thread hijacking. Laura must have hit a nerve

vinny

The Living Force
Laura said:
Since we have broached the subject, there is something about the whole Jewish question that has been niggling in my brain for the past week or so. Here it is:

I think that the holocaust denial stuff is being set up as a major tar baby.

I also think that the whole 9/11 movement should join together and concentrate on ONE thing: the weak link in all of it, including any Zionist manipulations; and that is : concentrating on the CRIMINAL aspect of 911, that it was a CRIME and we need to force the issue of an independent investigation that is REALLY independent and thorough and bring the criminals to trial.

What forcing that single issue will accomplish is this: in the course of investigating the crime as it should be investigated (and this will have to be really forced) and bringing the criminals to trial, ALL ELSE will be exposed.
Laura said:
The following is exactly the thing that is needed to press for a new, independent, (really, really, really independent!) investigation of 9/11. Nothing else will do. So, let's see how many 9/11 "truth" people go for that angle, insisting also that EVERY aspect of 9/11 be totally and completely re-investigated including the Pentagon strike:

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/06/341238.shtml
I've noticed a very interesting thing this morning. On several threads, Laura posted the above plus a fair bit of related information, and this REALLY must have touched a nerve, because in all of these threads simulataneously, since that was posted, some kind of pointless debate or flame-war has broken out.

Interesting? Don't believe it? Check out the most recent 10 or 20 threads. Could be random chance, but it looks to me like a cointelpro-distraction-strike. It might be quite interesting to see just who initiated and fueled these various distractions.

So, I'm bouncing it back to the top of the thread-list by re-posting it ;-)
Lets see if it acts a cointelpro-bait and happens again now I've called it...

edit: added a second quote above

2nd edit: after more reading, it looks like a boost in noise levels in general, across other threads too.
 
FifthWay said:
What I am seeing is that a variety of "new" people popped up on this forum. While this is a good thing in principle, it feels like a number of "them" are here to confuse manipulate and twist - even try to discredit experienced long time posters.

And I think that is meant by "being informed".

So all be extra cautious and discerning and don't let anybody get away with anything!
Some guidelines from another thread:


mk31 said:
I don't think it helps any of the parties involved if questions about the topic are responded to
with ridicule. First time poster here but from an outsider's perspective on this forum there
seems to be some elitism from some of the senior members. I've just started reading your
book, "the High strangeness..." and so far have been quite taken with it Laura but I'm surprised
and I think it's unfortunate that you would take this kind of tone even when you feel your position to
be solid and correct. I am the first to admit that I have much to learn about "the true
nature of reality" but the fact that I and other's are here states the fact that we are curious
and our questions are an attempt to come closer to this understanding.
Let's not be disingenuous mk. If you are aware of our work, you are certainly aware of 1) the possibilities of hyperdimensional manipulations; 2) the work of Andrzej Lobaczewski - Ponerology - which actually obviates the necessity for hyperdimensional explanations though it doesn't negate such as a reality. Fact is, ponerological networks of deviant personality types form pretty much the same way that fat collects together on the soup.

As you might suppose if your neurons were firing, at this point in time, we've had a LOT of experience dealing with attack and attackers, both the blatant and more subtle "butter wouldn't melt in my mouth" kind. We can spot 'em usually in the first sentence. You have been spotted.

For any readers who want to have the "experience" just read the following threads from start to finish:

http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=1093

http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=395

... where we do actually take the time to allow the "agents" to express themselves and then, gradually, as the discussion proceeds, see that they expose themselves in quite dramatic ways. I want to point out that these types do the same stuff over and over again; you'd think that they would get creative and try something different.

Observation and evidence indicates that, certainly, individuals can behave as agents without being conscious that they are fully functional ponerological (network of evil) elements; that's a given. But based on the fact that you were just "attracted to this discussion" like a moth to a flame suggests otherwise.

Now, sure, I could do the pas de deux with you for a few days, maybe a week, and eventually you would be outted in your full schizotypal glory, but why bother? I have better, more creative things to do - like finish the second edition of our 9/11 book in which we are taking the gloves off across the board. I've also got two other books in progress, one of which is about people just like you: a layman's guide to Ponerology "Wolves and Sheep."

Speaking of sheep, did you ever hear the term "Wolves in Sheep's Clothing?"

Sure you have. The concept is that there are wolves among us that dress up like sheep, pretend to be just innocent questioners, try to act like they are civilized and just "doing this for your own good." Well, when anybody says that they "hate to say this, but it's for your own good," run like hell. It's a sure sign of the Wolf in Sheep's Clothing.

Now, for any readers of this thread who want to get the REAL Scoop, start with our work on Ponerology
Political Ponerology: A Science on The Nature of Evil adjusted for Political Purposes

And then move to some more directed studies of psychopathy and other types of deviant behavior:

The Psychopath: The Mask of Sanity

You will also notice many links on the sidebar in the psychopathy section to articles, both on our site and offsite, that will educate you so that you, too, can spot deviants like "mk" in the first sentence. Among these articles is a review/synopsis of psychologist George Simon's book cleverly entitled: In Sheep's Clothing.

From this most interesting book we learn about folks like mk in the following:

psychologist George Simon said:
There are two basic types of aggression: overt-aggression and covert-aggression. When you're determined to have something and you're open, direct and obvious in your manner of fighting, your behavior is best labeled overtly aggressive. When you're out to "win," dominate or control, but are subtle, underhanded or deceptive enough to hide your true intentions, your behavior is most appropriately labeled covertly aggressive. Now, avoiding any overt display of aggression while simultaneously intimidating others into giving you what you want is a powerfully manipulative maneuver. That's why covert-aggression is most often the vehicle for interpersonal manipulation.

The Process of Victimization

For a long time, I wondered why manipulation victims have a hard time seeing what really goes on in manipulative interactions. At first, I was tempted to fault them. But I've learned that they get hoodwinked for some very good reasons:

1. A manipulator's aggression is not obvious. Our gut may tell us that they're fighting for something, struggling to overcome us, gain power, or have their way, and we find ourselves unconsciously on the defensive. But because we can't point to clear, objective evidence they're aggressing against us, we can't readily validate our feelings.

2. The tactics manipulators use can make it seem like they're hurting, caring, defending, ..., almost anything but fighting. These tactics are hard to recognize as merely clever ploys. They always make just enough sense to make a person doubt their gut hunch that they're being taken advantage of or abused. Besides, the tactics not only make it hard for you to consciously and objectively tell that a manipulator is fighting, but they also simultaneously keep you or consciously on the defensive. These features make them highly effective psychological weapons to which anyone can be vulnerable. It's hard to think clearly when someone has you emotionally on the run.

3. All of us have weaknesses and insecurities that a clever manipulator might exploit. Sometimes, we're aware of these weaknesses and how someone might use them to take advantage of us. For example, I hear parents say things like: "Yeah, I know I have a big guilt button." - But at the time their manipulative child is busily pushing that button, they can easily forget what's really going on. Besides, sometimes we're unaware of our biggest vulnerabilities. Manipulators often know us better than we know ourselves. They know what buttons to push, when and how hard. Our lack of self-knowledge sets us up to be exploited.

4. What our gut tells us a manipulator is like, challenges everything we've been taught to believe about human nature. We've been inundated with a psychology that has us seeing everybody, at least to some degree, as afraid, insecure or "hung-up." So, while our gut tells us we're dealing with a ruthless conniver, our head tells us they must be really frightened or wounded "underneath." What's more, most of us generally hate to think of ourselves as callous and insensitive people. We hesitate to make harsh or seemingly negative judgments about others. We want to give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they don't really harbor the malevolent intentions we suspect. We're more apt to doubt and blame ourselves for daring to believe what our gut tells us about our manipulator's character. [...]

While, from a certain perspective we might say someone engaging in these behaviors is defending their ego from any sense of shame or guilt, it's important to realize that at the time the aggressor is exhibiting these behaviors, he is not primarily defending (i.e. attempting to prevent some internally painful event from occurring), but rather fighting to maintain position, gain power and to remove any obstacles (both internal and external) in the way of getting what he wants.

Seeing the aggressor as on the defensive in any sense is a set-up for victimization.

Recognizing that they're primarily on the offensive, mentally prepares a person for the decisive action they need to take in order to avoid being run over.

Therefore, I think it's best to conceptualize many of the mental behaviors (no matter how "automatic" or "unconscious" they may appear) we often think of as defense mechanisms, as offensive power tactics, because aggressive personalities employ them primarily to manipulate, control and achieve dominance over others.

Rather than trying to prevent something emotionally painful or dreadful from happening, anyone using these tactics is primarily trying to ensure that something they want to happen does indeed happen. [...]

Denial - This is when the aggressor refuses to admit that they've done something harmful or hurtful when they clearly have. It's a way they lie (to themselves as well as to others) about their aggressive intentions. This "Who... Me?" tactic is a way of "playing innocent," and invites the victim to feel unjustified in confronting the aggressor about the inappropriateness of a behavior. It's also the way the aggressor gives him/herself permission to keep right on doing what they want to do. This denial is not the same kind of denial that a person who has just lost a loved one and can't quite bear to accept the pain and reality of the loss engages in. That type of denial really is mostly a "defense" against unbearable hurt and anxiety. Rather, this type of denial is not primarily a "defense" but a maneuver the aggressor uses to get others to back off, back down or maybe even feel guilty themselves for insinuating he's doing something wrong. [...]

Selective Inattention - This tactic is similar to and sometimes mistaken for denial It's when the aggressor "plays dumb," or acts oblivious. When engaging in this tactic, the aggressor actively ignores the warnings, pleas or wishes of others, and in general, refuses to pay attention to everything and anything that might distract them from pursuing their own agenda. Often, the aggressor knows full well what you want from him when he starts to exhibit this "I don't want to hear it!" behavior. By using this tactic, the aggressor actively resists submitting himself to the tasks of paying attention...

Rationalization - A rationalization is the excuse an aggressor tries to offer for engaging in an inappropriate or harmful behavior. It can be an effective tactic, especially when the explanation or justification the aggressor offers makes just enough sense that any reasonably conscientious person is likely to fall for it. It's a powerful tactic because it not only serves to remove any internal resistance the aggressor might have about doing what he wants to do (quieting any qualms of conscience he might have) but also to keep others off his back. If the aggressor can convince you he's justified in whatever he's doing, then he's freer to pursue his goals without interference. [...]

Diversion - A moving target is hard to hit. When we try to pin a manipulator down or try to keep a discussion focused on a single issue or behavior we don't like, he's expert at knowing how to change the subject, dodge the issue or in some way throw us a curve. Manipulators use distraction and diversion techniques to keep the focus off their behavior, move us off-track, and keep themselves free to promote their self-serving hidden agendas. [...]

Lying - It's often hard to tell when a person is lying at the time he's doing it. Fortunately, there are times when the truth will out because circumstances don't bear out somebody's story. But there are also times when you don't know you've been deceived until it's too late. One way to minimize the chances that someone will put one over on you is to remember that because aggressive personalities of all types will generally stop at nothing to get what they want, you can expect them to lie and cheat.

Another thing to remember is that manipulators - covert-aggressive personalities that they are - are prone to lie in subtle, covert ways. Courts are well aware of the many ways that people lie, as they require that court oaths charge that testifiers tell "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth." Manipulators often lie by withholding a significant amount of the truth from you or by distorting the truth. They are adept at being vague when you ask them direct questions. This is an especially slick way of lying' omission. Keep this in mind when dealing with a suspected wolf in sheep's clothing. [...]

Covert Intimidation - Aggressors frequently threaten their victims to keep them anxious, apprehensive and in a one-down position. Covert-aggressives intimidate their victims by making veiled (subtle, indirect or implied) threats. Guilt-tripping and shaming are two of the covert-aggressive's favourite weapons. Both are special intimidation tactics.

Guilt-tripping - One thing that aggressive personalities know well is that other types of persons have very different consciences than they do. Manipulators are often skilled at using what they know to be the greater conscientiousness of their victims as a means of keeping them in a self-doubting, anxious, and submissive position. The more conscientious the potential victim, the more effective guilt is as a weapon.

Aggressive personalities of all types use guilt-tripping so frequently and effectively as a manipulative tactic, that I believe it illustrates how fundamentally different in character they are compared to other (especially neurotic) personalities. All a manipulator has to do is suggest to the conscientious person that they don't care enough, are too selfish, etc., and that person immediately starts to feel bad. On the contrary, a conscientious person might try until they're blue in the face to get a manipulator (or any other aggressive personality) to feel badly about a hurtful behavior, acknowledge responsibility, or admit wrongdoing, to absolutely no avail.

Shaming - This is the technique of using subtle sarcasm and put-downs as a means of increasing fear and self-doubt in others. Covert-aggressives use this tactic to make others feel inadequate or unworthy, and therefore, defer to them. It's an effective way to foster a continued sense of personal inadequacy in the weaker party, thereby allowing an aggressor to maintain a position of dominance. [...]

Playing the Victim Role - This tactic involves portraying oneself as an innocent victim of circumstances or someone else's behavior in order to gain sympathy, evoke compassion and thereby get something from another. One thing that covert-aggressive personalities count on is the fact that less calloused and less hostile personalities usually can't stand to see anyone suffering. Therefore, the tactic is simple. Convince your victim you're suffering in some way, and they'll try to relieve your distress. [...]

Vilifying the Victim - This tactic is frequently used in conjunction with the tactic of playing the victim role. The aggressor uses this tactic to make it appear he is only responding (i.e. defending himself against) aggression on the part of the victim. It enables the aggressor to better put the victim on the defensive. [...]

Playing the Servant Role - Covert-aggressives use this tactic to cloak their self-serving agendas in the guise of service to a more noble cause. It's a common tactic but difficult to recognize. By pretending to be working hard on someone else's behalf, covert-aggressives conceal their own ambition, desire for power, and quest for a position of dominance over others. [...]

A recent scandal involving a tele-evangelist resulted in his church's governance body censuring him for one year. But he told his congregation he couldn't stop his ministry because he had to be faithful to the Lord's will (God supposedly talked to him and told him not to quit). This minister was clearly being defiant of his church's established authority. Yet, he presented himself as a person being humbly submissive to the "highest" authority. One hallmark characteristic of covert-aggressive personalities is loudly professing subservience while fighting for dominance.

Seduction - Covert-aggressive personalities are adept at charming, praising, flattering or overtly supporting others in order to get them to lower their defenses and surrender their trust and loyalty. Covert-aggressives are also particularly aware that people who are to some extent emotionally needy and dependent (and that includes most people who aren't character-disordered) want approval, reassurance, and a sense of being valued and needed more than anything. Appearing to be attentive to these needs can be a manipulator's ticket to incredible power over others. [...]

Projecting the blame (blaming others) - Aggressive personalities are always looking for a way to shift the blame for their aggressive behavior. Covert-aggressives are not only skilled at finding scapegoats, they're expert at doing so in subtle, hard to detect ways.

Minimization - This tactic is a unique kind of denial coupled with rationalization. When using this maneuver, the aggressor is attempting to assert that his abusive behavior isn't really as harmful or irresponsible as someone else may be claiming. It's the aggressor's attempt to make a molehill out of a mountain.

I've presented the principal tactics that covert-aggressives use to manipulate and control others. They are not always easy to recognize. Although all aggressive personalities tend to use these tactics, covert-aggressives generally use them slickly, subtly and adeptly. Anyone dealing with a covertly aggressive person will need to heighten gut-level sensitivity to the use of these tactics if they're to avoid being taken in by them.
In short, mk, I got your number in the first paragraph (and the rest of your pals, too.) As The Gardener sez: its a Trolls Siege.
 
sleepyvinny said:
I've noticed a very interesting thing this morning. On several threads, Laura posted the above plus a fair bit of related information, and this REALLY must have touched a nerve, because in all of these threads simulataneously, since that was posted, some kind of pointless debate or flame-war has broken out.
Funny how they tend to be newbies claiming naivety and "just asking questions", too.

"I'm just a harmless little sheep... Baaaaaa!!!"

:lol:
 
what really bothers me, is that probably this storm of distractions IS confusing things and dissuading genuine newcomers who are seeking something.
 
Yeah, but what can we do? Crack down too much, and we look like hardasses and people stay away. Give the noisemakers too much slack, and people will think "food fight", and stay away. Where do you draw the line? I guess we just have to be creative, stand up for truth, and trust that like-minded individuals will see through the bollocks.
 
BTW - check this out:

Interesting article in "New Scientist"

New Scientist said:
Software that follows an online discussion and picks out the most relevant post and the most influential participant could provide an automated synopsis of chat-rooms debates and email chatter.

The software was developed by Eduard Hovy and colleagues at the Information Sciences Institute, University of Southern California, US. They say single out the key post or email from thousands of messages.

To start, they manually categorised the messages according to their purpose - identifying, for instance, requests for information, answers to such requests and social chit-chat.

Then they used a lexical database to look for similarities in the vocabulary of each message and find relationships between them. Another lexical analysis technique was used to measure the degree to which a message was useful to posters, based on the language used in replies.
Page ranking

To integrate these different analyses, the team modified an algorithm called Hypertext Induced Topic Selection (HITS), which is normally used to rank web pages according to the links between them. But, instead of using it to search for the web page most relevant to a particular query, they used the algorithm to find the most influential post in a conversational thread.

The dataset used by the team was threaded discussions between students on the USC undergraduate computer science course. The software was found to be 70% accurate at picking out the most relevant post, when compared to human analysis.

"I think people will want to try this technique to untangle threads in conversation records of all kinds, including message boards," Hovy says.
Rich structure

Jon Kleinberg, a computer scientist from Cornell University, New York, who developed the HITS algorithm, believes the approach has potential.

"It is a very nice application of link analysis," he told New Scientist. "Exploiting the fact that human conversations have a rich structure beyond the raw text they contain." Kleinberg, however, notes that the software is not yet fully automated, as the messaged have to be categorised.

Categorisation is "notoriously difficult", Hovy concedes. To do this, "one has to combine the number of responses, the types of responses and the authority levels of the responders all together. We've only begun to untangle the threads".

The research was presented at the Human Language Technology Conference 2006 in New York, US, in May 2006.
 
Ryan said:
Yeah, but what can we do? Crack down too much, and we look like hardasses and people stay away. Give the noisemakers too much slack, and people will think "food fight", and stay away. Where do you draw the line? I guess we just have to be creative, stand up for truth, and trust that like-minded individuals will see through the bollocks.

Seems to me THIS way of discussing the issue is rather creative, humorous too! ;)
Thanks Laura, your contribution is proving to be invaluable.
 
On another thread:

Youngfox said:
"...there's also a group called the Rendon Group that is all about controlling public opinion on government actions that people are reporting on their site meters. Considering that the Rendon Group has contracts from BushCo to spread pro-war propaganda, it's hard to imagine that they aren't also targeting left-leaning blogs, possibly trying to circumvent productive anti-war discussion by bomb-throwing and other nonsense."
Professional trolls* by Joshua Holland

behind netvocates (and it's link to customscoop)

A little corporatist cointelpro to stir the internet pot...ugh.
 
sleepyvinny said:
what really bothers me, is that probably this storm of distractions IS confusing things and dissuading genuine newcomers who are seeking something.
I really don't think it is. The way I see it, confusion is being thrown into the forum, and members are learning the task of cleaning it up. People are watching, reading and coming to conclusions. When we can ride the trubulence and come out clean, this is all on record.

People in this world are very much confused, and the biggest question is how to learn to think clearly. When one can handle confusion, then all the other issues can be addressed. Disinformants know this, so their main weapon IS confusion.

And the main response of members of this forum is learning to deal with it. As such, we are an example of a very fundamental solution being established. This is nothing less than self-empowerment, and making an example of it to all who come across here.

So take heart and stand tall. The world is watching.
 
Wait until the new podcast comes out...

That should make things even more interesting...

Don
 
People in this world are very much confused, and the biggest question is how to learn to think clearly. When one can handle confusion, then all the other issues can be addressed. Disinformants know this, so their main weapon IS confusion.



I know I am extremely unpopular on this forum now and my posts mean little but this illustrates
where I'm coming from. I ain't no scientist and frankly pretty much a normal guy and my
questions weren't trying to front on anyone, but clear up MY confusion.

oh well. sorry for "cloggin up the forum."
 
EsoQuest said:
People in this world are very much confused, and the biggest question is how to learn to think clearly. When one can handle confusion, then all the other issues can be addressed. Disinformants know this, so their main weapon IS confusion.

And the main response of members of this forum is learning to deal with it. As such, we are an example of a very fundamental solution being established. This is nothing less than self-empowerment, and making an example of it to all who come across here.
You've got that right, I considered myself as a newbie, I'm learning to think clearly. The debates on Alex Jones and Rense among others have been besides interesting, revealing on how the process of thoughts works, and I think I have being not just learning in the theoretical way but in the practical one.

I had recently an encounter with a friend about signs website -by the way-, he argumented that signs website is tendentious and does not believe in its best interest, but he came with asumptions, I encouraged him to listen the Media podcast and he came back with these statements.
 
Back
Top Bottom