TruthMove Forum

Register or log in:

Username:

Password:

TruthMove Forum » TruthMove Main Forum

9-11 Synthetic Error: The meltdown of Webster G. Tarpley (56 posts)

1. Arabesque
   Member

   http://www.911blogger.com/node/11441

   I have been aware of the divisions within the 9-11 movement for years now and know that they have slowed our progress toward the truth behind the events of September 11th. We do need to come together around the best possible evidence we have and get behind the best researchers to keep propelling our 9-11 questions to the forefront of the public eye. So I was a bit surprised to find out that the very day that this article surfaced at 911blogger.com, Webster Tarpley was publicly attacking me, Cosmos, Col. Jenny Sparks, and Arabesque on his radio program GCN World report. In order to understand better what prompted this attack, it is important to step back in time and examine the circumstances surrounding the emergence of what is known as "The Kennebunkport Warning" [...]

   It should be known that I denounce Mr. Tarpley and his ad hominem attack on all of us in the strongest of terms and that the others who were attacked have my full and undivided support. In closing I will say that what Mr. Tarpley has done to cause the controversy surrounding the KW is nothing short of despicable. Additionally, he has for years promoted some of the worst information regarding the 9-11 cover-up, a fact that seems to either have been ignored, or hidden in plain sight, or both. Today, instead of practicing what he preaches, he simply attacks anyone who might dare stand up to his egomaniacal little tirade against the Peace Activists. I am aware of calls to move past the KW, and yes, I would like nothing better. This has cost me many hours of valuable time that I could have used much better. However, the fact remains that Webster G. Tarpley has behaved in a way that cannot and should not be ignored. In the past, and using the mantra "for the sake of the movement", it has been the practice to ignore these disruptors. What has ignoring these people done? Have things got better as a result of ignoring them? Have they gone away? On the contrary, like busy little termites, the have been slowly eating away at the foundations of our movement. These outrageous actions by Mr. Tarpley cannot, and will not go unchallenged by me. We as a movement need to come together on how we handle such disruptors and re-evaluate the unwritten, failed policy of ignoring them and hoping they will just go away.

   A strong statement by Michael Wolsey, and I support it.

   He brings up a good question here, and it is one that I frequently think about. How do we deal with disruptive behavior? What can we do to prevent division within the 9/11 truth movement and attempts at sabotage (deliberate or otherwise)?

   I think the first step is to acknowledge that we have a problem. How to deal with it, is a different question altogether.

   Posted 17 years ago #
2. JonGold
   Member

   That is the question isn't it? How do we resolve our differences, and focus our attentions on absolute truth, and absolute accountability so we don't have to do this for the rest of our lives?

   Posted 17 years ago #
3. Arabesque
   Member

   Exactly, and I couldn't agree more.

   Justice, accountability, and a better world is the primary goal, and it should be at all times.

   Posted 17 years ago #
4. Victronix
   Member

   I think stuff like this really has to be out there. It's sort of a psychological release for the people who were attacked and our viewing of their responses makes the whole thing real instead of surreal. On some level it's traumatic to have this happen to you. How we respond defines us. We stand up for people who have been wronged or we don't. Everyone on both sides of that understands the relevance of the response on an emotional level, regardless of what words are spoken.

   The people who were getting out to stand on freeways with signs, the people who were working on their talks for the anniversary, the people who were fielding the interview emails . . . everyone went on with their work. I don't think we need to be that worried about the issue of not allowing an event like this to distract or divide. Where the damage is done is when we pretend it didn't happen. It was pretty black and white for the vast majority of people once they saw the facts. And the people who were working kept on working. I know for myself I felt a renewed interest in 9/11 following the anniversary because of all that happened and was accomplished and so it made this issue much lighter, even as I did spend some time on it.

   Posted 17 years ago #
5. truthmover
   Administrator

   Go Michael!!! Paradigm shift.

   We as a movement need to come together on how we handle such disruptors and re-evaluate the unwritten, failed policy of ignoring them and hoping they will just go away.

   I have to bring this up, but I will try to summarize as best I can. "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" by Thomas Kuhn.

   Here's a link. The section on coherence covers the issue I address here.

   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_structure_of_scie...

   Science develops in a cyclical manner, moving from one paradigm to the next. For a very long time the world was thought to be flat. During that time scientists were involving themselves in what Kuhn calls the period of "normal science." That involves exploring and deepening the understanding of the present paradigm. During this period there will be contrasting opinions, however, based on the stability of the present paradigm, these views will be marginalized. Think Galileo. However, with a deepening view of the present paradigm, comes a deeper view of its flaws.

   At a certain point a critical mass of dissent is reached as the present paradigm is no longer viewed as having a secure foundation. People started to realize the world was not flat. This leads scientists into a period of "revolutionary science" in which they seek to find a new paradigm. This is a period of great anxiety, and creativity. A moment when the dissenting voices are heard as any path toward a secure paradigm is desired.

   When a new paradigm is established scientists return back to the comfortable space of "normal science."

   Now here's how this all applies to us. Michael Woolsey is suggesting that we should not just put this issue behind us and for a very good reason. As he implies, the movement has been operating under a paradigm of avoiding internal controversy. For a time that made sense. But the world and our movement have changed a great deal in the last year. With the Kennebunkport Warning, I feel that many of us realized that now was not the time for "normal science." A paradigm shift is in order and "revolutionary science" is what you see happening on this forum.

   But here's the hard part. Those who wish to undermine our efforts and support the old paradigm (big tent), are particularly concerned with us returning to "normal science" as soon as possible. Saying, "Let's just move on," is exactly the old paradigm and serves this purpose, consciously or not.

   Micheal Woolsey is advocating a period of "revolutionary science" followed by a paradigm shift. Us TruthMovers have been talking recently, in light of everything on this forum, about not letting that period of "revolutionary science" pass us by. Every time something bad happens we wring our hands and forget about it in two weeks. Maybe this time we should keep talking, and stir up some healthy debate around how we should be promoting 9/11 truth. Otherwise its back to going along to get along, which in this case isn't going anywhere, or really getting along at all.

   Posted 17 years ago #
6. NicholasLevis
   Member

   To your thoughts I might add: the most important half-truth train (of the LC - Alex Jones axis) left the station long ago. It's not like they'll ever consult again with the likes of us (if I may use that pronoun). This should be liberating. Their locomotive is already in the process of derailing from its own contradictions. This is a time when others can build a better machine for transporting the message - but this has been true for more than a year! Which is not to say that it can't go ahead, belatedly.

   Posted 17 years ago #
7. Victronix
   Member

   I often wonder what the LC boys will think of themselves when they grow up . . .

   Thanks for the link above and the summary of the issue in "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" by Thomas Kuhn -- great, I hadn't seen that.

   Posted 17 years ago #
8. NicholasLevis
   Member

   The lure of Hollywood is in its claim that you never have to grow up.

   Posted 17 years ago #
9. JonGold
   Member

   I know members of this movement are mad at the LC Boys. Aside from putting out two movies that are questionable (I haven't seen the third), and acting their age on many occasions, is it possible they just made a mistake? That they had good intentions, but went about it the wrong way? I used to be mad at them as well. Over time though, I've seen a different side to them. A side that says, "We're sorry for what we did, and we're trying to make amends."). I happen to know that the LC Boys just gave a nice donation to the FealGood Foundation. Is it possible they just got caught up with their "celebrity status", and abused it? I dunno... I do know that I'm learning to cut them some slack.

   Posted 17 years ago #
10. NicholasLevis
    Member

    So cut them some slack.

    How about they make up for it with a public apology and endorsement of the work of Nafeez Ahmed?

    How about they make up for it by financing a quarter's worth of Cooperative Research (or whatever it's now called)?

    Posted 17 years ago #
11. JonGold
    Member

    It sounds to me like you know more about them than I do. I was never an advocate for either of their films (I wish EGLS or PFT came out first), and I never "followed" their activities. Did they say something against Nafeez? Have they made enough money to give a quarter's worth of the $40,000 cooperative research (whatever they're called now) is asking for? I don't know. I just gave $25 to them. I give when I can. I also just sent the PFT Pack to two of my congressmen. There's another $50. This movement can be expensive.

    Posted 17 years ago #
12. mark
    Member

    If the "movement" had been able to publicly admit that Flight 77 really did hit the Pentagon, this latest problem would have been prevented, since a book promoting disinformation about 9/11 (Rumsfeld's "Pentagon Missile") would not have been taken seriously even if part of it is accurate.

    There never was any evidence that any of the plane crashes were faked.

    It was expertly marketed, but it's not real.

    It's been widely debunked in the 9/11 truth movement from many perspectives, and the media is smart enough to focus on it instead of the "plane into building" exercise, the suppressed FBI investigations into the flight schools, warnings from US allies, etc.

    Tarpley's book is on the latest Deception Dollar that I've seen, along with Fetzer's website and Loose (with truth) Change.

    It's not a "truth" movement if the loudest voices are promoting lies. Some of those voices are probably sincere, but their intentions (good or otherwise) doesn't make their claims truthful.

    The LaRouche cult has always been very anti-environmental, promoting nuclear power, star wars, food irradiation and denying the reality of ecological limits to endless growth. It was sad to see some of the truth movement embrace Mr. Tarpley's mix of some true claims and some false claims.

    No one is likely to be 100% accurate and it's nice to be able to admit making a mistake. If there's a "second wind" for the truth movement it would have to shift focus away from "no planes" and demolition theories and toward fact checking, "means, motive, opportunity," and the bigger context of which these events are only a chapter.

    ---

    9/11 research is a rabbit-hole of Byzantine complexity full of snares and delusions and peopled with false friends, lunatics, earnest lost souls and a few heroes. It's not necessary to understand all the nuances of science and bureaucracy that allowed the government to get away with mass murder, blame it on swarthy foreigners (of whom many are eager accomplices) and use the incident as (in the words of the Cheney, Jeb Bush et al cabal, the Project for a New American Century) "a new Pearl Harbor." At this critical juncture in human history, it's only necessary to understand why they did it. The motive was Peak Oil, a disaster which will affect everyone on the planet, about which all must enlighten themselves and for which all must prepare. -- Jenna Orkin, World Trade Center Environmental Organization http://mikeruppert.blogspot.com/2007/05/epa-whistl...

    Posted 17 years ago #
13. Arabesque
    Member

    A Message for Webster Tarpley and the Supporters of the Kennebunkport Warning: It’s About the Divisiveness http://arabesque911.blogspot.com/2007/09/message-f...

    In examining the divisive behavior surrounding the Kennebunkport warning, many of those who brought attention to this issue are in turn being accused of divisiveness. In fact, some of Tarpley's supporters have said that we are being "divisive" by even bringing up this issue.

    "Those who seek to discredit the Kennebunkport warning exhibit a devastatingly tragic myopia (or worse), as they selfishly attempt to engineer a divisive conflict entirely of their own creation, while foolishly ignoring the material substance of the document." Dan Abrahamson, False Flag News

    That's an interesting point of view, since "divisiveness" is the core issue that we have been trying to emphasize in the first place; we felt that Tarpley, and the Kennebunkport supporters were being divisive and we tried to bring attention to it. Calling us “divisive” for talking about this behavior is intellectually dishonest since the divisive behavior of the Kennebunkport supporters is our central complaint.

    Does pretending a problem does not exist make it go away? Does ignoring a problem because it might cause controversy make things better? Let’s take the example of 9/11. If you saw the evidence 9/11 was an inside job, what good what it do if you did nothing about it? Are you going to say: "I'm not going to deal with this problem because it's going to create too much divisiveness and controversy"? How would that lead to constructive change? Similarly, if your uncle was having financial problems, or was engaging in destructive behavior that impacted your family should you ignore it? If you think that we should ignore problems simply because they are "divisive", why are you reading this blog, why do you care about 9/11 activism, and why do you care about world peace? The first step is acknowledging that there is a problem; the ultimate solution is for the “family” (i.e. the 9/11 truth community) to decide.

    Having brought attention to this issue, it is up to the 9/11 truth community to decide how to respond to Mr. Tarpley and his associates.

    Posted 17 years ago #
14. TruthandJustice911
    Member

    I know members of this movement are mad at the LC Boys. Aside from putting out two movies that are questionable (I haven't seen the third), and acting their age on many occasions, is it possible they just made a mistake? That they had good intentions, but went about it the wrong way?

    Two things here. I'm unable to name names, but I am aware of a few people who STILL believe that fligth 93 landed here in Cleveland and that those on the plane were taken to a secure facility, shot, and killed. This disinfo is widespread and a LOT of people still believe it. Having been a resident of northeastern Ohio for over 10 years now, I have spoken with 4 people, all of which do not know each other, who claim that they saw a low-flying plane pass south of downtown (Cleveland) and turn around - this is the exact flight path reported by the FAA and other sources. The disinfo in this movement is strong.

    Another phenomenon in our movement is that of WeAreChange. It is my opinion that this organization is contributing to the forestalling of the momentum we have gained for years now. The fact that they are tightly aligned with Jones and crew does not help. What I am getting at here is, being that I am in regular contact with some new members of CHANGE, they are currently asking 911 groups across the country to "become change" or apart of their org, and I'll tell you that it is happening very rapidly. Tucson, Seattle, Minnesota, Boston, Florida, and many others are ‘jumping on the CHANGE bandwagon.’ All of these previous 9/11 truth groups who are now a part of Change have undergone quite a shift in how they promote the "truth." Ideological issues and unyielding support for Ron Paul dominates a lot of these sites. So, when we talk about an axis, we should really be referring to the LC - CHANGE - Jones Axis. We need to take our movement BACK!!!

    Posted 17 years ago #
15. truthmod
    Administrator

    Arabesque:

    If you think that we should ignore problems simply because they are "divisive", why are you reading this blog, why do you care about 9/11 activism, and why do you care about world peace? The first step is acknowledging that there is a problem; the ultimate solution is for the “family” (i.e. the 9/11 truth community) to decide.

    We've had quite a lot of experience with this dynamic--being called divisive or "disruptors" because we've stuck our heads out to bring divisive actions and materials to people's attention.

    • Taking issue with the distribution of disinformation/hate literature by Les Jamieson at St. Marks Church was supposedly "divisive." http://www.truthmove.org/forum/topic/530?replies=1...

    • Promoting environmental issues rather than "occult globalization" and the NWO is supposedly divisive.

    • Questioning some in the 9/11 truth movement for their support of a far right-wing libertarian presidential candidate (who is pro-life, anti-environment, and doesn't even support 9/11 skepticism) is supposedly divisive.

    Oh yeah, and war is peace. Don't forget, we're dealing with an opposition bent on twisting reality 180 degrees.

    Posted 17 years ago #
16. JonGold
    Member

    "We need to take our movement BACK!!!"

    When the movement was respectable (completely focused on the families, the responders, the omissions and distortions of the 9/11 report, getting a new investigation, and accountability for the attacks, and didn't do things like promote theories as fact, pretend that we know all of the answers, completely and totally revolve around Controlled Demolition, etc...) I thought we were really going to make a difference. I'm not so sure anymore (still hopeful), but not so sure. I used to ask people to motivate them "Do you want 9/11 to become like the JFK assassination? Accepted by the majority as being a "Conspiracy" yet only talked about in bars, among friends as idle conversation, etc... or do you want to make sure those responsible are held to account for their crimes?" It seems to me all of the back and forth debating is a waste of time, and helps to make us exactly as I described. I have tried to address this before with articles...

    http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showthread.php?t=...

    Granted, the Eleventh Of Every Month Action is helping (and I'm very proud of everyone that participates in it), but there is still room for improvement. After 5 years, I can honestly say that I don't know what happened on 9/11. I suspect also that neither do any of you. I do know the following:

    We were lied to (something we DO know about). Those who lied to us have benefited the most from the attacks. The attacks have been used to take away our civil liberties, start two illegal wars (and possibly a third), and have bankrupted this country. It's not rocket science to know that if the attacks weren't what we were led to believe, we need to know about it, and we need to know about it NOW. Otherwise, the insanity will continue.

    So, how do we "take our movement back?" How do we teach people to focus?

    http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showthread.php?t=...

    How do we teach people to promote the best information possible (which needs to be defined), not to promote theory as fact, and to understand that we have to be as strategic as possible? Our enemies are not stupid. Not by a longshot. We need to be smarter than they are. We need to understand that the movement is infiltrated, and we need to develop ways of dealing with that infiltration.

    Posted 17 years ago #
17. JonGold
    Member

    Open Letter

    My name is Michele Little, sister of Fallen Firefighter FDNY, David M. Weiss of Rescue 1, Midtown Manhattan.

    I met Jon Gold in Chandler, AZ at the 9/11 Accountability Conference in February 2007 where I was an invited to speak as a family member. Jon and I became fast friends and we speak on a consistent basis.

    Jon is known by many family members as a compassionate man who stands by our side for truth and justice. Through the 9/11 Truth Movement, he speaks out sharing his knowledge for truth and justice with anyone who is ready to wake up to facts that are pivotal to being an American.

    To hear anything to the contrary as many people heard through Webster Tarpley’s words and finger pointing in New York City the weekend before September the 11th Memorial was unimaginable and unexpected.

    Jon is a good man with good intentions and should be honored for his kindness, thoughtfulness and outspokenness on behalf of the 9/11 Family Members, Survivors and 9/11 Responders.

    It is astounding to me that six years later, as we find that most of the conspiracy theories that we started out with have become irrevocable facts, we can still find ourselves fighting and pointing fingers at one another. What is the sense of this?

    Unless we have something to hide, by this point we should have had some reconciliation of September the 11th, 2001 and the family members and our loved ones who were murdered would have some completion.

    Isn’t it time to stop the finger pointing? Isn’t it time to unite together and bring hope to the world? Do you believe that hope and justice are essential for our children and for the generations to come?

    I believe that this is the only moment we have; make it the most precious moment we’ve got! How about you?

    Sincerely, Michele Little Sister of Fallen Firefighter FDNY David M. Weiss Rescue 1 Midtown Manhattan

    Posted 17 years ago #
18. Arabesque
    Member

    

    http://www.rense.com/1.imagesH/barlet.jpg

    Read my response here: http://arabesque911.blogspot.com/2007/09/kennebunk...

    Posted 17 years ago #
19. JonGold
    Member

    That boggles my mind. First of all, Michael Wolsey is the one that told me to listen to Jack Beacon debate Chip Berlet...

    http://www.911podcasts.com/files/audio/beaconberle...

    He told me to do so because he thought Jack would kick his _ss. I don't think Jack came off well at all, but that's a story for a different time. I've known Michael Wolsey for a couple of years now. We were on the 911Truth.org Steering Committee together. I have helped him to get guests on his show. I have listened to his radio show from the very beginning, and know that he tries VERY hard to put forward good information. I have hung out with him in Chicago, and in my neck of the woods. He started the Colorado 9/11 Visibility group. He has been in the local Colorado news. He has held conferences in his area. He has started a new website called visibility911.com to coincide with his weekly commitment of having a radio show. He even gave WingTV a hard time when they interviewed him.

    http://911underground.com/WING_TV_2005-08-07_Micha...

    If he isn't a genuine truther, I don't know what is.

    Secondly, Cosmos is responsible for the ONE thing this movement does as a "movement." The Eleventh Of Every Month Action. He has been "YT" for a while on 911blogger.com, and was always one of the better posters. I have met him twice, and both times, he seemed like a regular guy. If you listen to his voice on his radio show, you will hear that he cares.

    I don't know Arabesque at all. In fact, I only recently learned his first name. However, I have seen his contributions to the movement in the form of articles, and they are well thought out, and well sourced.

    "Col. Jenny Sparks" and I used to get along. Now we don't talk. It has a lot to do with certain people that I would really rather forget. However, I don't think she's COINTELPRO, or paid for by the Ford Foundation. I even vouched for her in an email I sent out to people about Tarpley's statements in NYC.

    All they have done, as I have done, was refuse to post a document that could be so EASILY used against us. Why on EARTH would we post a document where the alleged signatories say they didn't sign it? The only other thing we have done is denounce Webster's "critiques" (putting it nicely) of the alleged signatories that say they didn't sign it.

    Keeping in mind that I DID post the "warning" when it first came out and took it DOWN after some of the signatories said they didn't sign it.

    It must be nice to have a professional political cartoonist on hand. John Albanese... it reminds me of those pamphlets the FBI made... maybe you could elaborate on that.

    Posted 17 years ago #
20. Arabesque
    Member

    Thanks Jon.

    I've corresponded with Michael Wolsey several times before this incident. He contacted me after seeing my stuff on 911blogger. I obviously think he is the real deal, and so are Cosmos and yourself. Did I think I would be attacked like this just for questioning what happened? No way. I think this is a big joke actually, and the accusations don't bother me at all. I've gotten far worse from the rabble on 911b.

    The amount of detail in this cartoon is quite stunning. We've got our FBI "marching orders", "poison pen", "Ford Foundation Funding". It has all of the keywords that Tarpley has been using against us. I just wish I had the "funding" to pay someone to make a silly cartoon like this in response.

    Why would someone make a cartoon like this? Did someone actually pay to make this?

    Posted 17 years ago #
21. casseia
    Member

    Jenny is very mad that she is not depicted with a fat wad of cash. And that's a really, really awful likeness.

    I'd just like to say that thanks to this cartoon, I am now featured in a Nico Haupt video "mash-up." I think we're all accused of working for al Qaeda -and/or a "taskforce" (oh no! not a taskforce!) -- Jenny certainly is. It's pretty hard to follow.

    I've said this before when Nico was blabbing about his research on me: when you know the facts of a situation and then see them run through the Nico "processor" and issued from the other side, you get a really clear picture of just how distorted and inaccurate his contributions his perception of consensus reality is.

    Posted 17 years ago #
22. NicholasLevis
    Member

    I find these particular mashups truly demented. They're like white noise bizarro world, mind control experiments, completely alienated and sick. I think the intent is to intimidate the target, and not to persuade anyone on the sidelines of anything other than that this whole subject is whacked and worth avoiding.

    Do you think they're actionable?

    Posted 17 years ago #
23. casseia
    Member

    I certainly agree that they are demented but I think they have a pretty limited audience. I think Nico would like us to be so offended or threatened that we would consider legal action, but I'm not. Jenny, on the other hand... the business of him calling her a tranny and "gender dysmorphic" (although I think he writes "dysporphic" which sounds like it has something to do with dolphins) I find truly offensive. She does not, however -- she has a rhino-like skin when it comes to this kind of stuff. Nico better hope he never runs into her in a dark alley, though -- she's a competitive powerlifter and she likes her boys scrawny like him (but with better personal hygiene, I'm sure.) (Jenny also does not find rape jokes acceptable under any circumstances and would not approve of my remark.)

    Nico was one of the very first 9/11 posters I ever encountered online, back when I was first looking at 9/11 material. In March of 2006, just before the movie "United 93" came out, the studio created a website with a forum area that was immediately overrun by Truthers. Nico had more than one thread along the lines of "Planehugger FAQ" and in retrospect, I realize that some of the really jaw-dropping porn that was posted there was likely his doing as well. (The board was a complete free-for-all for about a week as I recall.) Anyway, I identified him as a whacko and moved on, unharmed, into the larger world of 9/11 Truth. Of course this online behavior is deplorable (and I won't even touch the issue of his real life behavior) but I think most level-headed people who encounter him on the internet can see right through him.

    Posted 17 years ago #
24. Arabesque
    Member

    I'd just like to say that thanks to this cartoon, I am now featured in a Nico Haupt video "mash-up." I think we're all accused of working for al Qaeda -and/or a "taskforce" (oh no! not a taskforce!) -- Jenny certainly is. It's pretty hard to follow.

    I'm sorry this happened to you. I think it's just lame attempts at intimidation.

    I find these particular mashups truly demented. They're like white noise bizarro world, mind control experiments, completely alienated and sick. I think the intent is to intimidate the target, and not to persuade anyone on the sidelines of anything other than that this whole subject is whacked and worth avoiding.

    Couldn't agree more. At first my reaction was: "what the heck"? But to see the level of detail that went into this cartoon is flattering. There was some offline stuff that went on behind the scenes that made me realize almost right away that I was on to something here.

    What's interesting/fascinating is the whole disinformation network working in coordination. You've got the holocaust deniers, DEW supporters, LaRouche people all teaming up in supporting the warning. Many of the principals involved in this made previous warnings in the month or so before this controversy erupted. There were radio interviews, press releases, the works--all of this before the warning came out.

    Posted 17 years ago #
25. NicholasLevis
    Member

    The coming together of the various types is partly a function of opportunistic alliances: the niche marketeers of given conspiracy brands, the genuine wackos, the insecure fan-boys who have adopted a pet idea and don't want to leave it, and the real-live disruptors come to understand that they can provide safe harbor for each other, and all of them see a common enemy in reason and sobriety. But somewhere below the surface, there is a good deal of coordination as you point out. It's like watching the ramp-up to the latest war, or whatever the mainstream hysteria du jour is. If one could reveal the inner structure of this beast - grasp its beating heart - one might win more than just exposure of the disinfo campaign. The problem is that as one constructs models of it, a terrifically speculative matter, these models will look disturbingly like mirrors of the very same bogus map they've preemptively imposed on the sane. We can get tangled up in it. We can also cast the net too wide, and end up accusing naive innocents and doing the work of the disruptors. I've never figured out the right strategy for this.

    Posted 17 years ago #

Reply »

You must log in to post.