shady28
Platinum Member
- Apr 11, 2004
- 2,520
- 397
- 126
Paul Ryan is just like Hillary Clinton.
Which is to say, he is malleable and will do whatever is in his own best interests. Right now that means he will do whatever Trump tells him to do.
BonzaiDuck
Lifer
- Jun 30, 2004
- 16,664
- 2,039
- 126
One has to distinguish between things like manufactured events as transmitted through the media with plausible stories about them, outright lies, distortions, deliberate and cynical exaggerations, innocent exaggerations, inaccuracies, or what appears to be "promises" based on limited information that later show to be unfeasible.
There were two important dates this month, one of which is fading into history leaving a longstanding Myth in the minds of the public. If you check the LA TIMES over the last week, there was an op-ed printed which actually suggested that Lee Harvey Oswald really wanted to kill John Connelly -- Governor of Texas -- based on some notes in LHO's journal of questionable authenticity.
Letter-writers -- two in print and possibly more on the web-page -- responded.
One of them mentioned Vincent Bugliosi's massive tome; both of them disparage the article. To me, the article is more misinformation. Further, the letters show how the public has absorbed propaganda about the event pointing in all directions of the compass.
There is a spectrum of human understanding one can crudely describe as "knowing through simple fact," "knowing through a rigorous inference from the largest set of facts," "theorizing based on a subset of facts," "suspicion with a similar basis," . . . . . "believing." When people say they "know" God, they are talking about belief. If an official government report provides a comfortable explanation, and it is based only on a subset of inferentially related fact, and finally -- people don't do pursue their own investigations from other sources, they will merely believe the official report.
Here's the way I infer that it happened.
CIA made a bad recruitment in 1950, when -- as Richard Helms tells us -- there was an dearth of psychologists and screeners during the Great Stalin Panic and early paranoia of the Cold War. Citizen X had really wanted to be an actor; he loved the spotlight; his mother doted on him as a child. This and more provide the perfect profile of a narcissistically-disordered person.
Citizen X collected knowledge of certain projects during the 1950s, when people like Frank Wisner Sr. did their best to keep as much as possible in certain operations from being put to writing. Somebody may have lost track of Citizen X or what he knew or participated in.
One thing the CIA was doing at that time involved Hollywood and the media. As Bedell Smith an interim DCIA had said, "propaganda may be an effective prophylactic to save us from spending too much on military hardware.
Citizen X first crossed paths with a man named Richard Condon in 1953, New York, when Condon was producing a Broadway play entitled "Stalag 17," and X's Nazi-POW-camp comedy flopped two weeks later. He was still pursuing his interest in amateur acting and writing plays. Then, in January, 1954, Condon was in Havana visiting Hemingway; X was frequenting Hemingway's favorite Havana watering-hole in January, 1954 -- as was Richard Helms. Hemingway's best friend was the CIA station chief in 1954 Havana. X's brother was a screenwriter in Hollywood, and introduced X to Robert Mitchum. Mitchum and Condon knew each other well. X assisted his brother and Mitchum in doing research for the film production "Thunder Road." Meanwhile, X variously worked in "Building K" of DC-Southwest, with a man named Len. They worked with book authors, film-makers, media people of all sorts on CIA Cold War propaganda projects. Len continued to correspond with Condon through the years.
How is it, that Lee Oswald -- a nobody who had "defected" to the USSR when the US was desperate to get anybody inside the Iron Curtain to gather intelligence -- is only two degrees of association removed from the milieu of the author and film-makers who released "Manchurian Candidate" on the 7th day of the Missile Crisis in 1962?
Helms and Angleton behaved like innocent men. Helms put in a budget increase request for the MKULTRA project -- turned up in Oswald's file-boxes declassified in 1995. Angleton, whose job as Counterintelligence Director was making him clinically paranoid, went over the edge and savaged CIA's Russian Division, damaged relations with British intelligence and the French SDECE, and caused one woman who had worked at the US Moscow Embassy to go crazy enough for commitment to an asylum, and another agent in South Africa to be delivered to the Soviets for immediate execution. It was called the "HONETOL Mole-hunt." Angleton was sure, after the assassination, that there was a Soviet mole inside the agency -- but there wasn't.
There were only two men who knew enough of the whole story -- both of them veterans of the failed Operation Zapata Bay of Pigs invasion. X wanted to create a grand "Reichstag Fire" propaganda success for various reasons -- one of them for revenge against JFK. It was almost a matter of whim, because he had access through the second man and Johnny Roselli to the Mafia resources, large amounts of money, knowledge of other CIA projects and so on.
What can be learned from this? First -- leave the CIA out of it: this was the product of one loose screw inside the agency and his willing accomplice and liaison to Roselli. Second, don't blame the media. Neither Condon, Frankenheimer, Axelrod or any of those folks were guilty of anything except making a movie, cooperating with CIA assets possibly unknowingly, and mid-wifing the book from gut-splitting satire to film noir. Third, Myths define public opinion which lasts a long time -- especially when coupled by shock and horror.
"A communis' did it!" "The Russians did it!" Finally, to avoid those implications, "A lone-nut and communis' did it!" That was the cover story. If that cover story didn't float, the next layer in the Babushka doll was "the Mafia did it" -- still sold to us today.
===============
Who lied the most during the campaign? How can you prove they lied? Whose lies were trivial? What events were manufactured? Dispel the myth -- partially true -- of a Liberal Media, or the disparagement of a Lamestream Media. The media transmitted the information churned up about Benghazi and e-mails. The media unwittingly gave great assistance to Trump. Trump's supporters are then disparaging the media for "trying to destroy" Trump.
And now, the media -- always a bit slow to see the trail signs behind them -- are pursuing the Russian and RT connection to misinformation favoring Trump.
Who hacked the State Department and failed to hack Clinton (no fact to carry beyond belief, you see.)? Who created the two school-district terror hoaxes hours or days before major campaign debates and town-hall discussions?
If I'm correct in my understanding of "history" -- and many will say I'm a nobody who can't "know" anything -- and if there really was a Josef Goebbels and a Harold Laswell who fathered a "science and art" of psychological warfare, then a genius could delude himself no less than anyone else for failing to accept his role as part of mass and group psychologies: "I'm smart. I think for myself. I can't be fooled. I'm not 'average' in an 'average of the mass'." It all works because of those attitudes of individuals in a culture that elevates the importance of the individual and individual citizen.
How could you be part of a mass-psychology if you believe in "American exceptionalism," the pluralism of the media, your "common sense," and your unique departure from "just average?"
============
By the way. Citizen X coached Vincent Bugliosi in two projects, after hiring him in his legal case against London Observer in the late 1980s. He coached Bugliosi in his role as prosecutor of Oswald in the mock BBC trial with Gerry Spence as defense attorney; and he coached the famous "Helter Skelter" lawyer in his lifetime book project -- culminating in the publication of 2007. How do I know? I found X's letter to Bugliosi at Library of Congress in March, 2004.
Last edited:
Commodus
Diamond Member
- Oct 9, 2004
- 9,215
- 6,820
- 136
I don't mind malleability so long as that leads to being good. Clinton's stance on the LGBT community, for instance... who cares if she wasn't a supporter years ago when she is now? My beef is when someone is willingly sacrifices basic principles in the name of power. It was horrible to see Trump's opponents tell some scathing truths about their rival in the primaries, only to kiss his ass once he was the nominee. That happens in other primaries (including the Democrats)... it was just particularly craven this time around.
BonzaiDuck
Lifer
- Jun 30, 2004
- 16,664
- 2,039
- 126
Well, this is a mildly humorous response to your post there. If you read my long screed preceding yours, I'll say my early Catholicism with its own myths has infected my thinking without hurting my objectivity.
Citizen X (mentioned in my post) actually bears a facial resemblance to Trump. When he published his spy-memoir in 1977, the dust-jacket was a simple theme in the colors orange and black. He was born on October 31, and joked that he was "born to be a spook."
When the establishment GOP began gathering around Trump despite opposite inclinations of people like Nikki Haley and John Warner, it reminded me of the ending scene in "Rosemary's Baby" as the extended family and friends gather around the cradle to rock it vigorously.
One bumper sticker I had in mind is in two parts: "Sweep the Trash out of the House in 2018, . . . " --- " . . . and impeach the Anti-Christ!"
Puffnstuff
Lifer
- Mar 9, 2005
- 16,216
- 4,901
- 136
Most of the pseudo conservatives are not Christians even though they want for you to believe that they are and have the support of big religion. These are the very same people and organizations that will give the Beast power as they celebrate their false second coming in power with Satan himself. I believe that we are witnessing the infrastructure that will make all of this possible soon and men's attitudes towards others demonstrates that they are ripe for such an event. While I do oppose abortion and do not support the LBGT lifestyle I can still have respect for these people as human beings. Big religion will wave signs and yell abasing things at them with absolutely no love in their hearts as Jesus commanded them to. Yes Christianity is dead and has been replaced by religion just like it was in the beginning.
The other thing that everyone should be mindful of is that the constitution doesn't provide any express guaranties to our privacy which is how we ended up with the Patriot Act. This gives the government to ability to listen in on any conversation anywhere without requiring a warrant. The methods that they use vary but are embedded in more things that you realize. If you believe that the 4th Amendment protects your privacy you are mistaken. The Constitution is based upon common law, is considered to be a living document that is interpreted by the standards at the time and with the power grabbers back at the helm you can rest assured that they will exploit it to the fullest as they strip you of your rights. Without any express language in the Constitution that clearly spells out specific protections of our privacy these same people will continue to exploit our implied freedoms away one piece at a time. When it all goes down just remember that someone told you it was coming and you laughed at them.
The other thing that everyone should be mindful of is that the constitution doesn't provide any express guaranties to our privacy which is how we ended up with the Patriot Act. This gives the government to ability to listen in on any conversation anywhere without requiring a warrant. The methods that they use vary but are embedded in more things that you realize. If you believe that the 4th Amendment protects your privacy you are mistaken. The Constitution is based upon common law, is considered to be a living document that is interpreted by the standards at the time and with the power grabbers back at the helm you can rest assured that they will exploit it to the fullest as they strip you of your rights. Without any express language in the Constitution that clearly spells out specific protections of our privacy these same people will continue to exploit our implied freedoms away one piece at a time. When it all goes down just remember that someone told you it was coming and you laughed at them.
BonzaiDuck
Lifer
- Jun 30, 2004
- 16,664
- 2,039
- 126
1) Good common sense.
2) When I first attempted to post my "evidence" on the "great crime of the 20th century," the Dutch web-site was hacked to pieces and all was lost. That was around 2004 or 2005. I can only suspect on that angle; I cannot "know" for sure.
HeXen
Diamond Member
- Dec 13, 2009
- 7,837
- 38
- 91
Damn guys he just got into office. You can't seriously think he can just snap his fingers and make it all happen right away did you? Either way, the most obvious thing to avoid is what the mass media has to report on the subject since the bias is clear.
BonzaiDuck
Lifer
- Jun 30, 2004
- 16,664
- 2,039
- 126
No -- you still don't understand. Maybe you work hard, even with overtime. Many people just come home, turn on TV with a distraction of kids whining for supper, and soak it up like a sponge takes water. That goes for soaking up FOX no less than MSNBC; LA TIMES versus a conservative Texas paper.
There is a stark distinction between news-fact, the choice of what news to report and what to censor by omission, editorializing within that news, opinion (propaganda), "white" propaganda, "Gray" propaganda and "black" propaganda.
consider that science is always an approximation of the Truth. There is nothing you can know absolutely, even if you're 99.999999999% sure. If you want to verify a news-fact -- check additional sources, if you have time to do so with the distraction of kids, limited time, limited reading skills, or even a desire after the day's fatigue. If you want to distill more of the Truth from it, make precise inferences from those facts.
The media transmits information about events, and events can be manufactured. They are "true" -- but they can be created with an agenda.
As for your first sentence -- that's the attitude I took with Bush, but I was able to predict what would happen. The danger arises if the Elected One thinks that he HAS to snap his fingers and make it happen all at once, creating a disaster that hurts more people than it helps.
So, we will wait. But unlike Bush -- whose industrial ties and family origins only got my attention in 1999 -- I've seen "your President Elect" on TV since early part of last decade.
And I'm satisfied with my conclusion that he is the most disgusting human being I've ever seen on TV. I knew him well ten years ago, five years ago, through the Birther frenzy, and at the beginning of the campaign.
"Blacks are welfare queens/criminals."
Case in point of considerable racial resentment.
shady28
Platinum Member
- Apr 11, 2004
- 2,520
- 397
- 126
It was a bit more overt, but at least it is in response to the will of the political GOP base (in Ryan's case). Of course, there's some self-interest in not overtly going against the will of those voting for you. Clinton OTOH simply lies to get votes. I am quite certain that if she has any personal ideology (and I don't think she does), it is not the one the media presents.
Insofar as Clinton and Trump go on LGBTQ, Trump has a history of saying he thinks states should decide. Clinton has a history of saying it should be between man and woman. If you look at more recent statements, Trump is consistent as to his personal feelings but has also said he is fine with the SCOTUS rulings and considers it settled. Trump's message is that it's done aka "It's a problem that has been determined by the Supreme Court, frankly I'm about jobs..." - DJT
As far as I know Trump is the only GOP candidate that has waved a gay pride flag on stage during campaign rallies, where an openly gay man (Peter Thiel) was allowed to address the RNC nomination, and who directly referred to the LGBTQ community as something that had to be protected during a nomination speech (and was cheered). These are all things that no normal GOP candidate would ever do, they have always used euphemisms like "all Americans".
This is the guy that MSM wants everyone to think will be going after limiting LGBTQ rights and openly compares him to Hitler.
Let's not pretend you can't figure out that Trump lies far more to get votes, and that you're more than will to propagate whatever it takes to further the cause.
Grooveriding
Diamond Member
- Dec 25, 2008
- 9,147
- 1,330
- 126
I think a segment of them were, as much as a segment of Democratic voters likely were. Trump's campaign used the internet for mass propaganda and managed to indoctrinate the gullible with reddit, 4chan, wikileaks. The drones went all in thinking they had found the one ring and the one truth and went forth to spread the propaganda to whoever would swallow it. This is the demographic that does not fact check and believes positions just because they like the sound of it and what the 'truths' imply, whether they were truths or not was irrelevant because they wanted them to be and that is good enough.
I think the Repub party also has a real advantage in their pandering to the religious automaton voters in the US. Single/dual issue weak minded voters that only care about irrelevant metrics based on their fairy tale ideology. A lot of my friends in the US who were ardent Trump supporters were all in just because of their religious dogma. These are the worst sort of voters you could want in a nation. People making a fundamental decision to affect the outcome of elections based on fantasies that are not only nonsense, but irrelevant in the governance of a country. The Republicans seem to have most of these easy to gain votes locked up because they dog whistle the hate the shared faith of these voters advocates. If ever there was a solid argument to further marginalize religion with facts and reality, it would be the American voting demographic that lets their fairy tale dictate their votes.
I think the Repub party also has a real advantage in their pandering to the religious automaton voters in the US. Single/dual issue weak minded voters that only care about irrelevant metrics based on their fairy tale ideology. A lot of my friends in the US who were ardent Trump supporters were all in just because of their religious dogma. These are the worst sort of voters you could want in a nation. People making a fundamental decision to affect the outcome of elections based on fantasies that are not only nonsense, but irrelevant in the governance of a country. The Republicans seem to have most of these easy to gain votes locked up because they dog whistle the hate the shared faith of these voters advocates. If ever there was a solid argument to further marginalize religion with facts and reality, it would be the American voting demographic that lets their fairy tale dictate their votes.
BonzaiDuck
Lifer
- Jun 30, 2004
- 16,664
- 2,039
- 126
I think I understand the subtle aspects of our racial problems. For a long time, I worked with a PhD statistician and practicing lawyer -- later a US Attorney prosecuting drug criminals. He was the son of a black Baptist minister; extremely well-prepared in math and able to get an NIH fellowship and attend Catholic University in DC. He was the junior colleague of Deming, who had a lot to do with building the Japanese economy and their auto industry. At one point, we consulted with Ford Motor and Norfolk Southern.
And I also grew up and came of age in Riverside California, graduating from college at the time of the Christensen-Tiel "Ambush" murders and the trials of the Riverside Three. Those men were railroaded. They had never met each other before their arraignment. And I actually knew one of them -- Larrie Gardner -- just a poor, polite, big black kid who was trying to help bring his family to CA from Mobile AL. There wasn't a mean bone in his body, but I somehow accepted a likelihood of his guilt, because . . . . the papers made it look so. And -- after all -- he was "black." Aren't they all criminals, capable of murdering two policemen with a pump-action shot-gun?
Then, I learned late at age 60 my family history in Texas -- a family who had settled in San Antonio from Eastern Europe in 1850. And I learned how my father and siblings were beaten, spit-upon and mistreated by little cornpone cowboy fucksticks with boots like their mother's shoes. They were 3rd-generation Americans, but to the little cornpone Anglo shitasses, they were "dumb Pollacks and Catholics." And we had good reason to suspect the origins of my father's frontal lobe brain-tumor in 1956, leading to his untimely end. When the wildfires burned out the red counties in west Texas some years ago, I felt like cheering. I may be Caucasian -- I don't use "White" anymore. And I feel more like John Brown than Martin Luther King. Or, for that matter, Thaddeus Stevens.
What happened with the Obama election revealed something that had been hidden since before I worked with my friend. This isn't post-racial America, and in areas that are rural and mostly white, there is this myth that Obama was a sop to affirmative action and minorities. He really didn't have any talent; he got through Occidental and Harvard because of his "privileged" status under "Affirmative Action."
Or -- we all voted for him because he was black, maybe a slap in the face to people who'd voted for Bush because of "Clinton and that Monica thing -- disgusting." All of these things are resident in the cornpone, low-information mind-set. Those possessed of that mind-set will tell you "I'm not a bigot; I'm not a racist" because they believe it themselves -- just like Trump won't admit to his fallibility or his personality disorder. For the dummies -- it's called "denial."
The Birther Frenzy and the election of Donald J. Fuckstick is their reactionary answer to Obama.
And here's the clincher. I first "met" Donald J. Fuckstick on TV a dozen years ago. He was an asshole then. He was an asshole with the Birther Frenzy. He was an asshole throughout the campaign. So don't expect any Kum-bay-yah moment from me, because -- as far as I'm concerned -- he's an Asshole now and will be an Asshole next year.
How d'ya like that? YOUR President Asshole.
Last edited:
imported_tajmahal
Lifer
- Jul 9, 2009
- 10,759
- 2,086
- 136
JSt0rm
Lifer
- Sep 5, 2000
- 27,399
- 3,948
- 126
"Gullible" and "stupid" for those who're persistently wrong is the natural assumption of people who stackrank virtues like honesty & correctness. More specifically, if you value the faculties which lead to those virtues, you assume everyone else does, and therefore their deficiency in that regard must be due to haplessness. However it's entirely possible that many don't value those virtues very much, and they're persistently wrong because doing so leads to some other more desirable effect. In other words, people don't necessarily lie because they're stupid.
There are certainly many dumb hick conservatives, but I always get the impression that quite a few aren't as dumb as they look. They're reasonably aware that getting/remaining higher on the social status totem has its advantages. That's why they naturally target those on the other end, the most vulnerable minorities like illegals and muslims, where there's the least political consequence for their attacks. It's all very self-interested if you look past the veneer of rationalizations. There's great insight in the observation that complex language didn't evolve to communicate the truth, but to argue for & generally advance our interests.
A fascist enthocentric america isn't a determent to all americans, so it makes perfect sense who is which side.
Grooveriding
Diamond Member
- Dec 25, 2008
- 9,147
- 1,330
- 126
I don't disagree with that. There are certainly going to be people who know something is false, but still treat it as true because they want to spread the lie because of partisanship, a lack of respect for the truth or whatever other motives. I do still believe that these sorts can and will find their way into the minds of people who are gullible and don't know better. Never underestimate the stupidity of some people and how easily you can get people to believe lies are truth.
BonzaiDuck
Lifer
- Jun 30, 2004
- 16,664
- 2,039
- 126
If that's a response to something I said, try this:
Press-Enterprise, Riverside, CA
or this:
Orange County Register (only recently no longer owner of P-E)
Liberal media. Who the hell you think you're talkin' to?
This county once had a margin of 30,000 more GOP registered voters (2006) than Dem out of about 750,000. A few years ago, when P-E switched hands from Belo Corp of Dallas to OC Register, they began publishing only opinions from the Right. At least, once in a while even under Belo, they would occasionally offer up some Maureen Dowd or Leonard Pitts. Once in a blue moon.
GOP locals argued that the Press was good and "doing right" because of this slim majority.
As of last year, voter registration in the county favors Democrats by an equal margin or greater. And this . . . blight of print media is still f***ing here. Printing the same drivel. We get both the Times and the P-E for balance. I wanted to write a nasty letter to P-E and terminate the subscription, but one family member wants "local news" and the other prefers the Sports section. Majority rules. I just pay the bills and do the accounting.
Why don't you take your Liberal Media Myth, wrap it around a big, long English Cucumber, and shove it up your Tory Tea Party Ass to Chill?
Commodus
Diamond Member
- Oct 9, 2004
- 9,215
- 6,820
- 136
The problem is, how do you know Clinton is lying about her stances? Do you know what she's really thinking? No, of course you don't. And to me, the notion that people aren't allowed to sincerely change their mind is baffling. Remember Obama's hands-off approach to LGBT issues at the start of his term and how the White House marked the gay marriage ruling with rainbow lights years later? The notion that Clinton can't possibly be telling the truth is based more on what you want to be true than what is.
As for Trump's policies... well, they're anti-LGBT. State's rights is a codeword for "I support discriminatory laws." He supports North Carolina's anti-transgender law, for example. Trump also said he would "strongly consider" appointing Supreme Court justices in a bid to overturn same-sex marriage. And you simply cannot say that you're pro-LGBT if you have Mike Pence as your VP. You know, the guy who believes in the myth of gay conversion therapy and signed a bill allowing businesses to discriminate against LGBT people. Also, Thiel is best known as the guy who destroyed an entire media outlet solely because it outed him... not exactly an advocate for LGBT openness, I'd say.
You want to talk about people who lie to get votes? That's Trump in a nutshell. He said exactly what the bigots wanted to hear, then proclaimed to be an LGBT ally when it was convenient. So which is his actual position? I'll tell you: if you actually support the LGBT community, you swear an oath that you will never overturn same-sex marriage. You condemn that North Carolina law resoundingly and consistently, and vow that it will be overturned if at all possible. You not only don't pick Pence as your VP, you explicitly rule him out for any position in your administration.
Trump is better about LGBT people than previous Republican presidential candidates, but that's like saying that being punched in the face is better than being stabbed in the face. Generally, it's better to vote for the person who won't hit you in the face at all.
Blue_Max
Diamond Member
- Jul 7, 2011
- 4,223
- 153
- 106
Again, ironic that the only way this nightmare of yours will happen is if you get your way and allow unlimited islamic immigration (all while telling yourselves how wonderful you are for 'saving the refugees'...)
imported_tajmahal
Lifer
- Jul 9, 2009
- 10,759
- 2,086
- 136
It was. I just wanted to know the name of a conservative Texas newspaper that you mentioned. Thanks for giving me 2 California papers. Your help is much appreciated.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter