Can we start a new "crisis actor" thread?

[mentalgongfu2]

BrandonD said:

Our western mentality toward violence is the problem, not just here at home but globally. To some degree powerful people are doing their evils out in the world without the consent of the citizens, but at the same time powerful people are merely an extension of the mentality of its citizens toward how we should solve our problems.

Spot on. Reminded me of a very instructive book I read a few years back.

The Shame of the Cities is a book by Lincoln Steffens. Published in 1904, it is a collection of articles which Steffens had written for McClure’s Magazine.[1] It reports on the workings of corrupt political machines in several major U.S. cities, along with a few efforts to combat them. It is considered one of several early major pieces of muckraking journalism, though Steffens later claimed that this work made him "the first muckraker."[2]

Though Steffens' subject was municipal corruption, he did not present his work as an exposé of corruption; rather, he wanted to draw attention to the public's complicity in allowing corruption to continue. Steffens tried to advance a theory of city corruption: corruption, he claimed, was the result of "big business men" who corrupted city government for their own ends, and "the typical business man"—average Americans—who ignored politics and allowed such corruption to continue. He framed his work as an attempt "to sound for the civic pride of an apparently shameless citizenship," by making the public face their responsibility in the persistence of municipal corruption.[3]

Edited to fix formatting.

[JackRiddler]

BrandonD said:

Our western mentality toward violence is the problem, not just here at home but globally. To some degree powerful people are doing their evils out in the world without the consent of the citizens, but at the same time powerful people are merely an extension of the mentality of its citizens toward how we should solve our problems.

Spot on.

So any time I want to support some total POOMA hypothesis, I'll know now to just add a non-sequitur about how puppies are beautiful and we shouldn't run them through meat grinders.

Something like this:

I have this persistent gut feeling that my randomly chosen neighbor on the third floor, this frail old lady who's going blind, has been luring college football players into her apartment and serially murdering them with an axe, then wiping out all of the evidence so thoroughly that I have never seen any of it.

Here's a video that shows pictures of her and suggests as much. It's important for us all to consider this idea with an open mind, and to associate it with other endangered ideas like that the government engages in psyops and money controls the media. Because these ideas should all go together, they all potentially have equal validity. That's why we have a Free Internet, and this small protected space known as RI.

I think puppies are beautiful. Here is a famous writer with an unrelated but highly insightful quote about the magnificence of the sunrise, and staying at peace with your own soul:

etc.

If you doubt anything I just said in print, you are censoring me and murdering the puppies. Do you want to run puppies through meat grinders? God no. Why can't we all just get along and be kind to each other? Please.

[mentalgongfu2]

Thanks for your well thought out and constructive reply, Jack.

[JackRiddler]

Thanks for your well thought out and constructive reply, Jack.

Thanks to you too! Pleasure doing business. Do note I added more to it (starting with the bolded sentence) so as to make it even more constructive.

So did you (and BrandonD too) have a sly plan to move this thread away from "Justifiably Actionable Bloodcurdling Bizarroland Slander of Some Random Lady (or Ladies)" into "Positive Generalities We Can All Agree With"?

Good work!

.

[Wombaticus Rex]

Jack, your efforts at parody have really lapsed into incoherence here. If you think the thread is dumb, just don't participate in it.

FFS, here's some Baby Otters.

[JackRiddler]

Jack, your efforts at parody have really lapsed into incoherence here. If you think the thread is dumb, just don't participate in it.

I don't think this thread is dumb.

I think it is actively toxic and an offense to human decency.

It purports to be about a general category of propaganda tactic possibly employed by elite bad actors. But it begins with an example that assaults some unknown innocent lady (perhaps two ladies: irrelevant) in Boston, in a particularly creepy fashion.

If there was a thread that picked a random woman's Facebook page and spoke disparagingly of her appearance, I think you'd find it offensive. You would also not want it associated with the site, due to its alienating power.

The OP picks a random unidentified woman and accuses her, with no evidentiary basis and a violently illogical argument, of participating as a hired hand in an act of false flag terrorism that murdered people.

I suspect this is playing, regardless of motives of individuals, into a general, coordinated well-poisoning campaign to discredit deep state research, much in the way that the 9/11 "no-planes" crowd turned out to be spooked up the wazoo, and also engaged in direct personal harrassment of their critics.

Those who choose to defend this aren't even defending it. They're posting completely unrelated stuff about kumbaya, and let's be friendly now, and oh, look at this intensely wise general thing someone wrote long ago.

[82_28]

Quit making making personal mountains out of molehills guys. We know that the long-timers can be basically trusted. Nordic, chill the fuck out too and don't do that "bye" thing. Stick around and consider it all just water under the bridge. We are all in basic concert here. There will always be differences but our anger should not be directed at one another.

[JackRiddler]

Quit making making personal mountains out of molehills guys. We know that the long-timers can be basically trusted. Nordic, chill the fuck out too and don't do that "bye" thing. Stick around and consider it all just water under the bridge. We are all in basic concert here. There will always be differences but our anger should not be directed at one another.

No, I think we should randomly select real human ladies in Boston to defame with fantasy visions of how they helped murder other real humans in Boston. Because what could go wrong with that?

[Wombaticus Rex]

The OP picks a random unidentified woman and accuses her, with no evidentiary basis and a violently illogical argument, of participating as a hired hand in an act of false flag terrorism that murdered people.

Sure, and people nobody here knows anything about routinely get accused of far worse. It's the nature of the niche.

I don't think there's anything about RI that is not alienating to most English-speaking human beings.

[JackRiddler]

The OP picks a random unidentified woman and accuses her, with no evidentiary basis and a violently illogical argument, of participating as a hired hand in an act of false flag terrorism that murdered people.

Sure, and people nobody here knows anything about routinely get accused of far worse. It's the nature of the niche.

It is an egregious example. It's due to my weakness, but due also to prior experience with this kind of well-poisoning, that it's turning into a terminal annoyance for me. I mean, a) the inability to absorb the simplest logical analysis on the part of "researchers," combined with b) the doofy contrast of responses that urge us all to just be nice while we rip up this poor lady. The real problem is an offensive tone!

I'm not out to be friends with this shit. I wish I didn't have so much work invested in the real threads. But my time here will end, sure enough.

[Project Willow]

I think Jack has a point about the ethical problems with singling out random strangers for speculation-based accusations, but I'd likewise ask him not to inflict the same sort of accusatory process on other posters here. Rail against the idea, the lack of evidence, the strategic and ethical problems, but don't make it personal.

[JackRiddler]

Thanks Willow. If you look back, you'll see weeks worth of thoroughly personalized insults directed at me by Nordic. These were purely speculative and not actually related to me. It's indicative of the active and malicious imagination he (and the videomaker of the OP) apply in deciding, on gut feeling, that some poor lady on the street who talked too readily to the media in Boston is a suitable target, and should be compared to known cases of elite political malice like the neocon architects of the Saddam "statue toppling" psyop and the "Brooks Brothers" rioters of Florida 2000.

I have trouble not calling out stupidity in posts, especially when these are bereft of empathy and trampling on powerless, random individuals in the name of "fighting the power." I also have trouble forgetting my own experiences, seeing the awful treatment to which real victims of 9/11 were subjected to from both the "skeptics" and the conspiracy merchandisers, how made-up talk of "crisis actors" turned the focus away from the Bush criminal organization and attacked first responders and family members and impeached all of the evidence we had to demonstrate a cover-up. Much of this was done rather transparently with the aim of destroying the 9/11 truth movement. There are others on this board who, like me, spent years working on that effort only to face the worst attacks from fake "truthers" who played the old COINTELPRO device of labeling every other activist as COINTELPRO.

It's a further weakness of mine to identify stupidity by that name, but this also comes in response to what's given here in the posts, and it's truly not "personal." I hope that Nordic, assuming he is not a persona intentionally following a well-poisoning strategy, wakes up to the way he is helping the bad guys with his naive and stubborn adherence to claims that attack the innocent, contrary to logic.

[Searcher08]

Surely most,if not all of us here are people who are characterised by willingness to think(by MSM standards at least) that which is unthinkable and at our best, have it on the table for discussion?

Earlier in the thread I referred to what you were doing here as no different than the attitude of JREF people to the initial seedlings of 9/11 truth - and you responded with letting us know about the some of the victims families being behind that. That didnt happen in a vacuum - it took people being willing to discuss the undiscussable first. The pseudoskeptics arguments were that it was all inherently BS and that looking at it was (choose from) illogical, insensitive, a distraction, appalling, disloyal to the government, not based in facts etc.

Let's put a hypothesis forward that what happned at Sandy Hook was not all it appeared in the MSM version. Let's also assume that there will be both COINTELPRO type operations AND that there will be genuinely unbalanced people interested in it. Take that as a given.

What I was aware of in watching some of the Sandy Hook videos were massive incongruities in the behavior of some of the significant people involved. FWIW their behaviour triggered the same 'communication BS' tripwires I learned through decades in the corporate world. Yes, I am aware this is anecdotal; I dont ask you believe it, but just to accept it as another viewpoint.The single most incongruent data point to me were the people walking in circles at the Sandy Hook fire station.
I posted up thread that there may be an explanation which is enmeshed within the crisisactors.org website - that of a deliberate mixing of elements of real world event and set-up simulation - the frame for it being one of mutiple agency training and social network observation.

The need and urgency for this was presented very clearly on their site.

The opportunities for feeding at the DHS hogtrough - enormous, the amount of data that could be captured - vast - and it is a given that the NSA ant ALL DATA EVERYWHERE for further analysis. This is totally different from the conspiracy angle of screaming 'IT'S ALL FAKE!!!IT'S JUST A PSYOP. THEY WANT OUR GUNS'. Those would be outputs being measured and modelled, not necessarily objectives.

[JackRiddler]

It's pointless, all you'll ever see is the pseudo-skeptic side of the attack, and not the side to which you are contributing by naively (or maliciously) accepting obvious bullshit tropes. However, this is too juicy:

What I was aware of in watching some of the Sandy Hook videos were massive incongruities in the behavior of some of the significant people involved. FWIW their behaviour triggered the same 'communication BS' tripwires I learned through decades in the corporate world.

Possibly because they learned the same very similar corporate BS about how to comport themselves even if they're standing over the bloody corpses of their own children?

THERE IS NO RIGHT WAY TO GRIEVE IN PUBLIC IN FRONT OF CAMERAS FOR THE EDIFICATION OF MILLIONS WHO MIGHT PASS JUDGMENT.

There is no right way not to "look" phony or suspect to someone.

Character armor is common, incredibly diverse, thick as all hell, and not in itself evidence of witting anything. It's very interesting. It's almost never a plot.

Your feelings and alarm bells about someone's particular character armor are not evidence with respect to their conscious actions or thoughts. Might tell you a lot about what kind of person they are underneath. Might prompt you to look for evidence. But if you can't find any, then yes, with some things -- like your feeling that people are not actually the grieving parents of the dead children -- it's better to just forego talking about it until you do. And it's court solid. Intellectual discipline! Try it sometimes.

Down this road lies the death of serious inquiry and any hope of opposition to the power structures that generate propaganda and misinformation.

[Saurian Tail]

Extraverted Intuition (Ne):

Let's put a hypothesis forward that ...

Meet Extraverted Thinking (Te):

it's better to just forego talking about it until you do. And it's court solid. Intellectual discipline! Try it sometimes.

I'm pretty certain that Searcher is an ENTP and that Jack is an ENTJ or INTJ.

Jack is conclusive (Ni … Introverted Intution) and values order and structure (Te) .. but doesn't really do feelings.

Searcher is open and speculative (Ne) (a Searcher!) and uses rational argumentation (Ti … Introverted Thinking) to try to "open up" other people to a broader (more Ne) perspective.

I'm an INFP and have Ne as my second function. I identify with and understand Searcher, even when I disagree with what he says. I'm very sensitive to the Te "voice" … it is in my Anima position. When it is used wisely, I admire and respect it … when it is used as a weapon, I am easily wounded.

Here is a function chart for reference:



Notice where Te and Ne fall in the functional stack for the various types and what "voice" is heard by each party. Then consider why INFJ's/ENFJ's like Nordic and Canadian_watcher get apoplectic when being trapped in the Te logic box (their trickster and/or demon position). To an INFJ or ENFJ stuck in the Te logic box, perhaps the only option might appear to be to tell the other person to "fuck off". It's not very effective, but I understand why it happens.

I'm sorry if this is off-topic and perhaps a bit too personal. These days I'm so fascinated with how people interact with one another and why arguments persist. As an idealist, I wish that everyone could understand one another and pull together to make the world a better place. One can certainly hope!