Writing at the website for
Portland Independent Media Center, an Oregon site for people to post and exchange idea and concepts, a poster who
identifies him or herself as "Diogenes" has collected and identifies 20 ways to spot disinformation. From that list, I want to share 10 that I think
particularly apply to this subject material (i.e. Nibiru and the disinformation that seemingly accompanies it).
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. 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" which can have no basis in fact.
3. 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.
4. Question motives.
Twist or amplify any fact, which could be so 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.
5. Invoke authority.
Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough "jargon" and "minutiae" to illustrate you are "one
who knows", and simply say it isn't so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.
6. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions.
This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.
7. 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".
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 may require 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.
9. 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.
10. 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."
I would add to the above list an 11th reason. Attempt to put forward a "feeling" or perception of a situation or topic. Then, that feeling or perception
is embellished by truths or half-truths in an attempt to move this "sense," gut feeling" or "theory" into the world of hard, cold fact.
Avoiding a Black and White Approach in a Gray Tone World
The problem in sorting information from disinformation is that truth is all a matter of perception and as Marshall Masters says, "good disinformation always gets the benefit of the doubt."
Quite simply put, often one person's information is another's disinformation. To complicate this even more, we have become a culture or civilization that
not only replies on others to give us the truth, we also have become increasingly reliant on others to discern for us the truth from the lies.
Lies exist everywhere. Consider the role, for example, of our educational system. The reality is that there is nothing so vulgar left in human experience
for which some educator from some institution cannot be found to justify it. In the name of literary license, anything passes off as permissible. The caution
I want to throw out to you in this mini-lesson is; we so often let the everyday stuff of our lives get in the way of finding the truth; we sit and just accept what
the media, educators and government dish out to us without a sense of questioning its validity."
Author Aldous Huxley once remarked that the civil
libertarians and rationalists who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny "failed to take into account man's almost infinite appetite for distractions." To
simplify his thought, we could say that we tend to have the attention span of a gnat.
Finding a Target for our Intercontinental Ballistic Index Finger
To be totally honest, each of us possess the deadliest weapon ever know - a weapon that has cost the lives of millions over the span of our existence A
weapon that while its uses for good are almost limitless, is rarely used for that purpose. That weapon is our index/digit finger.
We seem to have this insatiable need to find fault, find the culprit, the perpetrator. When we do, if we do, we unleash our incredible wrath. This
wrath can take various forms, from destruction of reputation to death and all too often, there is very little difference between the two. The interesting thing
about this heinous weapon is that, unlike a gun, one can never use it for the purpose of suicide.
Rarely, if ever are there serious attempts to turn this weapon on ourselves and to take blame for something that should not be, not continue, or to indicate who is really to blame.
Perhaps the most dangerous aspect of this weapon is not the weapon itself, rather the indiscriminate use of it by all of us. We all are certainly guilty of the
adage, "shoot first, ask questions later." Sadly, however, those questions are seldom seriously asked. While examples of this indiscriminate "killing"
pervade EVERY aspect of our daily lives, we will limit this examination to Nibiru — our topic at hand.
Have there been vast amounts of disinformation? The answer, without a doubt, is yes, and it is coming from many, many sources. The difficulty, as I
see it, is that these many sources, more often than not, are not connected, even though we assume they are. This only confuses our attempt to identify,
not the source; that is the easy part rather the reason for the disinformation. To truly stop or eliminate a problem, one needs to understand the problem, not just identify it.
Rounding Up the Usual Suspects
The most often named culprit is "Government." Is government a valid choice for our list? Most assuredly it is, but also most certainly not the only suspect.
My purpose in writing this piece is not to identify or create some suspect list, naming names, or "pointing the finger." Rather, my intent is to try to give you
a foundation for the proper targeting of your weapon of choice, your finger. I think it is critical to keep in mind the list of methods of disinformation that we
have listed above, to become familiar with, and understand these methods of disinformation. When we do, we begin to better understand the reasoning
behind their disinformation attacks and this enables us to better counter those attacks. To put it simply, by becoming better-informed listeners,
readers and self-researchers, we become more adept at sorting through the chaff. The reasons for the disinformation are as varied as those that are
leveling the "attacks" - from the most malicious to the most benign.
"What is My Motivation?"
How often have you heard the expression, "what is my motivation?" usually uttered by some actor schooled in the Constantin Stanislavski method of
acting. Actually, this is an important question that we need to apply to our attempt to discern information from disinformation. What is the motivation of
those, you feel, are pushing forth disinformation? In short, what are the motive, agenda and/or intent of those that others say are pushing forth
disinformation. While we on this particular topic, can we say with any certainty, that those crying "disinformation," are not in fact practitioners of disinformation.
Webster's defines "disinformation" as "false information deliberately and often covertly spread (as by the planting of rumors) in order to influence
public opinion or obscure the truth" and the Encyclopedia Britannica equates the term disinformation with that of "propaganda," which they go on to
describe as "... dissemination of information—facts, arguments, rumors, half truths, or lies—to influence public opinion.
Propaganda is the more or less systematic effort to manipulate other people's beliefs, attitudes, or actions by means of symbols (words, gestures,
banners, monuments, music, clothing, insignia, hairstyles, designs on coins and postage stamps, and so forth). Deliberateness¼"
It All Comes Down to YOU
Bob Stepno, Emerson College, Boston PhD Candidate, UNC Chapel Hill School of Journalism and Mass Communication and Bob Henshaw, M.S.,
Information Sciences, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, currently with the Center for Instructional Technology University of North Carolina at Chapel
Hill, in a paper originally issued in 1995, posed the most important question in attempting to identify and sort out information from disinformation. That
question is "Who's Defining Quality?" Not us. This area is as subjective as it comes. Two people named Bob might even disagree over a simple
statement like, "One person's information is another person's disinformation."
The pair goes on to remind us that:
You, the Consumer... have a number of issues to consider in your quest for reliable information.
Consider Your Needs -Strategies for locating
information are determined initially by the nature of our information needs. How much detail is needed? How esoteric is the subject matter?
Consider Your Options -If you live on a mountaintop and your satellite dish is down you may feel starved for information and actually go to the library for a book.
For most of us, however, too much information is the problem. In addition, the Internet exacerbates this information overload by adding almost unlimited quantity to the problem of weighing the relative
quality of the information.
Consider the Source - With traditional media, we can draw significant conclusions about content from the source alone. Information providers tend to be most
successful when consumers can consistently predict certain characteristics about the content.
Assuming their content is in demand; providers may
become "brand names" for information consumers who welcome the convenience of a reliable, consistent source of information.
Internet search engines, hypertext links and directory
services complicate this process. You may be led to the content of a Web page first. You can consider the source if you have reason to question its accuracy or
are interested enough to seek further information.
Hidden agendas exist in other media and can be exposed on the Web. Then you have to consider the source of
the expose', too... Is all of this access to information and the ability to publish a guarantee of quality, or a guarantee of Babel?
5 PM PST / 8 PM EST
Chat Room + Call In
YowRadio.com
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
GUESTS: Richard Shaw and Dan Dean
The Return of the Annunaki: Part 1 of 2 — How the Elites are Preparing
Something is coming this way from the depths of space, and elites are preparing at a frenetic pace - but for what?
That's the big picture story this panel will pursue in this first episode of a two-part series. GO
Tuesday, February 7, 2012
GUESTS: Richard Shaw and Dan Dean
The Return of the Annunaki: Part 2 of 2 — What We Can Do as Individuals
Wakey-wakey folks, this is 2012, and the future of humanity is already in destiny overtime. GO
BEAT THE ELITES: Virtual Consciousness Swarming and Remote Viewing
This video present a new occupy movement strategy based on cold war esp research that combines virtual consciousness swarming and remote viewing.
One that can give us the power of mind, to change the world for the common good and for which the elites have no defense.
Crossing the Cusp: Surviving
the Edgar Cayce Pole Shift
by
Marshall Masters
The Bad News You Expect and the Good News You Need
In July 2008, a two-stage crop circle larger than three soccer fields materialized in England on a farm near Avebury, Wiltshire. Unlike more common symmetrical snowflake formations, this one evidenced a clear and unmistakable message: That in December 2012 we will see the appearance of a celestial harbinger. One that portends a global tribulation in which life as we know it will come to an end.
Fully coherent and free of exceptions, the Avebuy 2008 formation is an urgent warning from distant friends to those who get it and who want to get through it. That is why the first part of this book, "The Bad News," presents a series of more than 50 illustrations to decode this message with easy-to-follow, building-block explanations. Intended for the common man, the goal is to empower the reader and this need is great.
This is because those who survive the tribulation will live to bear witness to the single greatest die-back event in the history of our species. A pole shift as predicated by America's "sleeping prophet," Edgar Cayce (1877-1945) and it could happen as soon as 2013. When it does, it will be a time of testing that favors the meek over the wealthy and powerful. But not for reasons you might think.
If you get it and want to get through it, this is the book you've been waiting for. GO
Surviving 2012 and Planet X
New to the topic? This 5-part video series, will get you quickly immersed in the key concepts. From there, you'll be able to connect the dots for yourself very quickly.
Please feel free to share complete and unedited copies of these programs with others. All other rights reserved.
The
Sagan Continuation Project:We
WELCOME all who RESPECT our FREE WILL. If you CHOOSE to HELP, then help
us to help ourselves. There is GOOD HERE too. WE LOOK for a reply,
Author Aldous Huxley once remarked that the civil
libertarians and rationalists who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny "failed to take into account man's almost infinite appetite for distractions." To
simplify his thought, we could say that we tend to have the attention span of a gnat.
