towards them. The implication was that the person in question was naive, foolish, or in willful denial, and that he or she was being cynically used by the Soviet Union, or another Communist state. The term is still in use and used more broadly to describe someone who is perceived to be manipulated by political movement, terrorist group, or hostile government, whether or not the group is Communist in nature.

As you see, the comment referred to your political judgement, not mental abilities.

Ample evidence has already been provided in this discussion that there are ulterior political motives behind Shoutwire's flaming against SOTT. Shoutwire has yet to step up and offer any mature, documented and professional comment regarding this development.

Willing participation in this could only mean two things: either one is not aware of what's going on (i.e., one is a 'useful idiot'), or one is aware of it and and conciously promotes it (which makes one, for a lack of a better term, an accomplice or an agent).