The Real World > COINTELPRO and Disinformation
Jeff Rense EXPOSED!!
:
Read the Editorial Here.
Ruth:
Yes, it certainly looks like Rense is being set up maybe as some sort of 'tar baby' as Laura suggested.
I guess its no coincidence that the easiest way for the PTB to cause havoc and strife is to set up groups and individuals against each other. A sort of manipulative 'divide and conquer'.... Well, it works pretty well.
The latest editorial seems to suggest that Kurt Nimmo has Rense in his sights. Are the Signs team in danger of 'getting in on the act' too? And, how come? It might be a dangerous thing to buy into.
morgan:
--- Quote from: Ruth ---Yes, it certainly looks like Rense is being set up maybe as some sort of 'tar baby' as Laura suggested.
--- End quote ---
It is not so much that Rense is "being set up" as that he may be a willing participant in COINTELPRO. Or that is what I gathered from reading the editorial and reading about Laura's experiences with Rense.
--- Quote from: Ruth ---I guess its no coincidence that the easiest way for the PTB to cause havoc and strife is to set up groups and individuals against each other. A sort of manipulative 'divide and conquer'.... Well, it works pretty well.
--- End quote ---
Yes, and sometimes both sides are COINTELPRO. Confusion and chaos are the results, making it difficult for those seeking truth.
--- Quote from: Ruth ---The latest editorial seems to suggest that Kurt Nimmo has Rense in his sights.
--- End quote ---
I find this a strange phrase you used, "In his sights". I think this phrase is metaphorically derived from shooting a gun. I did not read anything so violent in the article. There are the facts. Nothing wrong with stating facts, seeing connections, and stating an hypothesis - particularly when defending the truth.
--- Quote from: Ruth ---Are the Signs team in danger of 'getting in on the act' too? And, how come? It might be a dangerous thing to buy into.
--- End quote ---
More metaphorical phrases that are meant to cast the editorial in a negative light without facts to back up assertions, seeming to imply that SotT is attacking Rense. "Kicking someone when they are down" or "jumping into the fray". I did not read this as an attack, rather a calm stating of facts. As far as dangerous, publishing the whole site is dangerous. Truth doesn't have nearly enough support on this planet to protect it and those who publish it.
The phrase "buy into" also implies being "hoodwinked" or "duped" by wild assertions, particulary since it is followed by a demand. But you haven't given any facts to calmly and rationally discuss. Instead, you started the post with something that sounds like you might agree with certain aspects of the editorial, and ended the post with statements that sound like the whole article is some sort of scam. So, I am a bit confused.
Ruth:
--- Quote from: morgan ---Instead, you started the post with something that sounds like you might agree with certain aspects of the editorial, and ended the post with statements that sound like the whole article is some sort of scam. So, I am a bit confused.
--- End quote ---
Sorry about that, let me see if I can unconfuse you...
Firstly, to 'have someone in your sites' is a metaphor for 'targetting' someone and this is not usually done literally with a gun, it's also done metaphorically. And, if this is the case there is usually a reason for it. Kurt seems to have a 'bone to pick' with Rense or a problem with him and I think it would be good to know some background history on that, for example: Why? And what exactly was/is the problem?
The signs page has linked with two of Kurts articles which suggests that they support his point of view. Again, no background information as to why or if they also have a 'bone to pick' with Rense. Maybe - and perhaps it is a very real possibility - the Signs people also have a problem with Rense.
If Mr Rense is a 'tarbaby' then his actions may very well be unconscious or the result of blackmail, or the result of another person who has influence.
Attacking someone who is being set up in this way may very well be what the PTB want, as you are doing their work for them. Maintaining a distance between two 'waring' parties or providing a commentary on what seems to be the problem may be the best way of conserving energy as it enables you to remain uninvolved. Kind of like a neutral observer, or objective.
The impression I get when I see no background info as to why people do what they do is that they may be being drawn into a (very much) manufactured sts conflagration. I hope this is 'negative' enough for you... bearing in mind that negativity is really only relative?
My question is not a 'demand', it is a request to be careful.
I can rustle up a 'demand' if you like and I've just thought of a good one, lol. I DEMAND that you don't go shooting yourself in the foot or walking into a trap whilst you are judiciously and courageously supporting and printing the truth! Of course, you are free to interpret and misinterpret my words and what they mean as much as you like.
Mr. Premise:
I've read Nimmo's editorial three times now and maybe I am missing something, but it seems to be defending Rense. What am I missing?
--- Quote from: Ruth ---Yes, it certainly looks like Rense is being set up maybe as some sort of 'tar baby' as Laura suggested.
I guess its no coincidence that the easiest way for the PTB to cause havoc and strife is to set up groups and individuals against each other. A sort of manipulative 'divide and conquer'.... Well, it works pretty well.
The latest editorial seems to suggest that Kurt Nimmo has Rense in his sights. Are the Signs team in danger of 'getting in on the act' too? And, how come? It might be a dangerous thing to buy into.
--- End quote ---
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version