Miles Mathis on Bob Dylan & Operation Rolling Stone

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Miles Mathis on Bob Dylan & Operation Rolling Stone

Postby guruilla » Sun May 10, 2015 1:45 pm

I just came upon Miles Mathis' site. Has anyone seen it? Curious to hear your thoughts.

At first glance it seems less-than-credible (too broad a brush stroke), and the writing is just-OK; the research doesn't appear obviously "off" or sloppy, only that he makes a lot of leaps.

I was particularly interested by a piece on Bob Dylan (PDF). Here's an excerpt:

We know Intelligence was running all sorts of secret operations in the 1960's. Many of them have
since been partially de-classified, like Operation Mockingbird, Operation Bluebird, Operation Chaos,
MKULTRA, and many many more. But there appears to have been an even larger, more fundamental
Operation beneath all of them. This was Operation Rolling Stone. It was the promotion of change in
all forms. To what end? The promotion of trade. The Jews and Gentiles that would run the 20th
century were masters of trade. They were money lenders and money changers and money makers.
These families had always been very good at making money, but in the 20th century they discovered a
way to accelerate this money making beyond even their own dreams. They discovered that accelerated
trade depended directly on accelerated change. The more change of any kind they could introduce into society,
the more money they would make. This is simply because change can always be accompanied with new products.
New products = new wealth. More products = more wealth. Therefore, the fundamental and underlying Operation
of the 20th century has been CHANGE.

This was revolutionary in every way, since humans don't really like change. Like cats and all other
animals, they prefer things to stay as they are. Living creatures tend to equate change with discomfort.
So to promote change was to go against human nature. It wasn't something that would happen on its
own. It had to be manufactured and constantly sold.

...

But what does this all have to do with Bob Dylan? Dylan was just one player in a vast operation of
change. And one of the clues is the “Rolling Stone” meme. We see it coming up several times, in
things that don't appear to be related. We see Dylan's famous song, we see the band the Rolling Stones,
and we see the magazine Rolling Stone. All came out in the 1960's. Why? Have you ever asked that question?
Maybe. Has anyone ever explained that to you? I don't think so.

To understand it, we have to go back to the maxim that started them all: A rolling stone gathers no moss.

That is attributed to Publilius Syrus, from the first century BC. That just means little citizen of Syrus,
so the person is anonymous. He is said to have been a slave from Syria, later freed, so he may have
been a Jew. However that may be, the maxim was suggestive to those would control the 20th century
because it was the perfect expression of change as the engine of wealth. A rolling stone gathers no
moss, but it gathers something else green: money. This is what Don McLean meant when he said in
American Pie, “moss grows fat on a rolling stone, but that's not how it used to be.” The moss there is
money. A rolling stone gathers no moss, but it grows fat on money.

Robert Heinlein cryptically suggested the same thing as far back as 1952, in his story The Rolling Stones.
It is about a family in search of adventure and money. So the Rolling Stone meme was a creation of Intelligence.
It was likely the title of their biggest and longest running Operation. In this way, it linked Dylan, the Rolling Stones,
and the magazine. All were fronts for British/US intelligence. Their prime directive was the creation of rapid change.

Much of the piece is pretty speculative. He argues, less-than-convincingly, that Leonard Cohen wrote many of Dylan's songs. But towards the end there's this:

This would also explain Joni Mitchell's very strange comments in 2010, when she said of Dylan:
"He’s a plagiarist, and his name and voice are fake. Everything about Bob is a deception. We
are like night and day, he and I."

(see here: http://www.americansongwriter.com/2013/ ... -comments/)

Mathis sums up:

In conclusion, I repeat that this is no easier for me than for you. I don't like losing “Shelter from the
Storm,” for one thing. It hurts. Talent and real art have been rare enough in the past century without
losing what little we had to these government disinfo programs. It isn't just Dylan I am losing here, it
is Cohen—who was in many ways the real thing. But how can I ever listen to anything by him again
without being reminded of his part in all this? If Joni Mitchell is bitter, I think we can now see she has
every right to be. We all do. All the arts, including popular music, have been mangled and destroyed
to suit the financial interests of a few vulgar families. And if you think you have it bad—having your
old heroes ripped out from under you—think of kids now. You find that the beauties you grew up on
were partial and compromised and ultimately in the service of a great ugliness. But turn on the radio
now: the Wasteland is here in its gasping totality and the youth are being sucked utterly dry by its
sirocco. What they wouldn't give for the relative richness of your upbringing. This is the predictable
outcome of art controlled by trade.

But I have since learned that trade curses everything it handles; and though you trade in messages
from heaven, the whole curse of trade attaches to the business.

There's also a MM debunking site, which maybe speaks to the guy's favor: https://milespantloadmathis.wordpress.com/
It is a lot easier to fool people than show them how they have been fooled.
User avatar
guruilla
 
Posts: 1414
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 3:13 am
Location: Canada
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Miles Mathis on Bob Dylan & Operation Rolling Stone

Postby 0_0 » Sun May 10, 2015 4:01 pm

Hey guruilla, I read most of those Mathis pfds over last couple of weeks. I read the Sharon Tate one first, then the Kennedy one, the OJ Simpson one, the John Lennon one, The Bob Dylan one etc. I think they're entertaining at least to read, and i'd love to discuss them somewhat here. Altho strictly speaking it's a forbidden topic here i believe, since it ties in with the whole hoax/crisis actors train of thought. And sure enough i found myself on the www.cluesforum.info site shortly after, from the maker of the September Clues documentary, claiming no planes hit those buildings in New York. Then i found myself checking videos on youtube about the Sandy Hook event, claiming it was all a hoax. Now i never was intrested in Sandy Hook before and that Hoax-crowd seemed to me to be like the most bizarre self-evidently dumb and untrue take on things. But after looking at some videos i changed my stance and felt that at the least there was soemthing very strange about all of it. A lot of people really do seem to be acting, which in the case of a real event wouldn't be necessary, at least not to the extent that it seemed to be going on in this case. I was kinda doubting my sanity again at this point. Then i found the Lesta Neidam channel on youtube, who makes the most amazing videos imo. Just type that name in youtube, you'll find his/her channel and then also check out their G+ page with lots of extra comments and thoughts. The latest event they're making videos about is the Nepal earthquake and although the idea that that was a hoax is even crazier, some of the videos are again -to me at least- very convincing.

In general with all these people mentioned above, the thing is that they bring up very strange anomalies, stuff most people would never pick up on, and patiently zoom in on it until you have no other choice than to agree that something isn't right. Mathis has a knack for it, but especially that Lesta Neidam person. It shows a fantastic power of observation imo. So much the weirder that they mix it up with stuff that is so obviously sloppily researched, flat out wrong or badly reasoned. As a small example for Mathis: in his Kennedy paper he uses a black and white pic of the assasination, only it's actually from a reenactment of the event done in the 80s. Nowhere does he acknowledge that, and he goes on a long tangent about how this weird pic doesn't match the others. He also has a different site where he focuses exclusively on his physics theories, claiming pi is actually 4 or something. I didn't check those cos my own knowledge of physics is sadly very small. But i did see at one point that Mathis himself makes a really basic dumb reasoning error concerning statistics. Stuff like that.

So it's definitely a mixed bag and my own take on it at the moment is that some agency somewhere is actively promoting this whole "everything a hoax" theory by injecting little snippets, clues and anomalies in these events. Wether the people discussed above are just picking up on those clues without putting 1 and 1 together or that they are actively involved in promoting this way of thinking I don't know. Again especially with Lesta, the videos are in their simplicity so convincing and he picks up on the minutest details with such a precision that it does make me wonder. Anyway, it seems to me to be more logical that they saw this hoax theory and decided to feed into it with some real anomalies than that everything we heard about for the last 100 years really was a hoax. Putting on one hoax after the other without anyone realising just seems pointless, but confusing the public even more by making the idea that everyhting might be hoax and noone or nothing can be trusted does seem to have a certain point to it. Sorry to ramble on, it's been on my mind lately.

Joni Mitchell did a lot of cocaine in the seventies which can make people paranoid i guess. She has that disease where you think insects and alien stuff is crawling under your skin too. I think she sorta retracted what she said about Bob Dylan in a later interview and blamed the reporter of the first interview. Sad that she had a stroke recently.
playmobil of the gods
0_0
 
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 9:13 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Miles Mathis on Bob Dylan & Operation Rolling Stone

Postby Lord Balto » Sun May 10, 2015 8:45 pm

I tend to ignore these guys, normally, as well as idiots like Neil Degrasse Tyson who represent the negative space around them. Both groups are trying to play a symphony with one string and a kazoo. Reality isn't either/or. It's a complex dynamic of interacting forces. And I must say, Tyson isn't doing himself any favors by calling everyone who disagrees with him a conspiracy theorist. He just makes himself look like an intellectual bigot.

As for Nepal, NDTV (New Delhi) had crews on the ground within a day or so. At some point the purported hoax involves virtually everyone on the planet except the hoaxee, which is the height of clinical paranoia.

So, are these guys for real, or are they just muddying the waters to throw off anyone with a functioning brain? I have no answer to that, but it goes to the very heart of the question of how far the propaganda machine has infiltrated the real world.

P.S.: I just looked at the Mathis site. You really take this guy seriously? I mean, "Stephen Hawking died and has been replaced"? Really? Sounds like another Jim Fetzer to me, whose only purpose is to make anyone who doubts the official narrative look like a lune.
User avatar
Lord Balto
 
Posts: 733
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2007 5:34 pm
Location: Interzone
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Miles Mathis on Bob Dylan & Operation Rolling Stone

Postby guruilla » Sun May 10, 2015 9:40 pm

I have only read the Dylan piece and the one on Graham Hancock, Pinchbeck, & Brand as schills.

The honest response for me is "I don't know." If the guy writes well and most of his points are at least coherent and logical, then I won't dismiss what he is saying just because it sounds nuts.

I don't think there's any doubt that, as conspiracy research degenerates into a form of "marginal"/mainstream entertainment and, like Ufology, becomes another cultural commodity, more and more poison enters the well until the water becomes undrinkable, which would of course be the point. Creating entirely bogus conspiracy/scams around real events, and as pointed out above, enough weird anomalies and parts that don't add up embedded into actual conspiracies so that researchers take the wrong path and wind up wandering dazed through Chapel Perilous, all the while thinking they are still reporting hard facts, and/or believing and arguing that there are no hard facts, that it is all quantum field phenomena, or whatever (which may be true at that level, but it doesn't mean you are going to eat your shorts for breakfast and put on a pancake)... is a great way to neutralize/discredit any potentially effective researchers.

But, is using one's own gauge of what's crazy or not good enough? If only it were that easy! Is it enough to just look at things a researcher puts out there and say, "he's a whack-job" and ignore him? I prefer to take it on a case-by-case basis (present case being Bob Dylan). Does it make more sense to discuss the claims, or the person making them? And is this material still relevant if it is somehow tainted, even if deliberately?

Maybe the growing meme about our cultural icons all being part of some psi-op is itself a psi-op to strip our icons of credibility. Personally, I lean towards the first hypothesis more, but I try to stay open to the shades of the spectrum. I'm not a Dylan fan, so it's easier for me to accept the idea that he was a front man.

Overall, the net result of all of these "conspiracy speculatives" is becoming less and less sure of what to believe. There are good arguments both for this and against it, as being a potentially positive development for the individual researcher.
It is a lot easier to fool people than show them how they have been fooled.
User avatar
guruilla
 
Posts: 1414
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 3:13 am
Location: Canada
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Miles Mathis on Bob Dylan & Operation Rolling Stone

Postby Morty » Sun May 10, 2015 10:24 pm

It seems the mindset of a civilization was transformed by the promotion of an incorrect understanding of a proverb. "A rolling stone gathers no moss":

What It Originally Meant

"A rolling stone gathers no moss, which sucks because a naked, gray rock without any moss on it is an affront to all that is good. Fuck that mossless rock!"

Our first clue that this has been bastardized is the fact that versions of it go back almost 2,000 years, to ancient Roman rhetorician Quintilian. This was an era when the most rock star lifestyle imaginable involved owning a nice plot of land and paying your taxes on time. Nobody was writing about the virtues of being a free-spirited drifter back then.

In fact, Quintilian helpfully avoided the confusing "stones and moss" metaphor and used the much clearer "A plant often removed cannot thrive." Well, that makes more sense: If you keep ripping up a flower and replanting it every week, it's never going to grow. In fact, there were other versions over the centuries, which included "A tree often transplanted is never loaded with fruit" and "... as the rolling stone gathers no moss, so the roving heart gathers no affections," both of which have the advantage of not assuming that the listener likes mossy rocks in their yard.

But the moss-and-stone metaphor is the one that survived, and that's why the hippies could think that a proverb intended to encourage settling down not only supports bouncing around from place to place, but actually warns against settling down, as if a long-term career and family is somehow harmful to the human soul. All because a generation of people read this metaphor and thought, "Eew, moss."


http://www.cracked.com/article_20251_th ... bs_p2.html
User avatar
Morty
 
Posts: 422
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2014 10:53 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Miles Mathis on Bob Dylan & Operation Rolling Stone

Postby Lord Balto » Mon May 11, 2015 12:04 am

guruilla » Sun May 10, 2015 9:40 pm wrote:I have only read the Dylan piece and the one on Graham Hancock, Pinchbeck, & Brand as schills.

The honest response for me is "I don't know." If the guy writes well and most of his points are at least coherent and logical, then I won't dismiss what he is saying just because it sounds nuts.

I don't think there's any doubt that, as conspiracy research degenerates into a form of "marginal"/mainstream entertainment and, like Ufology, becomes another cultural commodity, more and more poison enters the well until the water becomes undrinkable, which would of course be the point. Creating entirely bogus conspiracy/scams around real events, and as pointed out above, enough weird anomalies and parts that don't add up embedded into actual conspiracies so that researchers take the wrong path and wind up wandering dazed through Chapel Perilous, all the while thinking they are still reporting hard facts, and/or believing and arguing that there are no hard facts, that it is all quantum field phenomena, or whatever (which may be true at that level, but it doesn't mean you are going to eat your shorts for breakfast and put on a pancake)... is a great way to neutralize/discredit any potentially effective researchers.

But, is using one's own gauge of what's crazy or not good enough? If only it were that easy! Is it enough to just look at things a researcher puts out there and say, "he's a whack-job" and ignore him? I prefer to take it on a case-by-case basis (present case being Bob Dylan). Does it make more sense to discuss the claims, or the person making them? And is this material still relevant if it is somehow tainted, even if deliberately?

Maybe the growing meme about our cultural icons all being part of some psi-op is itself a psi-op to strip our icons of credibility. Personally, I lean towards the first hypothesis more, but I try to stay open to the shades of the spectrum. I'm not a Dylan fan, so it's easier for me to accept the idea that he was a front man.

Overall, the net result of all of these "conspiracy speculatives" is becoming less and less sure of what to believe. There are good arguments both for this and against it, as being a potentially positive development for the individual researcher.


I try to live in a consistent universe. If someone I'm reading clearly does not live in a consistent universe, I ignore them. Not because I am narrow minded but because the lack of consistency implies an inability to tell fantasy from reality. The point is that if one cannot see the problem with one ridiculous scenario (Stephen Hawking has been substituted), one cannot be depended on to see the ridiculousness of any scenario. If someone is flogging one ridiculous theory more idiotic than the last, I see no point in examining all of his theories. The guy may not be clinically insane, but the odds are vanishingly small that any of his theories are worth looking at. I mean, seriously, how many hoaxes can there be on one timeline? This guy literally doesn't believe that anything he sees on TV is real. This is the diametrical opposite of folks who think the TV is talking to them. Both conditions are evidence of a fundamental lack of understanding of the nature of reality and their place in it. This is all about ego. The guy thinks that the whole world is trying to fool him, but he is too smart to buy into it. And no matter which side of the barbed wire fence the guy is standing on, the property line runs between nuts and more nuts.
User avatar
Lord Balto
 
Posts: 733
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2007 5:34 pm
Location: Interzone
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Miles Mathis on Bob Dylan & Operation Rolling Stone

Postby justdrew » Mon May 11, 2015 9:58 am

remember: cognitive infiltration
By 1964 there were 1.5 million mobile phone users in the US
User avatar
justdrew
 
Posts: 11966
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 7:57 pm
Location: unknown
Blog: View Blog (11)

Re: Miles Mathis on Bob Dylan & Operation Rolling Stone

Postby guruilla » Mon May 11, 2015 11:23 am

He doesn't strike me as a nut; in which case, since i agree something isn't right here, then other possibilities present themselves.

This brought to my attention since I posted this thread yesterday.

For the first time in decades, the left has serious opposition from within its own ranks. ARC [Art Renewal Center] hired Miles to attack the left, not realizing that he was the strangest of bedfellows. Had they known that they had hired a former worker for Earth First, a card-carrying member of Greenpeace, an unrepentant Chomskyite, even a supporter of Ward Churchill, they would surely have been kept up nights. Miles learned to write by reading Thoreau and Wendell Berry, so it is unlikely that he would share the political views of the neocons. Miles' readings of Nietzsche~another mentor~had steered him not to Ayn Rand and Social Darwinism, but to an artist-centered theory of art that would turn out to be a truly extraordinary stance at the end of the 20th century. This stance has allowed Miles to critique both the left and the right from a position of unassailable power: a stance of power since it is ultimately futile to deny that the artist is the primary hand and voice of art. Only another artist could logically have the standing to refute him, and no true artist would do so. What artist would argue that non-artists should control art?

...
[recently added: and in 2010 he was contacted by an astrophysicist at NASA and Johns Hopkins, who recommended he publish in book form ASAP. This NASA scientist even offered to write the introduction, and Miles' first physics book came out in the summer of that year. Another reader offered to bankroll his second book, which came out in late 2011
http://www.mileswmathis.com/bio.html].


NASA!? :indifferentsneer:

Here's a shot of MM at Montalivet, France
Image

A Net-image-search of "Montalivet, France" brings up tons of arty-erotic shots naked children. Oops.

Also MM's own little secret soc, The Guild of the White Stone, has open echoes of Lewis Carroll and prepubescent Muses: http://www.mileswmathis.com/guild.html

I checked this guy out because a listener of my podcast recommended him. Normally I have discerning listeners (or so I like to think) and this one seemed intelligent, so I followed it up.

I still think the Dylan hypothesis has merit. And while I agree that dodgy tree means dodgy fruit, putting good apples among rotten ones is a good way to make sure it all starts to stink.
It is a lot easier to fool people than show them how they have been fooled.
User avatar
guruilla
 
Posts: 1414
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 3:13 am
Location: Canada
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Miles Mathis on Bob Dylan & Operation Rolling Stone

Postby Burnt Hill » Mon May 11, 2015 4:29 pm

Not to beat a dead mantee, but I can imagine the scolds had HMW presented the "rolling stone gathers no money" as a cultural influencing theme- promoted by Bob Dylan (especially Bob D, especially here) Leonard Cohen et al. It is just interesting how we are influenced to digest information, and I believe we need to do a better job of that. Maybe we are doing a better job of it, and that is what I am noticing. Still I cant help but wonder how this op would be viewed had it been offered by the aforementioned disappeared poster. Just food for thought, I am not trying to stir the pot! :sun:
User avatar
Burnt Hill
 
Posts: 2584
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 7:42 pm
Location: down down
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Miles Mathis on Bob Dylan & Operation Rolling Stone

Postby Burnt Hill » Mon May 11, 2015 4:38 pm

perhaps Intelligence "gave" Joni Mitchell Morgellons disease to discredit her, as the illness remains circumspect?
User avatar
Burnt Hill
 
Posts: 2584
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 7:42 pm
Location: down down
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Miles Mathis on Bob Dylan & Operation Rolling Stone

Postby jlaw172364 » Mon May 11, 2015 9:31 pm

He seems like he's an independent thinker presenting a somewhat fresh (at least for me) take on certain cultural figures I had suspicions about. I'm now at the point where I have no trouble assuming that EVERY figure in the mass media, no matter how innocuous seeming is some sort of intelligence operative. I mean, even Julia Child worked for the OSS, lol. Is nothing sacred? Was her cooking show nothing more than a plot to prematurely shorten our lives and sell more butter?

Unfortunately, since he has polymath tendencies, he spreads himself way to thin to make an impact.
jlaw172364
 
Posts: 432
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 4:28 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Miles Mathis on Bob Dylan & Operation Rolling Stone

Postby BrandonD » Mon May 11, 2015 9:38 pm

0_0 » Sun May 10, 2015 3:01 pm wrote:Hey guruilla, I read most of those Mathis pfds over last couple of weeks. I read the Sharon Tate one first, then the Kennedy one, the OJ Simpson one, the John Lennon one, The Bob Dylan one etc. I think they're entertaining at least to read, and i'd love to discuss them somewhat here. Altho strictly speaking it's a forbidden topic here i believe, since it ties in with the whole hoax/crisis actors train of thought.


Is that subject explicitly forbidden here? Or is it just an idea with very few supporters in this forum?

Non-sarcastic question.
"One measures a circle, beginning anywhere." -Charles Fort
User avatar
BrandonD
 
Posts: 768
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2011 2:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Miles Mathis on Bob Dylan & Operation Rolling Stone

Postby brekin » Mon May 11, 2015 10:58 pm

God almighty. I have my guilty pleasures, but Christ on a cracker...
Stephen Hawking died and replaced? Manson living in Santa Barbara?
In fact I'm surprised one of his updates isn't:
NEW PAPER, added 4/11/15, Christ revealed to be living on Ritz Cracker from where he secretly rules the world. I show lots of photographic evidence. If you thought you'd hit the bottom of the cracker barrel, take a deep breathe, wheee!

Two other marks of an evil genius.
1. Linked PDF stories, er essays.
2. Solicitations for donations via PayPal and Amazon, to help fund his fight against the global conspiracy

Updates
http://mileswmathis.com/updates.html

NEW PAPER, added 4/27/15, On Chemtrails and Other Topics. Brief commentary on chemtrails, as well as some updates from my mailbag.
PAPER UPDATE, added 4/22/15, Stephen Hawking died and has been replaced. To create confusion around this paper, someone (probably at the behest of Intelligence) created an internet death hoax for Hawking two days after it was posted. The death hoax got over a million likes at Facebook and was reported on widely in the mainstream press. Curious timing, no?
NEW PAPER, added 4/17/15, Stephen Hawking died and has been replaced. I show lots of photographic evidence that Hawking died in 1985 and has been played by an impostor since then.
NEW PAPER, added 4/13/15, Blank Space. Where I out Taylor Swift and others.
NEW PAPER, added 4/3/15, The Boston Marathon Bombing Trial. I show you that the trial, like the event itself, is fake. Included is a brief analysis of the Gabby Giffords shooting, which is related.
PAPER UPDATE, added 3/25/15, The Hidden King: Camelot ruled from the Cave of Merlin. I have added another 25 pages of explosive evidence, most of it old photographs. Via this evidence, I should change my title to Hidden Kings.
NEW PAPER, added 3/18/15, The Hidden King: Camelot ruled from the Cave of Merlin. If you thought you had hit the bottom of the rabbit hole, click on the title here. Take a deep breath first, though.
NEW PAPER, added 2/25/15, The Patty Hearst Kidnapping was Fake. Also related commentary on Clint Eastwood and Dirty Harry.
NEW CARTOON, added 2/24/15. My first SQUIB cartoon in over 25 years! Go here if you didn't know I was a cartoonist in college.
NEW PAPER, added 1/30/15, Bob Dylan's real link to the Rolling Stones. Operation Rolling Stone. I also out the real poet behind Dylan's songs. Joni can't tell you, so I have to.
PAPER UPDATE, added 12/3/14, Tate Murders. The mainstream tells us Manson is now living in Santa Barbara! Skip to near bottom of paper for the update.


Regardless of how much I enjoy Dylan's music I'd love a good send up of why Dylan is a secret agent man working for the Octupus, but it seems Rolling Stone wise the standard narrative makes pretty good sense.

Rollin' Stone
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rollin%27_Stone
Single by Muddy Waters
"Rollin' Stone" is a blues song recorded by Muddy Waters in 1950. It is his interpretation of "Catfish Blues", a Delta blues that dates back to 1920s Mississippi.[4] Although it did not appear in the national record charts, "Still a Fool", recorded by Muddy Waters a year later using the same arrangement and melody, reached number nine on the Billboard R&B chart. "Rollin' Stone" has been recorded by a variety of artists, and Rolling Stone magazine and the rock group the Rolling Stones are named after the song.[5]
If I knew all mysteries and all knowledge, and have not charity, I am nothing. St. Paul
I hang onto my prejudices, they are the testicles of my mind. Eric Hoffer
User avatar
brekin
 
Posts: 3229
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 5:21 pm
Blog: View Blog (1)

Re: Miles Mathis on Bob Dylan & Operation Rolling Stone

Postby Nordic » Mon May 11, 2015 11:29 pm

Burnt Hill » Mon May 11, 2015 3:29 pm wrote:Not to beat a dead mantee, but I can imagine the scolds had HMW presented the "rolling stone gathers no money" as a cultural influencing theme- promoted by Bob Dylan (especially Bob D, especially here) Leonard Cohen et al. It is just interesting how we are influenced to digest information, and I believe we need to do a better job of that. Maybe we are doing a better job of it, and that is what I am noticing. Still I cant help but wonder how this op would be viewed had it been offered by the aforementioned disappeared poster. Just food for thought, I am not trying to stir the pot! :sun:



Well I was gonna say, having read this thread for the first time just now, this is exactly the same kind of thinking behind HMW. Where every news event, no matter how obscure, was a hoax perpetuated by the CIA in order to hijack our keywords. Very similar to this, in structure.

I can't help but think, in my own conspirotard thinking, that if this is deliberate and planned and orchestrated, that guruilla was on the right track above, where this renders everything a conspiracy theory, thus devaluing real conspiracy research. It's like printing countless $100 bills until they're everywhere and they're worthless.
"He who wounds the ecosphere literally wounds God" -- Philip K. Dick
Nordic
 
Posts: 14206
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 3:36 am
Location: California USA
Blog: View Blog (6)

Re: Miles Mathis on Bob Dylan & Operation Rolling Stone

Postby Wombaticus Rex » Tue May 12, 2015 9:20 am

BrandonD » Mon May 11, 2015 8:38 pm wrote:
0_0 » Sun May 10, 2015 3:01 pm wrote:Altho strictly speaking it's a forbidden topic here i believe, since it ties in with the whole hoax/crisis actors train of thought.


Is that subject explicitly forbidden here? Or is it just an idea with very few supporters in this forum?

Non-sarcastic question.


That would, non-sarcastically, be news to me if that was an actual rule I was supposed to actually enforce.

It can be embarrassing when we got into false flag pirhana frenzies, but we've weathered worse, yeah?

Speculate as thou wilt.
User avatar
Wombaticus Rex
 
Posts: 10616
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:33 pm
Location: Vermontistan
Blog: View Blog (0)

Next

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests