Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
Publishers pay for the featured spots at Borders. Fact. I checked.
CIA has a long history with publishers, influencing and BEING them.
Same with 'mainstream' news outlets. Only a few editors-in-chief can determine headlines. Fact. I checked.
Nothing "nebulous" about Operation Mockinbird which started over 50 years ago.
A CIA director confirmed it to a Senate committee in 1976 and even the NYTimes had to print some of the expose to keep their cover on 12/25/77.
When myself and others ask you for evidence to support your examples, you either suggest the controllers are too savvy to leave clues (i.e. no evidence is evidence) or point to books and documents that have no bearing on your examples. At best, your "evidence" is guilt-by-association and innuendo. At worse, it is cherry-picked data that ignores all contrary evidence.
No, I point to means-motive-opportunity-precedent- as clues and you say "no evidence."
Do covert operations only exist when they are documented over at smokinggun.com?
Ad hominum attacks are not 'criticism.' More 'you don't like people like me who are reasonable' narrative. I address legitimate questions. Nothing "fantastic" about propaganda, disinformation, psychological warfare, and social engineering. It's standard procedure by military governments since WWII (called the Revolution in Military Affairs) with texts on the subjects right out in the open. I've read them. And posted them here for as many as possible to see. Thus not "confabulation" either.
I spend hours a day pouring over every discipline I can think of with "rigor and objectivity." Having learned some things isn't "bias." More 'you don't like people like me who are reasonable' narrative.
There really is a link between CIA/DIA/CFR and media, though. Isn't there, PP?
Or is it just too enigmatic and ineffective and to be ignored?
Why Cohen 'picked Kazakhstan' is irrelevant. (sp.) The movie phenomenon exists and has an effect in context. But that is something you don't address, rather like the argument that an arrow keeps halving the distance to a target infinitely and thus can never reach the target.
I see that the Borat arrow has reached the target. Do you? How? Why?
You've never heard of using unwitting assets by greasing the rails for them?
I keep pointing at the top of the food chain where decisions like If-Yes or No-How-When -By Who are made to discern of there is a Why other than mere commerce and you keep pointing at the lowest point in the food chain as if there was no such thing as plausible deniability, patsies, stooges, useful geniuses, useful idiots, useful whatever.
Spook media management skill lies in the ability to find, nurture, and disperse Units of Meaning to create psycho-political events that influence perception. There are an awful lot of UM lying around. Like old movies and VHS releases which can be cherry-picked for rerelease with the excuse of a new format, DVD. Hence all the cute dog movies I noted when that Abu Ghraib dog-handler was finally prosecuted, something that took forever to come to trial and thus could easily be accompanied by checking stock for keywords/themes and paying to have it out on the 'Featured' shelves at Borders.
Gee, why go to the bother? Because so many American households have a dog and it would be politically-damaging to have all those people think of Abu Ghraib everytime they looked at Fido.
I also think that preventing possible catchphrases and nicknames with pre-emptive generation of them is used. Like 'Nacho Libre' and 'Backwards Jenny.'
I have a 1976 book by a former USAID film propagandist who was working for Nixon when he was crucified for Watergate and the author for partisan purposes to defend Nixon explains how the TV network news shows (CIA) skewed their reporting to make Nixon the maximum villain for months. Using catch phrases is one of those tactics.
'The Candor Project' to imply that Nixon's efforts at openness with journalists weere a manipulation, for instance.
Now we have Fox TV and their bogus 'War on Christmas.'
Simple. If I can think of this, professional mass mind managers sure can.
(Hope they aren't checking my hypotheses for 'good ideas.' gulp. nawww...)
Just because you can think something up does not make it real.
Don't confuse the processes of deduction and reverse-engineering with 'confirmation bias.'
You can take something apart to see how it works and deduce who might have made it without knowing every single detail which you call 'evidence.'
As I said above, we share goals if not tactics.
robert d reed wrote:Hugh, you completely overwork this stuff, to the detriment of a case that, in my opinion, has considerable merit in some very important respects. But you don't impress anyone but a fraction of the already convinced with observations that more often thean not sound as if they skirt the cliffside of Paranoia, and occasionally shuffle only two or three slipshod steps from that long last hurtle into Word Salad Hebephrenia.
The tendency to over-focus is an occupational hazard of the counterintelligence game. It's important to step away occasionally...sometimes, an extended sabbatical is indicated. Not that I'm in any position to recommend one to you. That's a decision best made in the first person.
But this shit can drive you nuts. It's possible to spend so much time panning for the gold of authentically valuable information that the eyes go funny, leading to grasping at every little sparkle of pyrite....meanwhile overlooking the real deal. Perhaps it's that the pyrite tends to show up as the gaudy nuggets, while the gold is a finer and much more elusive quantity.
As for your often dogmatically phrased, lead-biscuit pronouncements about social philosophy...you're no Guy DeBord http://www.bopsecrets.org/SI/debord/.
I've read enough of your posts to know that you don't lack for a sense of humor. I think you should employ it more often, particularly as a way of not taking yourself and your observations so heavily. I've found that contemplating the Heisenberg Principle is a good place to start...always plenty of comic material to be mined there.
A type of schizophrenia characterized by foolish mannerisms, senseless laughter, delusions, hallucinations, and regressive behavior.
The dictatorship of the bureaucratic economy cannot leave the exploited masses any significant margin of choice because it has had to make all the choices itself, and any choice made independently of it, whether regarding food or music or anything else, thus amounts to a declaration of war against it. This dictatorship must be enforced by permanent violence. Its spectacle imposes an image of the good which subsumes everything that officially exists, an image which is usually concentrated in a single individual, the guarantor of the system’s totalitarian cohesion. Everyone must magically identify with this absolute star or disappear. This master of everyone else’s nonconsumption is the heroic image that disguises the absolute exploitation entailed by the system of primitive accumulation accelerated by terror. If the entire Chinese population has to study Mao to the point of identifying with Mao, this is because there is nothing else they can be. The dominion of the concentrated spectacle is a police state.
65
The diffuse spectacle is associated with commodity abundance, with the undisturbed development of modern capitalism. Here each individual commodity is justified in the name of the grandeur of the total commodity production, of which the spectacle is a laudatory catalog. Irreconcilable claims jockey for position on the stage of the affluent economy’s unified spectacle, and different star commodities simultaneously promote conflicting social policies. The automobile spectacle, for example, strives for a perfect traffic flow entailing the destruction of old urban districts, while the city spectacle needs to preserve those districts as tourist attractions. The already dubious satisfaction alleged to be obtained from the consumption of the whole is thus constantly being disappointed because the actual consumer can directly access only a succession of fragments of this commodity heaven, fragments which invariably lack the quality attributed to the whole.
66
Each individual commodity fights for itself. It avoids acknowledging the others and strives to impose itself everywhere as if it were the only one in existence. The spectacle is the epic poem of this struggle, a struggle that no fall of Troy can bring to an end. The spectacle does not sing of men and their arms, but of commodities and their passions. In this blind struggle each commodity, by pursuing its own passion, unconsciously generates something beyond itself: the globalization of the commodity (which also amounts to the commodification of the globe). Thus, as a result of the cunning of the commodity, while each particular manifestation of the commodity eventually falls in battle, the general commodity-form continues onward toward its absolute realization.
67
The satisfaction that no longer comes from using the commodities produced in abundance is now sought through recognition of their value as commodities. Consumers are filled with religious fervor for the sovereign freedom of commodities whose use has become an end in itself. Waves of enthusiasm for particular products are propagated by all the communications media. A film sparks a fashion craze; a magazine publicizes night spots which in turn spin off different lines of products. The proliferation of faddish gadgets reflects the fact that as the mass of commodities becomes increasingly absurd, absurdity itself becomes a commodity. Trinkets such as key chains which come as free bonuses with the purchase of some luxury product, but which end up being traded back and forth as valued collectibles in their own right, reflect a mystical self-abandonment to commodity transcendence. Those who collect the trinkets that have been manufactured for the sole purpose of being collected are accumulating commodity indulgences — glorious tokens of the commodity’s real presence among the faithful. Reified people proudly display the proofs of their intimacy with the commodity. Like the old religious fetishism, with its convulsionary raptures and miraculous cures, the fetishism of commodities generates its own moments of fervent exaltation. All this is useful for only one purpose: producing habitual submission.
68
The pseudoneeds imposed by modern consumerism cannot be opposed by any genuine needs or desires that are not themselves also shaped by society and its history. But commodity abundance represents a total break in the organic development of social needs. Its mechanical accumulation unleashes an unlimited artificiality which overpowers any living desire. The cumulative power of this autonomous artificiality ends up by falsifying all social life.
judasdisney wrote:I had the same thought about Kazakhstan when I read about "Borat."
Clouding the issue is not an unfamiliar tactic, and the method potentially used in "Borat" would not be the first time.
As for Professorpan, "Operation Mockingbird" is the evidence. It is evidence enough that "Operation Mockingbird" -- even though exposed by a journalistic "legend" such as Carl Bernstein, and exposed in as mainstream a publication as Rolling Stone -- was afterwards buried and ignored and disregarded en masse.
It's as if the knowledge of "Operation Mockingbird" never happened.
And if there's a media figure or pundit or talk show out there which omits any and all knowledge or discussion of Operation Mockingbird, then de facto they are contributing, if not collaborating, with the goals of Mockingbird.
Doesn't Professorpan (and others) find it strange that such a news bombshell as Operation Mockingbird could have such far-ranging implications and potential consequences, only to be 100% never discussed or 100% never heard about again?
Surely 100% of this "100% vacuum of silence" cannot be without design or intent. Why never a single utterance about a piece of history so explosive?
I knew what I was looking at before I knew its name.
orz wrote:I knew what I was looking at before I knew its name.
Hugh, for me that consisely sums up where i think you're going wrong.
robert d reed wrote:Sounds like more Bolshie over-analysis to me. I can only imagine the interpretation of what Stephen Foster was up to...getting directives from a secret council of the Planter Aristocracy of the American South, I suppose.
Wry, but illustrates how important stereotypes and iconic images are to creating or just sustaining social ills. Children are conditioned and then given reinforcement as adults.My major problem with Hugh isn't his focus on Project Mockingbird, psychological warfare, and media manipulations...it's more with the spurious "examples" he so often points out. To me, all to often it looks like "wolf-crying"...
If you're familiar with that particular parable, I hope that you'll recall the moral- raise a false alarm too often, and after a while you'll find that no one responds or even reacts when the wolf really does show up, and the alarm is genuine.
I don't think many of my examples are spurious, of course. I see many more than I cite here.
Vocabulary word: NESTING
Weekend shows on NPR have had entire scripts fabricated with double-entendre keywords and phrases embedded in overarching subliminal themes nested in overt themes. Yet listeners heard what purported to be a spontaneous dialogue or interview.
This is a VERY HIGH level of psycho-theatrical construct performed almost flawlessly.
I just didn't know how to post that one here.
So, RDR, you ain't heard nothin' yet from me.
I see a wolf culture created over the last 50 years and institutionalized with sheep's clothing. When big furry tails and claws poke out I try to point. And when there is just the smell of wolfy breath I try to pointlThe real irony in this case is that with a bit more rigor, there are all sorts of examples to bring up that pack a lot more punch
Yeah, there's mass murder and torture and looting and poverty and poisoning and...
but people are either not aware
or accept justifications
or turn away to avoidist entertainment
...which is still boobytrapped with material designed to prevent an appropriate reaction should one SEE those big obvious crimes.
Since Americans are being drugged by the images they consume, I do the psycho-chemical analysis to find it. Like finding carcinogens in the town's drinking water.
>When it is suspected to me or obvious to others in specific examples, we learn what to reject and warn others away from.
>We also learn to what extent our media is controlled and poisoned. Many don't know the basics unlike some regulars here who say 'ho-hum quit repeating yourself.'
>We also learn from bad example what humane media messages to instead support and reinforce by finding out what fascists want us to see and believe.than the claim that Borat comprises part of a wider plot by the Cryptocracy to sanitize the present regime in Kazakhstan for the American public (most of whom don't know Kazakhstan from Freedonia, Borat or no Borat, and couldn't care less...you could probably poll the audiences coming out of the movie about Borat's nationality, and most of them wouldn't get the name right.
People on the street I ask about the reasons for US war in Iraq have said 'oh,...religious war. Terrorism.' This is a very common view and few know of the Big Prize of Caspian Sea oil and gas and Kazakhstan's role in getting at it.
This is already a long war and going to be longer so the pre-emptive diversion using linguistic principles of Mutual Exclusivity was no doubt approved in the psy-ops beaurocracy that looks ahead to ward off trouble with planning.
Hammering the unfamiliar keyword home is why it is in the title:
'Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan'
Hammering the keyword home is why there is viral marketing through controversy as lawsuits and discussions of anti-semitism vs entrapment etc. etc.
(The next film is going to be worse agit prop. Cohen's character will be gay. Think this will create resistance to Democratic initiatives next year? Ask Bill Clinton.)Which in turn points to a problem that goes a lot deeper than the conjectured subversion of the American movie industry by CIA semiotics specialists...like, you know, the elimination of the subject of geography from most American school curriculums, including at the college level. )
As for Professorpan, "Operation Mockingbird" is the evidence. It is evidence enough that "Operation Mockingbird" -- even though exposed by a journalistic "legend" such as Carl Bernstein, and exposed in as mainstream a publication as Rolling Stone -- was afterwards buried and ignored and disregarded en masse.
It's as if the knowledge of "Operation Mockingbird" never happened.
And if there's a media figure or pundit or talk show out there which omits any and all knowledge or discussion of Operation Mockingbird, then de facto they are contributing, if not collaborating, with the goals of Mockingbird.
Doesn't Professorpan (and others) find it strange that such a news bombshell as Operation Mockingbird could have such far-ranging implications and potential consequences, only to be 100% never discussed or 100% never heard about again?
Surely 100% of this "100% vacuum of silence" cannot be without design or intent. Why never a single utterance about a piece of history so explosive?
**********************************
Throughout this discussion, I reflected to what great extent the CIA (and its interlocking alliance with the energy/oil/crime/military-industrial rackets) is GUILTY of terrible frauds, abuses, killings, wars, influence-peddling, bribery, subversion, propaganda etc., and how this points to continued and increasingly sophisticated subversion of domestic and global society, to the ends of imposing an ordered, directed, controlled sociopolitical-economic system, DIRECTLY contrary to the ideals and goals of an authenticly democratic society.
DeBord's thesis complements Hugh Manatee's often brilliant, persistant insights and speculations, esp. in exposing some overreaching organizing principles and key motivations and processes re: HOW such a high degree of seeming coordination can be acheived by the various corporate/institutional entities from the Alphabet agencies to Publishing Houses, Mafia-connected Hollywood Glam/Adventure/Spectacle industry, mass-media, news, Madison Ave. PR/Marketting Agencies, to Pentagon Mind Warriors, Political Focus/Organizing Interests and sundry OTHER participant/actors.
Perhaps Hugh DOES reach to allegedly preposterous lengths sometimes to connect seemingly disparate, infinitely complex/labour-intensive events and circumstances necessary to shape and direct public attitudes/beliefs helpful to perpetuate the Captive Consumer Syndrome in the context of a psychologized Police State and a multinational Imperialistic status quo -- but like he said, one can't learn nor master difficult and demanding subjects w/o making mistakes. In this endeaver (distilling HOW this massive social-programming function is carried out) it's necessary to make reasonable guesses about the continued development of expertise based on the past evidence of specialization and organization vis-a-vis the CIA's infliltration and cooption of leading mass media vehicles/channels/companies (ie., Mockingbird).
Alex Constantine:
In the intervening years since, it's to be expected that the CIA et al. would have developed, perfected and coordinated new technology, techniques and methods to 'better' accomplish the PTB's agenda. We sure know 'their' power and influence hasn't been reigned-in or placed under responsible, wise citizen oversight, eh?
But most important to me -- stopping the assault of global corporatocracies/plutocracies on the biosphere. If we don't get our asses in gear, it won't matter who rules, what people watch on TV, or if the Masons are drinking the blood of infants. We'll all be fucked-diddly-ucked.
As for Professorpan, "Operation Mockingbird" is the evidence. It is evidence enough that "Operation Mockingbird" -- even though exposed by a journalistic "legend" such as Carl Bernstein, and exposed in as mainstream a publication as Rolling Stone -- was afterwards buried and ignored and disregarded en masse.
It's as if the knowledge of "Operation Mockingbird" never happened.
And if there's a media figure or pundit or talk show out there which omits any and all knowledge or discussion of Operation Mockingbird, then de facto they are contributing, if not collaborating, with the goals of Mockingbird.
Doesn't Professorpan (and others) find it strange that such a news bombshell as Operation Mockingbird could have such far-ranging implications and potential consequences, only to be 100% never discussed or 100% never heard about again?
Surely 100% of this "100% vacuum of silence" cannot be without design or intent. Why never a single utterance about a piece of history so explosive?
**********************************
Throughout this discussion, I reflected to what great extent the CIA (and its interlocking alliance with the energy/oil/crime/military-industrial rackets) is GUILTY of terrible frauds, abuses, killings, wars, influence-peddling, bribery, subversion, propaganda etc., and how this points to continued and increasingly sophisticated subversion of domestic and global society, to the ends of imposing an ordered, directed, controlled sociopolitical-economic system, DIRECTLY contrary to the ideals and goals of an authenticly democratic society.
DeBord's thesis complements Hugh Manatee's often brilliant, persistant insights and speculations, esp. in exposing some overreaching organizing principles and key motivations and processes re: HOW such a high degree of seeming coordination can be acheived by the various corporate/institutional entities from the Alphabet agencies to Publishing Houses, Mafia-connected Hollywood Glam/Adventure/Spectacle industry, mass-media, news, Madison Ave. PR/Marketting Agencies, to Pentagon Mind Warriors, Political Focus/Organizing Interests and sundry OTHER participant/actors.
Perhaps Hugh DOES reach to allegedly preposterous lengths sometimes to connect seemingly disparate, infinitely complex/labour-intensive events and circumstances necessary to shape and direct public attitudes/beliefs helpful to perpetuate the Captive Consumer Syndrome in the context of a psychologized Police State and a multinational Imperialistic status quo -- but like he said, one can't learn nor master difficult and demanding subjects w/o making mistakes. In this endeaver (distilling HOW this massive social-programming function is carried out) it's necessary to make reasonable guesses about the continued development of expertise based on the past evidence of specialization and organization vis-a-vis the CIA's infliltration and cooption of leading mass media vehicles/channels/companies (ie., Mockingbird).
Alex Constantine:
Return to Psyops and Meme Management
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests