DECACS, Inc. and all its Initiatives

Archive for the ‘abc news’ Category

Obama’s Attack on "Fake News" (Videos)

https://youtu.be/wMomFFqt4iY



NB Commentary: This guy! We are being hoodwinked again with this proposition that we need “Big Brother” to censor “Fake News”!
No, we don’t need discernment.
We don’t need our own ability to sort through and sift through the BS.
No we are not mature enough or able to critically think for ourselves.
We need to have it done for us.
So, under the guise of protecting Democracy, whose greatest tenet is freedom of speech, let’s start sorting through the “Fake News”, shut them down, censor them on social media and decide for the ignorant masses what they need to or don’t need to know, read or discern.
Facebook, you fail at doing this for the masses.
Twitter, you are so awful we need to tell you what to keep out of your feeds.
Oh, we won’t look at the color revolutions that took place because of social media. In fact, when they happened we were cheering and jumping up and down about how wonderful it was that we were able to use social media to get the word out in a moments notice. People on the streets in mass, like never before.
And when we were able to get the word out on social media about the never ending threats posed by ISIS and their (fake) beheadings, we were very confident that the viewing public would be certain that what they were seeing was true. Without a doubt.

Let’s go all the way back to the Bin Laden videos while we are at it. Or how about 9/11 CGI.  That news was so real we were able to go to war on it and kill millions of people.
I am not talking about the “news” that accused Assad of gassing his own people and the picture of the dead bodies that turned out to be “fake” news. 
No, it doesn’t apply when the government is behind the propaganda. It is just when the alt-right and alt-left do not parrot the party line, that’s when we need to determine which one of those characters are faking it till they make it.
Hillary started this ball rolling when she spoke out against Info-Wars and Brietbart.
The major networks did their stories so well that when the Donald won, they were shocked!!! So who faked those polls? Certainly not alternative media. In fact it was there that folks could get the real news.

These people are always coming up with some way to counter a movement when it is not in their favor, but will surely feel really happy about a movement that is in their favor.

The majority of folks, especially here in America, barely read any other news except what comes from mainstream. They believe the lies the MSM tells them that is blasted at them thru their televisions. If you mention to them something that was not on Television, a counter perspective or simply a different one, they look at you like you have 2 heads, they dismiss you as a kook or a conspiracy theorist.

So this is an attack on Democracy! This is censorship! This is a big fat lie, to say freedom of speech needs to be monitored and by whom may I ask. Will the government get a think tank together to determine who’s fake and who’s not? According to what criteria??
The more things change, the more they stay the same.

What’s going on? Both Internet companies claim they’re changing their advertising policy to counter misinformation, indicating they’ll monitor content to assure it. Is censorship intended instead? Will reliable information sources challenging the official narrative be targeted? Will other similar online companies operate the same way? 

Is net neutrality threatened? Is online freedom and openness at risk – content available without restrictions, limitations, or discrimination, a level playing field for everyone, the essence of democratic free expression?

pre-election article discussed covert Google support for Hillary – its searches rigged for her, a way to sway undecided voters to choose her over Trump, while suppressing negative search terms about her.

Media scoundrels, Google, Facebook, and similar online operations and powerful tools for what power brokers want disseminated, restricting or blocking content they want suppressed.

Speech, press and academic freedoms are vital elements of free societies. Without them all other rights are endangered.

We the poor sheeple, who read newspapers, watch television and get our news from social media, may be in peril when it comes to being able to determine what is really going on in our world. I guess they see how easily we can be lead astray, in fact, haven’t they done it more times than we can count.

The history of this country is over populated with propaganda to support an agenda. Let’s just start with the profusion of false flags for starters. However, what they did not expect was that outlets like Facebook and Twitter, which they thought they could manage by infiltrating them with CIA agents, has gotten off the ground running faster than the speed of light, and too fast for them to keep up with, so now we need to crack down on them more and more, because Democracy is now in peril, as if this was ever a Democracy anyway.

How many times have folks been censored or demonized because they offered an alternative perspective to what the MSM has given us? How often has policies, laws and codes been instituted based on what was given to us in the MSM? How many times did they “Wag the Dog” to make a  point and affect public sentiment? Not the so called “fake news” outlets but the so called “Real News”, the mainstream Media.

Now, social media, has become a runaway locomotive and it is not doing what they initially thought it would do. It is allowing folks to fact check, to research, to look deeper into the narrative that is being given by the MSM and now it’s a threat.
Ironically, these outlets have been censoring content since before he felt threatened by it. They have also been moving content around so that it could be viewed under circumstances that would get the most traction. People have resorted to the Blogosphere in order to get the news out due to the already entrench censorship.

So what are we looking at here?
YouTube, creating a rewards program to encourage folks to become “flaggers” of content.
Facebook dropping folks into the Facebook jail and giving police access to the ability to shut down your live stream.
And Twitter, stopping content from being in their streams.
Is he just parroting what is already taking place. Or does his words sanction it?
Forget the BS around Democracy or fake news threatening. Has fake news become the new ISIS?
I really hadn’t intended on ranting on this one, but hypocrisy really gets me hyped!!

“In an age where there’s so much active misinformation ― and it’s packaged very well, and it looks the same when you see it on a Facebook page or you turn on your television ― where some overzealousness on the part of, you know, a U.S. official is equated with constant and severe repression elsewhere, if everything seems to be the same, and no distinctions are made, then we won’t know what to protect,” Obama said.

“We won’t know what to fight for, and we can lose so much of what we’ve gained in terms of the kind of democratic freedoms and market-based economies and prosperity that we’ve come to take for granted,” he added.

Marina Fang  Associate Politics Editor, The Huffington Post

President Barack Obama on Thursday pointed to the profusion of fake news on social media as a sign that people should not take democracy for granted.
In a joint press conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Obama warned that the ease with which people can promulgate fraudulent news stories threatens basic democratic principles.
“In an age where there’s so much active misinformation ― and it’s packaged very well, and it looks the same when you see it on a Facebook page or you turn on your television ― where some overzealousness on the part of, you know, a U.S. official is equated with constant and severe repression elsewhere, if everything seems to be the same, and no distinctions are made, then we won’t know what to protect,” Obama said.
“We won’t know what to fight for, and we can lose so much of what we’ve gained in terms of the kind of democratic freedoms and market-based economies and prosperity that we’ve come to take for granted,” he added.
Facebook in particular has come under fire for not distinguishing between credible and false news sources, helping to fuel misinformation on political issues and candidates. The site’s algorithm doesn’t filter out articles from websites presenting slanted or blatantly false coverage ― instead, when users post those links, they look as if they were from reliable news outlets. The company announced on Monday that it would take steps to address the problem.
If we can’t discriminate between serious arguments and propaganda, then we have problems.President Barack Obama
In a veiled criticism of President-elect Donald Trump, Obama spoke more broadly on the state of democracies around the world, cautioning both Americans and Europeans to “not take for granted our systems of government and our way of life,” advising that “democracy is hard work.” 
He also urged a greater emphasis on facts and reason.
“If we are not serious about facts and what’s true and what’s not, and particularly in an age of social media, where so many people are getting their information in sound bites and snippets off their phones, if we can’t discriminate between serious arguments and propaganda, then we have problems,” Obama said.
“If people, whether they are conservative or liberal, left or right, are unwilling to compromise and engage in the democratic process and are taking absolutist views and demonizing opponents, then democracy will break down,” he added. “And so I think my most important advice is to understand, what are the foundations of a healthy democracy and how we have to engage in citizenship continuously, not just when something upsets us, not just when there’s an election or when an issue pops up for a few weeks. It’s hard work.”

Fake news threatens democracy, Obama says
Obama, With Angela Merkel in Berlin, Assails Spread of Fake News
Barack Obama on fake news: ‘We have problems’ if we can’t tell the difference
Facebook staff mount secret push to tackle fake news, reports say
Facebook’s failure: did fake news and polarized politics get Trump elected?
Rather than connecting people – as Facebook’s euphoric mission statement claims – the bitter polarization of the social network over the last eighteen months suggests Facebook is actually doing more to divide the world.
In the memo, staffers weighed the pros and cons of accepting an invitation to the G20, if it were extended. On one hand, the meeting just 11 days after the election would “afford you an early and efficient opportunity to evaluate the positions of leaders from other economically important countries,” they wrote.
The report is a work of fiction published by a fake-news website that calls itself Fox News the FB Page. In fact, the parody website has no connection to Fox News whatsoever.  Nor is it a Facebook Page. Nothing published on the site should be taken seriously.
The result of the popular vote is, I’m sure you know, immaterial to the result of the Presidential election – but it carries a undeniable moral weight. Equally obviously, the claim is simply untrue. Clinton will ultimately win between one and two million more votes than Trump.
Advertisements

Everything Is A Lie: The Deliberate Intent To Deceive People Is At An All Time High

From pollution to politics, the era of deception and duplicity has reached new heights and hijacked almost every form of media in the world. In the last frontiers for truth such as the internet, disinformation operations are in full swing to discredit and destroy any semblance of authentic and factual information available to the public.
How many more lies will people around the world accept as truth? Some say a global awakening is taking place, but at what cost? Will it take the destruction of most of the earth and its resources before people are enlightened?

The escalating media and political reports are so far fetched, cunning, and so beyond reality, it’s as if each is trying to top the other with one sinister plot after the next. To demonstrate the outright lies by national governments and the media, let’s take three examples from the last year alone, including the H1N1 scandal, airport body scanners and the BP oil disaster.

The H1N1 Scandal

Last year, the H1N1 scandal reached its pinnacle in the fall of 2009 when the world united on the internet with a consensus and practical understanding of the World Health Organization’s orchestratration to deceive the masses. From radio, internet, television, newspapers, magazines, outdoor posters, signage and promotions, you could not escape the flu hype campaigns so diligently pursued by all the malicious agendas at play who only wanted one thing – to promote a dangerous H1N1 vaccine. After hundreds of reports exposed the criminal activity by all levels of government, we left the same people in power to do it all over again.

According to preliminary reports, another round of pandemic vaccine campaigns are scheduled for the 2010/2011 season and they’re already underway. However, there appears to be a recombination that has changed the H1N1 lab created virus into a more lethal form and it is not a hoax, but it may be yet another CDC lab experiment.

The CDC has recently issued a Health Advisory in connection with two summer outbreaks of H3N2 in Iowa. Other reports from Russia and India indicate that a real epidemic may be upon us if the virus steadily recombines and acquires new genetics. Even though a new strain may have accidentally evolved in eggs, reassortment of H1N1-H5N1 has been a legitimate concern for years. The WHO first suggested the reassortment of H1N1-H5N1 in 2004.

If this is really the case, how will the public react after all the lies from health agencies who have sworn to protect us? Will they hype another vaccine and if so, will the public even respond?

Body Scanners

They’ve been approved all over the world and marketed as the next greatest airport scanning technology. The U.S., U.K., Russia, Australia, Europe and Canada have all installed airport body scanners which have potentially devastating health effects.

Many of these scanners are reportedly using terahertz (THz) waves, the radiation that fills the slot in the electromagnetic spectrum between microwaves and infrared. Evidence suggests that although the forces generated are tiny, resonant effects allow THz waves to unzip double-stranded DNA, creating bubbles in the double strand that could significantly interfere with processes such as gene expression and DNA replication.
As the path toward rolling out wider use of whole-body scanners in U.S. airports ran through the White House, Obama expedited their deployment because the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Transportation Security Administration (TSA) didn’t need legislation from Congress to start using the devices at any of the 560 U.S. airports.
The White House ignored all the scientific evidence presented which suggested negative health effects. Politicians and regulatory agencies then covered up the bad publicity on naked body scanners and focused on the presumed benefits under the guise of public safety.

Privacy commisioners and airport authorities have also insisted that there were no risks of images being stored or personal details being revealed to security screeners. Now there’s new evidence to show that the scanners can do just that.

According to a CNET report, another federal agency, the U.S. Marshall’s service, admitted that it had actually stored over 30,000 images recorded by a full-body scanner used at a Florida courthouse.
A watchdog group called the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) obtained over 100 of the images and states on its web site that, “The images, which are routinely captured by the federal agency, prove that body scanning devices store and record images of individuals stripped naked.” The group has filed a lawsuit to suspend the deployment of body scanners at airports.

EPIC also discovered that the TSA actually specified to manufacturers that the machines have the ability to send and store images. The TSA says that these functions are only for testing and training and insists on its web site that the airport body scanners are delivered to airports with storage and recording functions disabled.

Again, the upper levels of the echelon are caught lying and deceiving, yet they are still left to their own devices to further manipulate and continue misrepresenting facts to the gullible public.

BP Oil Disaster

When news unfolded about the April 20, 2010 BP oil disaster, it went from bad to worse. Instead of immediately mobilizing for action in the face of a massive public health threat, the response was to cover-up, deny and respond with ignorance. After all the public will always believe them, or so they thought.
The Obama administration, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, U.S. Coast Guard commandant admiral Thad Allen, energy and climate-change policy adviser Carol Browner, BP and all their contituents conspired to deliberately mislead the public from the inception of the disaster to present day. What’s worse is they all agreed to further disseminate toxins in the Gulf by spraying 1.8 to 2 million gallons of the neurotoxin Corexit which was exposed by over a hundred scientists, toxicologists and other experts who have unequivocally classified the irresponsible aerial spraying of the chemical dispersant as a large-scale, uncontrolled non-consensual human and environmental experiment is being conducted in the Gulf region.
The media was grossly censoring the extent of the devastation in the Gulf. The poisons–oil and corexit are destined to spread globally, but honest reporting was and still is restricted, and many independent investigators have been arrested. Read 30 Facts Evidencing that The Gulf Oil Crisis Was Planned.
On June 12, 2010, The Institute of Atmospheric Sciences and Climate (ISAC) released “Risk of Global Climate Change By BP Oil Spill“, a document detailing how the BP spill may cause irreparable damage to the Gulf Stream global climate thermoregulation activity. Read Gulf Loop Current Destroyed: May Lead To Shut Down of Atlantic Thermoregulation, Rapid Cooling.

According to Dr. Gianluigi Zangari, an Italian theoretical physicist, and major complex and chaotic systems analyst at the Frascati National Laboratories in Italy, the Loop Current in the Gulf of Mexico has stalled as a consequence of the BP oil spill disaster. Zangari notes that the effects of this stall have also begun to spread to the Gulf Stream. This is because the Loop Current is a crucial element of the Gulf Stream itself and why it is commonly referred to as the “main engine” of the Stream.

The concern now, is whether or not natural processes can re-establish the stalled Loop Current. If not, we could begin to see global crop failures as early as 2011.

Zangari’s assessment is based on daily monitoring of real-time data oceanographic satellite public data feeds called “Real-Time Mesoscale Altimetry” from the Jason, Topex/Poseidon, Geosat, Follow-On, ERS-2 and Envisat satellites.

These satellite feeds are captured and made publicly available by NASA, NOAA and by the Colorado Center for Astrodynamics Research (CCAR) at the University of Colorado at Boulder.
The CCAR is now being accused of scientific fraud and tampering of data directly associated with the events surrounding the Loop Current phenomenon and its current anomalies. Various reporters have spear-headed the charge including radio personality Dr. Bill Deagle who has featured Dr. Zangari on his radio show The Nutrimedical Report where he detailed the events leading up to the destruction of the Loop Current in the Gulf.

Dr. Zangari has stated that he will no longer use CCAR data due to its unreliability.

Organized and Professional Disinformation Operations
Well-funded and highly-organized disinformation operations are in full-swing throughout the internet. From forums to comment boards and even professional websites that have only one purpose: Defame, distract, and destroy the truth.

However organized, the tactics are very predictable in a world filled with lies and half-truths. This, sadly, includes every day news media, one of the worst offenders with respect to being a source of disinformation.

Disinformation campaigns are launched against those seeking to uncover and expose the truth and/or the conspiracy. The H1N1 scandal was a prime example of how hundreds of operations can be launched to sway opinions on the facts. For every fact-based article on the realities of the H1N1 vaccine, there were both very primitive and sophisticated counters on message boards, comment forums and hundreds of alternative and mainstream websites.

Stephen Barrett’s Quackwatch.com and supporters such as skeptic.org.uk and skepticblog.com are examples of websites which promote both synthetic and organic disinformation on almost any topic that does not concur with mainstream thought.

There are specific tactics which disinfo artists tend to apply, as H. Michael Sweeney has brilliantly detailed. Also included with this material are eight common traits of the disinfo artist which may also prove useful in identifying players and motives. The more a particular party fits the traits and is guilty of following the rules, the more likely they are a professional disinfo artist with a vested motive. People can be bought, threatened, or blackmailed into providing disinformation, so even “good guys” can be suspect in many cases.
A rational person participating as one interested in the truth will evaluate that chain of evidence and conclude either that the links are solid and conclusive, that one or more links are weak and need further development before conclusion can be arrived at, or that one or more links can be broken, usually invalidating (but not necessarily so, if parallel links already exist or can be found, or if a particular link was merely supportive, but not in itself key) the argument. The game is played by raising issues which either strengthen or weaken (preferably to the point of breaking) these links. It is the job of a disinfo artist to interfere with these evaluation… to at least make people think the links are weak or broken when, in truth, they are not… or to propose alternative solutions leading away from the truth. Often, by simply impeding and slowing down the process through disinformation tactics, a level of victory is assured because apathy increases with time and rhetoric.
It would seem true in almost every instance, that if one cannot break the chain of evidence for a given solution, revelation of truth has won out. If the chain is broken either a new link must be forged, or a whole new chain developed, or the solution is invalid an a new one must be found… but truth still wins out. There is no shame in being the creator or supporter of a failed solution, chain, or link, if done with honesty in search of the truth. This is the rational approach. While it is understandable that a person can become emotionally involved with a particular side of a given issue, it is really unimportant who wins, as long as truth wins. But the disinfo artist will seek to emotionalize and chastise any failure (real or false claims thereof), and will seek by means of intimidation to prevent discussion in general.
It is the disinfo artist and those who may pull their strings (those who stand to suffer should the crime be solved) MUST seek to prevent rational and complete examination of any chain of evidence which would hang them. Since fact and truth seldom fall on their own, they must be overcome with lies and deceit. Those who are professional in the art of lies and deceit, such as the intelligence community and the professional criminal (often the same people or at least working together), tend to apply fairly well defined and observable tools in this process. However, the public at large is not well armed against such weapons, and is often easily led astray by these time-proven tactics. Remarkably, not even media and law enforcement have NOT BEEN TRAINED to deal with these issues. For the most part, only the players themselves understand the rules of the game.

Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation

1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don’t discuss it — especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it’s not reported, it didn’t happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.
2. Become incredulous and indignant.
Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used to show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the ‘How dare you!’ gambit.
3. Create rumor mongers.
Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method works especially well with a silent press because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such ‘arguable rumors’. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a ‘wild rumor’ from a ‘bunch of kids on the Internet’ which can have no basis in fact.
4. Use a straw man.
Find or create a seeming element of your opponent’s argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule.
This is also known as the primary ‘attack the messenger’ ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as ‘kooks’, ‘right-wing’, ‘liberal’, ‘left-wing’, ‘terrorists’, ‘conspiracy buffs’, ‘radicals’, ‘militia’, ‘racists’, ‘religious fanatics’, ‘sexual deviates’, and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
6. Hit and Run.
In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain critical reasoning — simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent’s viewpoint.
7. Question motives.
Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.
8. Invoke authority.
Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough ‘jargon’ and ‘minutia’ to illustrate you are ‘one who knows’, and simply say it isn’t so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.
9. Play Dumb.
No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.
10. Associate opponent charges with old news.
A derivative of the straw man — usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with – a kind of investment for the future should the matter not be so easily contained.) Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually then be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues — so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.
11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions.
Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the ‘high road’ and ‘confess’ with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made — but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, ‘just aren’t so.’ Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later, and even publicly ‘call for an end to the nonsense’ because you have already ‘done the right thing.’ Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for ‘coming clean’ and ‘owning up’ to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.
12. Enigmas have no solution.
Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to lose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.
13. Alice in Wonderland Logic.
Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic which forbears any actual material fact.
14. Demand complete solutions.
Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best with issues qualifying for rule 10.
15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions.
This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.
16. Vanish evidence and witnesses.
If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won’t have to address the issue.
17. Change the subject.
Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can ‘argue’ with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents.
If you can’t do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how ‘sensitive they are to criticism.’
19. Ignore facts presented, demand impossible proofs.
This is perhaps a variant of the ‘play dumb’ rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.
20. False evidence.
Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations — as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.
21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body.
Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed an unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed. Usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim.
22. Manufacture a new truth.
Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.
23. Create bigger distractions.
If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.
24. Silence critics.
If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by destroying them financially, emotionally, or severely damaging their health.
25. Vanish.
If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen.
Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist

1) Avoidance
They never actually discuss issues head-on or provide constructive input, generally avoiding citation of references or credentials. Rather, they merely imply this, that, and the other. Virtually everything about their presentation implies their authority and expert knowledge in the matter without any further justification for credibility.
2) Selectivity
They tend to pick and choose opponents carefully, either applying the hit-and-run approach against mere commentators supportive of opponents, or focusing heavier attacks on key opponents who are known to directly address issues. Should a commentator become argumentative with any success, the focus will shift to include the commentator as well.
3) Coincidental
They tend to surface suddenly and somewhat coincidentally with a new controversial topic with no clear prior record of participation in general discussions in the particular public arena involved. They likewise tend to vanish once the topic is no longer of general concern. They were likely directed or elected to be there for a reason, and vanish with the reason.
4) Teamwork
They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams. Of course, this can happen naturally in any public forum, but there will likely be an ongoing pattern of frequent exchanges of this sort where professionals are involved. Sometimes one of the players will infiltrate the opponent camp to become a source for straw man or other tactics designed to dilute opponent presentation strength.
5) Anti-conspiratorial
They almost always have disdain for ‘conspiracy theorists’ and, usually, for those who in any way believe JFK was not killed by LHO. Ask yourself why, if they hold such disdain for conspiracy theorists, do they focus on defending a single topic discussed in a News Group (NG) focusing on conspiracies? One might think they would either be trying to make fools of everyone on every topic, or simply ignore the group they hold in such disdain. Or, one might more rightly conclude they have an ulterior motive for their actions in going out of their way to focus as they do.
6) Artificial Emotions
An odd kind of ‘artificial’ emotionalism and an unusually thick skin — an ability to persevere and persist even in the face of overwhelming criticism and unacceptance. This likely stems from intelligence community training that, no matter how condemning the evidence, deny everything, and never become emotionally involved or reactive. The net result for a disinfo artist is that emotions can seem artificial. Most people, if responding in anger, for instance, will express their animosity throughout their rebuttal.
But disinfo types usually have trouble maintaining the ‘image’ and are hot and cold with respect to pretended emotions and their usually more calm or unemotional communications style. It’s just a job, and they often seem unable to ‘act their role in character’ as well in a communications medium as they might be able in a real face-to-face conversation/confrontation.
You might have outright rage and indignation one moment, ho-hum the next, and more anger later — an emotional yo-yo. With respect to being thick-skinned, no amount of criticism will deter them from doing their job, and they will generally continue their old disinfo patterns without any adjustments to criticisms of how obvious it is that they play that game — where a more rational individual who truly cares what others think might seek to improve their communications style, substance, and so forth, or simply give up.
7) Inconsistent
There is also a tendency to make mistakes which betray their true self/motives. This may stem from not really knowing their topic, or it may be somewhat ‘freudian’, so to speak, in that perhaps they really root for the side of truth deep within.
I have noted that often, they will simply cite contradictory information which neutralizes itself and the author. For instance, one such player claimed to be a Navy pilot, but blamed his poor communicating skills (spelling, grammar, incoherent style) on having only a grade-school education. I’m not aware of too many Navy pilots who don’t have a college degree. Another claimed no knowledge of a particular topic/situation but later claimed first-hand knowledge of it.
8) Time Constant
There are three ways this can be seen to work, especially when the government or other empowered player is involved in a cover up operation:

  • ANY NG posting by a targeted proponent for truth can result in an IMMEDIATE response. The government and other empowered players can afford to pay people to sit there and watch for an opportunity to do some damage. SINCE DISINFO IN A NG ONLY WORKS IF THE READER SEES IT – FAST RESPONSE IS CALLED FOR, or the visitor may be swayed towards truth.
  • When dealing in more direct ways with a disinformationalist, such as email, DELAY IS CALLED FOR – there will usually be a minimum of a 48-72 hour delay. This allows a sit-down team discussion on response strategy for best effect, and even enough time to ‘get permission’ or instruction from a formal chain of command.
  • In the NG example 1) above, it will often ALSO be seen that bigger guns are drawn and fired after the same 48-72 hours delay – the team approach in play. This is especially true when the targeted truth seeker or their comments are considered more important with respect to potential to reveal truth. Thus, a serious truth sayer will be attacked twice for the same sin.

Remarkably, even media and law enforcement have NOT BEEN TRAINED to deal with these issues. For the most part, only the players themselves understand the rules of the game.

Marco Torres is a research specialist, writer and consumer advocate for healthy lifestyles. He holds degrees in Public Health and Environmental Science and is a professional speaker on topics such as disease prevention, environmental toxins and health policy.

 
 

Celebrities, the Modern Day Gods

Humanity in the modern age, treat celebrities like their predecessors of the old days treated their gods. It seems that human beings have to have something to idolize, look up to, admire, wish to be like or live their lives for.
 Celebrities are the new age obsession of modern man, who once built altars and brought offerings to their gods, the modern day devotee (fan) now does the same, purchasing their pictures, videos, music in a frenzied state of wanting to be next to them, if only through a conduit.
The Modern day Priest is the peddler of these New Age Celebrities Gods. They pose as media moguls, press agents, producers and distributors of the mania that consumes the fans. These modern day idolaters scream, dance, sweat and cry over the “gods” they chose and keep their gods amply supplied with all the modern conveniences, and sometimes so modern, their “gods” can live in full furnished multimillion dollar homes.
Like any religion, the worshippers keep the Gods and their Mediators in power as the devotee depletes his resources just for one more favor or act of kindness towards them. These acts of kindness maybe inclusive of but not exclusive of, autographs, pictures, handshakes, special tokens and VIP seating at a gala affair.
When the devotee sees, reads or experiences the lives of their gods, they are energized living through their imagine world, or lack there of. They are excited by the challenges, the scandals, the lies, the deceit that shrouds their gods, because in order for their god to exist in the world of Celebrities they must face these and many other obstacles of success and/or failure. The Modern day devotee(fan) takes the life of the Celebrity in full scale of it’s own life, moving and progressing along as the God would demand of them. Dare they fall in the disfavor of their Gods or other devotees find them trifling.
Some devotees become so obsessed they will kill for their god, or kill their god itself, destroying its life, history and perchance its effect on any other devotee other than they.
Perhaps this is a displace madness, an obsession generated by the total lack of self ownership and self power. Perhaps the Celebrities while only temporary give the devotee the moment in time where they can feel overwhelmingly powerful and completely divorced from their miserable lives or completely disconnected from the miserable lives their very Gods live.
It is part of the social construct. Children see parents as gods, infallible and invincible, and as adults this lifelike onus is given to the Celebrity of their own choosing. In the realm of Celebrity worship, there are no boundaries as anything that would prove disconcerting to another can be hidden in the privacy of the devotees home, away from the scrutiny of any onlooker.
Devotees can get into fierce verbal battles with other devotees of other Gods, and like the Gladiators of old, can fight to the teeth about their particular god and its “well deserved” greatness and power.
Like any usurpation of power handed over freely or forcefully taken, the taker is as much a victim as the giver. The co-dependency of this relationship between the Devotee and the God, keep them inexorably bound to each other creating a life long dance of fierce passion and need to give the each other validation. The concert hall, theater, stadium or fan club is the Church of the Celebrities. The devotees attend these churches religiously and participate in the ritual celebration of their Gods.
The question to me becomes, what is missing from the human psyche that such props are needed? How has humanity come to this? And what is missing inside of the human being that this type of attribution of power is needed to be given to an “Idol” or object of their devotion. How is it that the social construct supports and promotes this type of mania?

Will Smith, Jada Pinkett Smith divorce: Lawyer Laura Wasser reportedly retained by Jada

From Huffington Post: Despite denying divorce rumors back in August, it appears that Will and Jada Pinkett Smith may be finally going their separate ways — at least according to In Touch Weekly.
The magazine is reporting that Jada Smith recently met with celebrity divorce lawyer Laura Wasser, who has represented the likes of Britney Spears, Maria Shriver, and Kim Kardashian.
A source tells In Touch that Smith has “finally begun to take steps to dissolve their marriage,” even reportedly turning down a role in Keanu Reeves directorial debut to spend time with her kids during this “difficult time.”

Read More Here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/04/will-smith-jada-pinkett-s_n_1183990.html?ref=black-voices&ir=Black%20Voices

//optimizedby.brealtime.com/tt?id=903186&size=728×90&bnrbdb//optimizedby.brealtime.com/tt?id=903186&size=468×60&bnrbd2

Newtown school shooting story already being changed

Newtown school shooting story already being changed by the media to eliminate eyewitness reports of a second shooter
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor 

 

(NaturalNews) The national media is ablaze today with coverage of the tragic elementary school shooting in Newtown, CT, where 27 people have reportedly been killed, including 18 children.

As always, when violent shootings take place, honest journalists are forced to ask the question: “Does this fit the pattern of other staged shootings?”

One of the most important red flags of a staged shooting is a second gunman, indicating the shooting was coordinated and planned. There are often mind control elements at work in many of these shootings. The Aurora “Batman” shooter James Holmes, for example, was a graduate student actually working on mind control technologies funded by the U.S. government. There were also chemical mind control elements linked to Jared Lee Loughner, the shooter of Congresswomen Giffords in Arizona in 2011.

According to multiple eyewitness reports from Aurora, Colorado, including at least one caught on camera by mainstream media news reports in Colorado, James Holmes did not operate alone. There was a second shooter involved. But the media quickly eliminated any mention of a second shooter from its coverage, resorting to the typical cover story of a “lone gunman.”

Today, the exact same thing is happening with the Newton, CT school shooting.

Eyewitness reports of a second shooter now being “scrubbed” from the news

As the story of this shooting was first breaking, the news was reporting a second gunman.

FoxNews reported that this second gunman was “led out of the woods by officers” and then questioned. The original source of this report was the Connecticut Post.

A local CBS affiliate was also reporting the existence of a second gunman and said “Police believe there may be a second gunman and are looking for a red or maroon van with its back window blown out…”

ABC News also originally reported, “A second gunman is apparently at large. Car-to-car searches are underway.”

A local CT CBS affiliate was also reporting, “CBS News reports that a potential second shooter is in custody and that SWAT is now investigating the home of the suspect. A witness tells WFSB-TV that a second man was taken out of the woods in handcuffs wearing a black jacket and camouflage pants and telling parents on the scene, ‘I did not do it.'”

But the more recent stories being put out by the media are scrubbing any mention of a second gunman and going with the “lone gunman” explanation, which holds about as much water as the “lone gunman” explanation of the JFK assassination.

“A lone gunman killed 27 people at an elementary school here, including 18 children, in a terrifying early Friday morning shooting spree,” reports USA Today. It makes no mention whatsoever of a second gunman.

NBC News is also now chiming in with the “lone gunman” version of the story, eliminating any mention of a second gunman from its coverage of the tragic event.

Another story authored by NBC News carries the title, “26 dead after lone gunman assaults Connecticut elementary school.” Once again, no mention of a second gunman as reported by eyewitnesses.

When key elements of the story keeps changing, something is fishy

Journalists are trained to ask questions, and one of the questions I have right now is: Why was the second gunman suddenly dropped from media coverage after the first few hours of this story developing?

And why is there always a second gunman in these recent mass shootings that seem to be engineered to maximize emotional shock value due to the sheer horror of all the innocent deaths?

This story is continuing to develop, and we’ll keep asking questions here on Natural News. Our hearts and prayers go out to the children and families impacted by this violent tragedy. Given the terrible loss of life that has taken place here, shouldn’t we all seek to get to the bottom of WHY these shootings all seem to fit a common pattern of multiple mind-controlled shooters followed by an almost immediate media cover-up of the facts?

For the sake of those children who were killed today, I want to get to the bottom of this and expose the REAL story, for the purpose of stopping this violence from targeting yet more innocents in the future.

naturalnews.com

Originally published December 14 2012


ABC News

20 Children Died in Newtown, Conn., School Massacre

http://abcnews.go.com/US/twenty-children-died-newtown-connecticut-school-shooting/story?id=17973836#.UMu7OKyAp8E 

http://cdnapi.kaltura.com/index.php/kwidget/wid/0_a99ol1i1/uiconf_id/3775332/st_cache/25506?referer=http://abcnews.go.com/US/video/connecticut-shooting-suspect-identified-adam-lanza-sandy-hook-17976636&autoPlay=false&addThis.playerSize=392×221&freeWheel.siteSectionId=nws_offsite&closedCaptionActive=true&

OUTLETS ISSUE CONFLICTING REPORTS ABOUT SHOOTER

Tag Cloud