rigorousintuition.ca

Character Assassination 101, Lesson 1a

(A) Find someone you don't like.

(B) Ask a question, the answer to which cannot be proven conclusively, either way.

• This might include, Did John Smith have an affair with an underage girl? Or Did Susan Johnson embezzle money from her last job without being found out? After all, you were "just curious," right? And who can fault you for your inquisitive mind?

• Or, in conspiracy-interested circles, you might ask Is Tim Jones a CIA Agent? Just the question puts the suggestion in readers' minds. ("Whatever you do, don't think of a purple elephant!")

(C) Provide innuendo, speculation, but no real evidence. Remember: you're only asking questions!


That Chris Hedges is one of the foremost voices in a growing resistance movement in America will almost certainly make him an especially attractive target for some.

What happened to my other post?

wordspeak2 wrote:...the outright dismissal of the question of it by most of you is just naive, in my opinion.

To never have wondered if you are one yourself, without even knowing it, is just naive, in my opinion.* But to make a case or a thread from nothing is just stupid. The OP is pure sophistry: Hedges doesn't like Ahmedinejad, Hedges for Arab Spring (which is entirely flat-out CIA, right?), therefore Hedges CIA!!! QED!!!

It's not outright dismissal of the question, which can be applied to anyone, that apparently makes several of us gag at the headline; but an understanding that promiscuous accusations of agentry have been the most common, and one of the most effective of all COINTELPRO tools.

--

* And you know what? About myself, of course I have! Haven't we all read enough solid information on MK and the like to wonder? And what the fuck good was the acid for, otherwise?

To whoever deleted my posts, the first post, and the second post questioning the disappeance of the first, I'd appreciate a message as to why.

Wombaticus Rex wrote:Nordic, I just deleted that. Let's not devalue that word here, of all places.

My point was the same as Simulist's, above, that this is a technique used by the Corporate Propagandists all the time for character assassination.

And you can punch in anyone's name, and then any particular accusation, followed by a question mark, to get the ball rolling and affect people's perceptions.

That technique, alone, is worthy of derision of this entire thread.

"Grizzly, dog beater?"

jlaw172364 wrote:To whoever deleted my posts, the first post, and the second post questioning the disappeance of the first, I'd appreciate a message as to why.

Are you having eye problems? Your "second post questioning the disappearance of the first" is on this page!

Oh, I respect your point, Nordic, and agree as well. I just felt it was a singularly bad choice of noun. Thanks for rolling with it, man.

Haha. Very funny. The first one is still missing. And the second one was up, then it disappeared, then it returned after I made the third post.

The first one actually took some time and energy to write. I'm still waiting for it to return.

I don't appreciate the ruses or gaslighting, especially when directed at me.

jlaw172364 wrote:Haha. Very funny. The first one is still missing. And the second one was up, then it disappeared, then it returned after I made the third post.

The first one actually took some time and energy to write. I'm still waiting for it to return.

I don't appreciate the ruses or gaslighting, especially when directed at me.

You are confused. Your second one never disappeared, but was there the whole time.

perhaps wombat mistakenly deleted your post instead of nordic's....

Nordic wrote:

Wombaticus Rex wrote:Nordic, I just deleted that. Let's not devalue that word here, of all places.

My point was the same as Simulist's, above, that this is a technique used by the Corporate Propagandists all the time for character assassination.

And you can punch in anyone's name, and then any particular accusation, followed by a question mark, to get the ball rolling and affect people's perceptions.

That technique, alone, is worthy of derision of this entire thread.

"Grizzly, dog beater?"

Its a favorite technique of Fox News. Just accuse those you want to slander but put a question mark at the end.

I was going to go with "Grizzly, agent of AIPAC, or the 1%?"

AIPAC Works for the 1 Percent
By Chris Hedges
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/aip ... _20120304/

Wombaticus Rex wrote:Oh, I respect your point, Nordic, and agree as well. I just felt it was a singularly bad choice of noun. Thanks for rolling with it, man.

I respect your moderator's decision.

Another thing. Someone use the term "resistance" vis-a-vis Chris Hedge's position. That's funny. I don't see Chris Hedges running around in the dark, sabotaging bridges, and taking out occupation forces. How is he resisting? He expresses his disapproval publicly, but that is not resistance. He encourages others to express their disapproval as well. Expressing disapproval of anything is national past-time. While people express disapproval, the machine grinds up more people.

Additionally, has anyone considered the possibility that factions within the military and the intelligence agencies may become disgruntled and propose tangible, viable, non-violent solutions . . . but then people will point out their military and intelligence agency ties, and then nobody will listen to them?

Simulist, you write in a way that suggests I'm either lying or am mentally ill. Maybe there was a technical malfunction. Maybe someone other than myself is lying or mentally ill. In any case, I saw what I saw. The second post was up, then it was down, then it went back up again after the third post.

jlaw172364 wrote:Simulist, you write in a way that suggests I'm either lying or am mentally ill. Maybe there was a technical malfunction. Maybe someone other than myself is lying or mentally ill. In any case, I saw what I saw. The second post was up, then it was down, then it went back up again after the third post.

No, I said you were confused.

You are projecting.