9/11 Scholars Forum

Exposing Falsehoods and Revealing Truths

Tips for identifying disinformation artists by Col. George Nelson, Colonel, USAF (ret.)

George Nelson, Colonel, USAF (ret.) on
http://www.thepowerhour.com/news2/nelson_watson.htm

Tips for identifying disinformation artists:
 
  1. The first and foremost sign that an Internet poster is a disinformation
 artist is abusive language. A shrill tone that attacks a person rather
 than a theory is a bad sign. So also are terms of abuse for a theory
 rather than a person. An example: "The nuts who push the lunatic
 no-757-at-the-Pentagon theory are probably off their meds."
 
  2. Excessive zeal in attempting to take an option off the table is another
 bad sign. Suppose, for instance, that someone thinks they have identified
 a particular type of engine at the Pentagon. Attempts to close the
 discussion without exploring all possible alternatives (retrofitted part,
 salted evidence, etc.) indicates an agenda of throwing serious researchers
 off the track.
 
 3. Calls for unity in the Truth Movement as a basis for failure to pursue
 a line of inquiry are another bad sign. There is no Truth Movement. All
 sorts of figures waltz into the discussion calling themselves members of
 the Truth Movement, and then attempt to limit discussion based on a plea
 for unity. Example: "We can all agree that all three WTC towers were
 brought down by demolition charges. But any attempt to identify the
 explosives as possibly nuclear, thermite/thermate, RDX etc. is just
 divisive. In the interests of unity in the Truth Movement, we must stop
 speculating about exactly what type of means may have been used to bring
 down the building." The fallacy of this approach should be apparent. The
 use of micronukes, for instance, would open up new vistas for
 investigation. If there is any evidence for such use, attempting to sweep
 this off the table is a bad sign.
 
 4. Any use of threats is a bad sign. If one's case cannot stand on its own
 merits, use of threats is a sign of an agenda different from that of a
 search for the truth.
 
 5. It must be remembered that the stakes in the information game are the
 highest possible. Our perceptions of the world determine our strategies in
 dealing with the world. Throughout human civilization, there have been
 highly successful, integrated programs to make masses of people act
 contrary to their actual interests through the presentation of false
 pictures of the world. Those pictures must be reinforced by multiple,
 apparently independent sources, who in turn expect a share of the profits
 from the deception. Those profits typically include security from injury,
 financial profit, sexual domination, status, rank, land, etc. The losing
 side in the propaganda war, whether they are called heretics or lunatics,
 may expect precisely the opposite outcome.
 
 6. It must be emphasized that this process can be regarded as a game. It
 is a deadly serious game, but a game nonetheless. One is not insulting
 someone if one comes to the conclusion that this person is a conscious
 disinformation agent. A helpful analogy would be that of a football
 huddle. If one notices someone with the wrong color jersey in your huddle,
 the fact must be noted and corrected. Nothing personal. He is just on the
 wrong team, and our own team needs its privacy and trust to deliberate
 effectively.    

Views: 121

Comment

You need to be a member of 9/11 Scholars Forum to add comments!

Join 9/11 Scholars Forum

Comment by Thoth II on January 21, 2011 at 9:39am

these are excellent tips and certainly correspond to my observations of how they have treated the critics as early as Mark Lane , and yes, even Lee Oswald himself.  I recently listened to a debate between someone on INCA versus Oswald over his Fair Play for Cuba activities, where Lee was playing the part of a Castro sympathizer.  I detected a very derisive debating style on the part of the INCA guy.  Of course, we know this countinued and even through , of all people, Johnny Carson.  I never looked at Johnny the same after his shameful performance with Garrison.  

 

1.  "abusive language".  the shills use the technique of intimidation, usually flocking together and ganging up on the reasoned debater on the forum, I've seen this on forums repeatedly.  It's the mentality of the schoolyard bully  ( I always resented bullies when I was a kid).  

 

2.  "excessive zeal in attempting to take an option off the table", this would be something like special pleading and ignoring all hypotheses and evidence not favorable to their side.  I've seen this done with the Jones group, and even heard Steve Jones last night still talking about thermite.  I won't get into the details, but I believe his science might even be degenerating.  In broad terms, the stuff he talked about doesn't correspond to the knowledge I have of physics or the evidence I see in the towers.   My take is that he is bending the evidence to fit his hypothesis which he rigidly supports and I don't believe he is looking at other options scientifically.  I believe he is now special pleading like a lawyer would.  

 

3. "Call for unity":  I totally agree this is bad.  That is why I post on this forum , because it has an atmosphere of following established scientific reasoning techniques, such as the IBE, where all the hypotheses must be weighted against all the evidence.  I have no stake in anything other than the "truth" and the way to "truth" is a scientific method.  Calls for unity are just ways of grouping people under beliefs, but do not correspond to scientific method.

 

4.  akin to number 1, and particularly threats are aimed at potential whistleblowers.  

 

5.  I believe the propoganda war can be seen in the use of the term "CT" which is an obvious attempt to group all conspiracy researchers under the same label as the real looney tunes out there, and thus marginalize them so the official myth can live on unchallenged.  

 

6.  Thoughtful , reasonable people would conclude we are on one team, the human race, and not think in these caste terms.  I can maybe see a reason for this in pre industrial days where material wealth was scarce, but there is no excuse whatsoever for it today given all the technology and wonderful inventions.  Bottom line is about a tiny fraction of this world's population is bullying all the rest of us around using their paid thugs.  

© 2019   Created by James H. Fetzer.   Powered by

Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service