rigorousintuition.ca

A common tactic of disinfo is to redefine important keywords into woo-woo.
Consider the use of keyword hijacking in UFO lore -
>Project Blue Book
>Majestic 12
>Phoenix
>Condor

Beginning in the early 1950s the academics of the Ivy League such as Princeton were regularly tapped for advice on national security estimates called "blue books."

It was 1956 when 'The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects' by Edward Ruppelt, Former Head of the Air Force Project Blue Book was published.

http://www.cia-on-campus.org/princeton.edu/consult.html

Forerunner, April 29, 1980


Panel met secretly in Princeton
Dulles Papers Reveal CIA Consulting Network
by John Cavanagh

....
The precise year that the Princeton Consultants began operations is unclear from the Dulles Papers. A "Princeton Consultants" file first appears in 1961. However, in thirteen identical letters dated October 21 of that year, Dulles thanks each of the Consultants "for what you have contributed to our work here over the years." This language indicates that the group's existence reaches back well into the 1950s. Black confirmed that his membership in the Consultants dates from around 1957.
.....
If Hoover's consultancy began with the Princeton Consultants, then the group's existence stretches back at least to 1953.

This is also probably the source of the '12' in the hoax called "Operation Majestic 12" since the Board of National Estimates was a 12-14 member board with many more academic advisors. Instead a group overseeing the cover-up of alien contact has been fabricated to confuse people.

Thus, the Dulles Papers reveal a direct link between the Princeton Consultants and the Board of National Estimates. Former CIA officer Victor Marchetti in collaboration with John Marks (The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence, 1974) describe the Board of National Estimates in 1973 as a 12- to 14-person board with a staff of forty to fifty specialists. It is doubtful that the Princeton Consultants were the Board; rather, they probably formed an adjunct to the "specialists."

The central function of the Board of National Estimates and its specialists was to prepare, each year, some fifty-odd National Intelligence Estimates (NIEs) -- called "blue books" -- which, according to Marchetti and Marks (p. 314), "were considered the highest form of national intelligence." Estimates covered such topics as assessment of the "enemy's" intentions in different countries and regions, and foreign military capabilities.
.....
The Marchetti and Marks description indicates that the Princeton Consultants' work could have served as an intelligence base for the series of brutal and often illegal covert operations of the 1950s and 1960s (and possibly also the 1970s) against the democratically elected or constitutional governments of Mohammed Mossadegh in Iran (1953); Patrice Lumumba in the Congo (1961); Joao Goulart in Brazil (1964); Juan Balaguer in the Dominican Republic (1965); Cheddi Jagan in Guyana (1962-66); and Salvador Allende in Chile (1973).

The 'Majestic' is probably from the meeting place of the beginnings of the Council on Foreign Relations at a May 1919 meeting in Paris's Hotel Majestic.
(The CFR used to be more hush-hush.)

Disinfoteer William Cooper tries to tell us in his book 'Behold a Pale Horse' (title hijacked from the murdered Danny Casalaro) that the keyword "Phoenix" is another UFO term, not the name of a massive assassination program by CIA in Vietnam which killed 20,000-40,000 people.

Since it is also known that the Consultants operated during a sizable segment (and possibly all) of the Vietnam War, the question arises whether their "estimates" of "enemy intentions" were an input into the CIA's Phoenix Program of torture and assassination, which led to the death, between 1968 and 1972, of some 20,000 Vietnamese citizens.

Cooper also tried to tell us that 'Condor' was the codename for John Lear who was some kind of an agent on a TV show about UFOs, not the CIA-assisted terrorism and and assassination program in South America that included the 1973 coup in Chile.

The keyword 'Condor' has been hijacked very many times and so has 'Phoenix.'

Just yesterday the bogus CIA 'Family Jewels' dump lied about the CIA control of media with complicit journalists/agents called Operation Mockingbird.

The 'Stage Jewelry' hoax told us instead that a 'Project Mockingbird' was just a brief surveillance of two journalists in 1963.
So the keywords 'Mockingbird' and 'journalist' were kept but journalists became the victims instead of the perps. This is keyword hijacking and meme reversal or mirroring.

Keyword hijacking seems to me to be one of the most common tools of disinfo, regardless of what orz and professor pan say. Anyone else think so, too?

Wikipedia says:

The new name, Project Blue Book, was selected to refer to the blue booklets used for testing at some colleges and universities. The name was inspired, said Ruppelt, by the close attention that high-ranking officers were giving the new project; it felt as if the study of UFOs was as important as a college final exam.

Sounds stupid to me but that's what Ruppelt allegedly said.

I've tried to edit my op a half-dozen times and it just times out. grrr..

Makes no sense to me, Hugh. You're reaching again.

I could make the argument that the use of the "blue book" for finding the value of used cars is a hijacking of Project Blue Book, and it would make as much sense.

professorpan wrote:Makes no sense to me, Hugh. You're reaching again.

I could make the argument that the use of the "blue book" for finding the value of used cars is a hijacking of Project Blue Book, and it would make as much sense.

That's exactly what I was thinking.

The keyword 'Condor' has been hijacked very many times and so has 'Phoenix.'

Yes, the parents of River Phoenix hijacked the word, too, I suppose.

Lesson One: Words are used for MANY THINGS!

Nader used to brag about his closeness to Rummy at princeton.

Farbeit from me to suggest (once again) that it was at Princeton that Nader was recruited to be a cover operator for the NWO/BFEE.

He fits the profile of a spook for the elites.

professorpan wrote:I could make the argument that the use of the "blue book" for finding the value of used cars is a hijacking of Project Blue Book, and it would make as much sense.

pan, did you really post that with a straight face?

Oh, that's right. You are an anti-conspiricist and a coincidence theorist who brings teapots to the forum for us to ooh over.

So you can't see why the fact that academia is dialed into CIA would get a cover story, ay?
And you throw out that nonsense about used cars as equivalent.

Careful. Your mind is showing.

professorpan wrote:Lesson One: Words are used for MANY THINGS!

Yes, they are used to lie, confuse, obfuscate, and deny. Thanks for the illustration.

Oh, that's right. You are an anti-conspiricist and a coincidence theorist who brings teapots to the forum for us to ooh over.

Wrong, as usual when you attempt to smear me. I believe in plenty of conspiracies -- just not ones illogical and implausible enough to plant doggie movies on the shelf at your local bookstore to distract people (well, the .03% of people who know or care) from the trial of an Abu Ghraib dog-handler.

Or vast enough to encourage some high school teachers to start a project with paperclips so that later it can be hijacked to distract people (again, the .03% who care) from the U.S. government's importation of Nazis after WWII.

Or a cabal enormous and omnipotent enough to convince an author to write a story about a dog D.A., which will later be turned into a film, in order to keep all the 6-12 year old kids from focusing on the Jim Garrison investigation of the Kennedy assassination.

Oh, I believe in plenty of conspiracies. Just those within the realm of logic and plausibility. And the conspiracy between the part of your brain that makes these things up and your fingers at the keyboard

I love you, Hugh!

I'm going to really break my own rules with this one, sorry about this;

Hugh Manatee Wins wrote:Oh, that's right. (Professorpan is).. an anti-conspiricist and a coincidence theorist who brings teapots to the forum for us to ooh over.

Professorpan wrote:Wrong, as usual when you attempt to smear me. I believe in plenty of conspiracies..

And on another thread;

Professorpan wrote:You can, and will, continue to paint me as some kind of arch-skeptic, but you know that's bogus. And anyone who has followed my postings, here and elsewhere, will know your characterizations are silly and inaccurate. So really, enough is enough.

Well, I have read every post on this forum for the last two years or more, and Pan's claim is the opposite of the truth. To demonstrate this I went and looked through the last three pages of Professorpan's posts. It's easy on this board to search for all posts by a particular poster. These cover the posts from May 2nd this year to today, basically the last two months (and actually you can go much further back and the same pattern is maintained.) During this period Professorpan made forty-five posts. Here's how they stack up;

One single line post praising a link to "psychedelic" books.
One two line post attacking "Mel," threatening him with banning if he continues his insulting posts.
One single line post attacking WTC7 demolition evidence as "inconclusive."
One single line post attacking Wayne Madsen as "eminently untrustworthy."
One single line post one post with a link to an article relating to a Chuch child-rape case.
One post attacking those who were complaining about Jeff saying moon hoax believers were not credible.
One single line link to a document site partnered with the US government's own National Archives.
One two line post denying the existence of "chemtrails."
One two line post with a link to an NPR article about US forces being in Iraq for decades.
One two line post with a link about "Facebook" being a privacy risk.
Two brief posts both attacking the tax protesters Ed and Elaine Brown as idiots.
Two posts defending Professorpan's own abusive posts against Fat Lady Singing's accusations of incivility and unpleasantness on the board.
One short post about a ufo sighting
Two brief posts about Arnie's belt buckle, the first being sceptical of it even being a skull.
One post with a brief query concerning the Iraq war "opinion poll" caller.
One short post calling the "dragonfly drones" story a hoax.
One post with a short dirty joke about Cheney.
One brief post about the recent ezboard technical problems.

And, of course, TWENTY-FOUR, sneering, sarcastic, abusive, sceptical, frequently lengthy, anti-conspiracist nay-saying posts in direct response to posts by our dear friend Hugh Manatee Wins.

So by my reckoning, that's 54% of Professorpan's post count spent on attacking Hugh, and an enormously greater proportion by word count, and 78% of his recent posts attacking other posters and/or conspiracy theories. Oh, and most importantly of course, ZERO posts in support of any silly old "conspiracy theory," unless you count his mention of NPR's "revelation" that US forces plan to be in Iraq for decades, or the child-rape court case.

So, I will leave it to you, gentle reader, to decide for yourself whether Hugh's characterisation of Professorpan as an "anti-conspiracist" is true, or whether it is "bogus" or "silly and inaccurate."

Once again I shall apologise, and I promise to never address this issue again.

Once again I shall apologise, and I promise to never address this issue again.

After that? Way to be a total coward.

Hugh Manatee Wins wrote:

professorpan wrote:I could make the argument that the use of the "blue book" for finding the value of used cars is a hijacking of Project Blue Book, and it would make as much sense.

pan, did you really post that with a straight face?

Hugh, please explain why you don't believe the used car Blue Book is a Keyword Hijack of Project Blue Book. I can't believe you'd doubt it, the evidence is all there, I mean, blue... book! Oh and CIA mockingbird paperclip psyop mutual exclusivity blah blah blah PROVES IT!!

Seriously, sarcasm aside, how do you decide that the used car book is not KH, but some disney movie is? I'm genuinely interested in the thought process.

Prove to me that said book is not a Keyword Hijack of project Blue Book

Once again I shall apologise, and I promise to never address this issue again.

Well I guess that'll save him the trouble to getting a restraining order....

Hammer of Los wrote:During this period Professorpan made forty-five posts.

professorpan has made 1,898 posts. Looking at forty-five of them won't do justice to his oeuvre.

He believes in conspiracy theories, just not all of them.

Hammer of Los wrote:I'm going to really break my own rules with this one, sorry about this;

Hugh Manatee Wins wrote:Oh, that's right. (Professorpan is).. an anti-conspiricist and a coincidence theorist who brings teapots to the forum for us to ooh over.

Professorpan wrote:Wrong, as usual when you attempt to smear me. I believe in plenty of conspiracies..

And on another thread;

Professorpan wrote:You can, and will, continue to paint me as some kind of arch-skeptic, but you know that's bogus. And anyone who has followed my postings, here and elsewhere, will know your characterizations are silly and inaccurate. So really, enough is enough.

Well, I have read every post on this forum for the last two years or more, and Pan's claim is the opposite of the truth. To demonstrate this I went and looked through the last three pages of Professorpan's posts. It's easy on this board to search for all posts by a particular poster. These cover the posts from May 2nd this year to today, basically the last two months (and actually you can go much further back and the same pattern is maintained.) During this period Professorpan made forty-five posts. Here's how they stack up;

One single line post praising a link to "psychedelic" books.
One two line post attacking "Mel," threatening him with banning if he continues his insulting posts.
One single line post attacking WTC7 demolition evidence as "inconclusive."
One single line post attacking Wayne Madsen as "eminently untrustworthy."
One single line post one post with a link to an article relating to a Chuch child-rape case.
One post attacking those who were complaining about Jeff saying moon hoax believers were not credible.
One single line link to a document site partnered with the US government's own National Archives.
One two line post denying the existence of "chemtrails."
One two line post with a link to an NPR article about US forces being in Iraq for decades.
One two line post with a link about "Facebook" being a privacy risk.
Two brief posts both attacking the tax protesters Ed and Elaine Brown as idiots.
Two posts defending Professorpan's own abusive posts against Fat Lady Singing's accusations of incivility and unpleasantness on the board.
One short post about a ufo sighting
Two brief posts about Arnie's belt buckle, the first being sceptical of it even being a skull.
One post with a brief query concerning the Iraq war "opinion poll" caller.
One short post calling the "dragonfly drones" story a hoax.
One post with a short dirty joke about Cheney.
One brief post about the recent ezboard technical problems.

And, of course, TWENTY-FOUR, sneering, sarcastic, abusive, sceptical, frequently lengthy, anti-conspiracist nay-saying posts in direct response to posts by our dear friend Hugh Manatee Wins.

So by my reckoning, that's 54% of Professorpan's post count spent on attacking Hugh, and an enormously greater proportion by word count, and 78% of his recent posts attacking other posters and/or conspiracy theories. Oh, and most importantly of course, ZERO posts in support of any silly old "conspiracy theory," unless you count his mention of NPR's "revelation" that US forces plan to be in Iraq for decades, or the child-rape court case.

So, I will leave it to you, gentle reader, to decide for yourself whether Hugh's characterisation of Professorpan as an "anti-conspiracist" is true, or whether it is "bogus" or "silly and inaccurate."

Once again I shall apologise, and I promise to never address this issue again.

can you say owned.