Disinfo site attacks Jeff Wells, Rigorous Intuition. others

[Hugh Manatee Wins]

There is more truth than humor in your comment, MP.<br>There are more connections and deliberately-staged phenomena in politics and media than most are aware of. And once you learn about this, you get labeled 'paranoid' by others who haven't learned the history and science.<br><br>About "the color of tie Bush wears" - <br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://p216.ezboard.com/frigorousintuitionfrm10.showMessage?topicID=6258.topic">p216.ezboard.com/frigorou...6258.topic</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br>(The Psychology of Color, the 1962 Color Marketing Group) <p></p><i></i>

[Seventhsonjr]

the prez of that museum is (or was) John Loftus - the one who got the dirt on the Bush nazi connections when he was a nazi hunter AAG at the Justice Dept under Jimmy Carter (Reagan dismantled the program) <p></p><i></i>

[Hugh Manatee Wins]

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>You are <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>taking a fact</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> -- that Jeff is listed as a columnist on a site with anti-Semitic content -- and extrapolating <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>from that fact</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Now I see the problem. This is <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>decontextualizing</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> my original post and all my posts as if they existed in a vacuum and as if only what I put in the post was the only thing supporting my analysis. Hunh. Clever.<br><br>Just like everyone else, I derive my conclusions from a myriad, a plethora, LOTS even, of facts when I post.<br><br>By coming at me as if what was in the post was ALL, you compartmentalize it to nibble it away. This has been what you've done in all the threads where you dispute me and characterize me as paranoid and unable to be rational.<br><br>Now I get it. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Decontextualization. Draining meaning from things. </strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> That's something to avoid, PP. That's worse than finding meaning where there might be none.<br><br>Because that's exactly what media mind management does, decontextualizes damaging information plus, of course, ascribes meaning to things in order to sanction them.<br><br>Well, I learned something from this thread. <!--EZCODE UNDERLINE START--><span style="text-decoration:underline"><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Decontextualization</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->.</span><!--EZCODE UNDERLINE END--><br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>When I suggest a theory, I like to get intelligent criticism because it helps me refine my own thinking.<br><br>I guess we just operate differently.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Intelligent criticism does not consist of snarky eye-rolling quips about my mental health with no focus on the many facets of a topic.<br><br>Yes, we certainly do "operate differently." <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=hughmanateewins>Hugh Manatee Wins</A> at: 10/12/06 6:26 pm<br></i>

[MASONIC PLOT]

I agree Hugh. I have no problem with the theories you post. I have been studying these matters for many, many years and there is absolutely no doubt that just about everything in the media is controlled. <br><br>Is the average newsroom editor part of the conspiracy? Not likely. Are those editors given talking points memos from corporate handlers and told how to frame the news and what to report? You bet.<br><br>Are some of those corporate handlers CIA spook infiltrates? Absolutely.<br><br>I know this for a fact. Ive worked in politics and media. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=masonicplot>MASONIC PLOT</A> at: 10/12/06 9:08 pm<br></i>

[professorpan]

Bowing out -- tired of wasting my typing fingers. <p></p><i></i>

[anotherdrew]

if one has enough control over their web server (able to at least make your own .htaccess type files), someone getting linked to from unwanted sites, could:<br>look at the logs for referers comming from bad sites.<br>configure the server to refuse clients comming in directly from links on those sites, or even redirect such link-followers to a page that explains why you dislike the site they are comming from.<br>use a script to search google for unique phrases embeded in your writting to identify places that have swiped your work, then hassle them to take it down.<br>identify other 'victems' and alert them to take their own steps against the offending site. <p></p><i></i>

[Hugh Manatee Wins]

Good advice. I hope Jeff follows up and doesn't allow himself to be used as a human credential for whatever malevalence is behind TheTruthSeeker.co.uk<br><br>Git'em. <p></p><i></i>

[professorpan]

Look at the subject line:<br><br>"Disinfo site attacks Jeff Wells"<br><br>That, in itself, is disinfo. Posting Jeff's material, and labeling him as a columnist, might be disingenous, unethical, or sleazy. But is it an <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>attack? </em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END-->Not the way I define attack.<br><br>Instead of bitching about it and speculating about truthseeker.org's intentions, why not just email the site admin and ask what's going on? Nah, that would put the kibosh on all the heated theorizing about malignant, dark plots.<br><br>Jeff's a big boy. He can decide which battles are worth fighting and which battles are a waste of his time. <p></p><i></i>