Why use the Travel section of the London Times to 'prove' a mass behavioral effect?
Isn't Mutual Exclusivity in the human brain a significant tool for psy-ops?
Hmm.
professorpan wrote:So now Hugh is asserting that the TV show Dallas supplanted the House Committee on Assassinations with its "Who Shot J.R.?" story.
(shakes head wistfully)
Shaking one's head isn't a refutation of any kind.
I remember when the HSCA was in action but remember almost nothing about it from the papers where I was in the northeast urban corridor of the US. Since nothing was memorable, it was a whitewash. Because the truth of the matter is damn memorable!
Is 'greying' out a subject with boredom psy-ops? To hohum-ify it?
http://www.proparanoid.net/truth.htm
Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation
.....
10. Associate opponent charges with old news
11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions
But the CBS TV show 'Dallas' was absolutely inescapable. It became a national obsession with tall Texas-hair jokes, Joan Collins forever, etc.
CBS also happens to be the CIA's first and foremost TV network. During the 1950s every Christmas the top honchos of CBS would have a swank party with the top honchos of CIA. Because they were the same people. And ex-CBS News president Sig Mickelson has said so. On camera, too.
Having since read of how the HSCA was derailed and prevented from doing anything and how the CIA got ahold of 'mainstream media' over 20 years before, I'd conclude that the CIA would pull out all the stops to cauterize the suspicions against them over the JFK murder in Dallas. This motivation was one of the major reasons to murder RFK, too.
That would be a motivation to re-associate the city Dallas with something else.
"And now for something...completely different."
(reminder: this is examing the potential use of mutual exlusivity and re-association of the word 'Dallas' to minimize associating it with JFK's murder by the CIA, a tactic I think is being used with Borat's big movie.)
Pan again-
Zappa's father did stick radioactive pellets in his nose. Frank was anti-union. Vaclav Havel is a member of the Committee on the Present Danger.
Uh...so what? Ah.
17. Change the subject
And then pretend not have slung piles of other nonsense which was then owned up to with "I was being cheeky."
But sadly any criticism of Hugh's theories becomes an attack on him personally, which is not my intention. But when someone becomes so emotionally attached to a theory or way of thinking that he/she can't disengage emotionally, the discussion becomes repetitive and unproductive.
18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad
And a few of us are finding it productive. Go Ask Alice. (sorry, different movie.)
I'd rather be in Kazakhstan drinking horse urine than take the time to refute another one of his examples, so I'll just say adios to this thread.
25. Vanish
I'm reminded of a musician joke-
Q. How do you make a guitar player turn down?
A. Put music in front of him.
But what about Mutual Exclusivity as the brain science behind keyword hijacking?
Seems to me this phenomenon is as important to know as the Conservation of Momentum which reveals the 9/11 inside job.
Ain't science grand? I recommend looking at old movies and their release/run dates to see if there is a pattern of deflecting away from politically damaging keywords.
I've found a number of them. The dates match perfectly. Coincidence? Confirmation bias?
I think not.