vinny
The Living Force
you see, the trouble is, realitybasher, that we have had EVERY kind of person check-in on this forum:
we have HAD IT, with all the layer upon layer of lies, disinformation, propaganda, emotional stonewalling, fake interviews, crazy theories that stridently ignore solid evidence, conflicting eyewitness testimony, emotional rants about 'crazy conspiricists', etc etc ad nauseam. check the rest of the forum if you really want to see the details.
We have had fundamentalists who are absolutely emotionally locked down into the tunnel-vision one or another particular mindset, who are 100% hung-up on their own 'sacred cows'.
We have had deliberate disinformation agents.
We have had unconscious dupes.
We have had people with obvious intellectual or emotional difficulties who can't string a coherent deduction together.
We have had people who simply want to 'let off steam' and have a bit of a rant
We have had people disrupting maybe just for the 'fun' of it.
We have had casual curious bystanders, or 'dabblers'
And we have had sincere and determined seekers of objective truth.
how to separate out all these different things? It needs a great deal of wider-context knowledge and experience, and so we attempt to 'network' to gather this knowledge. The experiences dealing with some of the above has certainly given us valuable knowledge of how cointelpro operates.
So, for example, you are giving us your own personal eyewitness account. You must be aware that this certainly conflicts with other eyewitness accounts. So who to believe? It comes down to solid corroborating evidence, plus an in-depth knowledge of wider circumstances of the situation - this includes the political situation and a knowledge of ponerology and other aspects of our reality, and always 'who benefits' must be considered when looking at the sources of evidence.
Another point, which may have escaped you, is that there are very clear cointelpro-based reasons as to why someone might appear, and say exactly the things you are saying, as an attempt to deceive or add 'noise'. This puts you in a very difficult position - the burden of proof is distinctly on you, when so MUCH indicates a reality different to your account. As is said, a truly revolutionary theory requires truly revolutionary levels of evidence to back it up.
No one is simply going to take what you say at face value, when it immediately contradicts a wealth of other information. Anyone can SAY anything. If you expect to be taken seriously, you will need evidence. Do you happen to have any photos of the things you describe?
Plus you link to GLP. This shows you are either not in the know are you ARE in the know. Neither of which stands you in good stead.
I hope you can see that this is why you have received rather a cold reception to your eyewitness account. Marching straight in here with your own insubstantiated ideas and calling people retarded for not agreeing with them ain't gonna help either - it is rude, and indicates a certain fixed mindset, which is NOT conducive to finding the truth.
we have HAD IT, with all the layer upon layer of lies, disinformation, propaganda, emotional stonewalling, fake interviews, crazy theories that stridently ignore solid evidence, conflicting eyewitness testimony, emotional rants about 'crazy conspiricists', etc etc ad nauseam. check the rest of the forum if you really want to see the details.
We have had fundamentalists who are absolutely emotionally locked down into the tunnel-vision one or another particular mindset, who are 100% hung-up on their own 'sacred cows'.
We have had deliberate disinformation agents.
We have had unconscious dupes.
We have had people with obvious intellectual or emotional difficulties who can't string a coherent deduction together.
We have had people who simply want to 'let off steam' and have a bit of a rant
We have had people disrupting maybe just for the 'fun' of it.
We have had casual curious bystanders, or 'dabblers'
And we have had sincere and determined seekers of objective truth.
how to separate out all these different things? It needs a great deal of wider-context knowledge and experience, and so we attempt to 'network' to gather this knowledge. The experiences dealing with some of the above has certainly given us valuable knowledge of how cointelpro operates.
So, for example, you are giving us your own personal eyewitness account. You must be aware that this certainly conflicts with other eyewitness accounts. So who to believe? It comes down to solid corroborating evidence, plus an in-depth knowledge of wider circumstances of the situation - this includes the political situation and a knowledge of ponerology and other aspects of our reality, and always 'who benefits' must be considered when looking at the sources of evidence.
Another point, which may have escaped you, is that there are very clear cointelpro-based reasons as to why someone might appear, and say exactly the things you are saying, as an attempt to deceive or add 'noise'. This puts you in a very difficult position - the burden of proof is distinctly on you, when so MUCH indicates a reality different to your account. As is said, a truly revolutionary theory requires truly revolutionary levels of evidence to back it up.
No one is simply going to take what you say at face value, when it immediately contradicts a wealth of other information. Anyone can SAY anything. If you expect to be taken seriously, you will need evidence. Do you happen to have any photos of the things you describe?
Plus you link to GLP. This shows you are either not in the know are you ARE in the know. Neither of which stands you in good stead.
I hope you can see that this is why you have received rather a cold reception to your eyewitness account. Marching straight in here with your own insubstantiated ideas and calling people retarded for not agreeing with them ain't gonna help either - it is rude, and indicates a certain fixed mindset, which is NOT conducive to finding the truth.