Jeff Rense EXPOSED!!

Superman Returns: WING TV repels Pathological Pirates AKA Rense & Co

The following is exactly the thing that is needed to press for a new, independent, (really, really, really independent!) investigation of 9/11. Nothing else will do. So, let's see how many 9/11 "truth" people go for that angle, insisting also that EVERY aspect of 9/11 be totally and completely re-investigated including the Pentagon strike:

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/06/341238.shtml

BYU Physics Prof Finds Thermate in WTC Physical Samples, Building Collapses an Inside Job By Jacob Hamblin, Portland Independent Media Center

WTC steel with diagonal cut, thermate residue. Based on chemical analysis of WTC structural steel residue, a Brigham Young University physics professor has identified the material as Thermate. Thermate is the controlled demolition explosive thermite plus sulfur. Sulfur causes the thermite to burn hotter, cutting steel quickly and leaving trails of yellow colored residue

341239.jpg


wtc steel with diagonal cut, thermate residue


Prof. Steven Jones, who conducted his PhD research at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center and post-doctoral research at Cornell University and the Los Alamos Meson Physics Facility, has analyzed materials from the WTC and has detected the existence of thermate, used for "cutting" the steel support columns.

Dr. Jones is a co-founder of Scholars for 911 Truth.

Dr. Jones in earlier work pointed to thermate as the likely explosive that brought down the WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 skyscrapers. See the original research work here:
http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html

But only recently was physical material analyzed in the lab and the presence of thermate announced. The samples were provided Dr. Jones team from redundant sources.

See recent comments regarding Prof. Jones' "Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse?"

http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/Comments_Jones_05May2006.html

Both BYU and Prof. Jones have been offered additional grants if he would "change the direction" of his research. In addition, there have been threats made by an individual who "is taking action" to stop Dr. Jones' research, specifically his experiment with thermites (aluminothermics), on the grounds his work may be helpful to "terrorists". Jones notes that much more detailed information on both thermite and thermate is readily available on the internet.
 
What Rense.com is not talking about

Ruth wrote:

"|...| what if they've all got the same distortion? What if their 'instruments of measurement' are looking at the wrong data, or their calibration's off. What then?"


Greetings Sibling Forumites and Reader Friends,

Ah, yes. Dear Ruth, these are the classic words of DENIAL, these and so many more you wrote with these. They are the refrains of "Everyone is out of step BUT me" and "Yes. But..." and that all time favorite of mine, "I am so different." They surely appear to be from someone who does secretly know that it is she who is missing the point. There is too a distinct flavour of the "I'll Do It My Way" taint, because, of course, "Nobody Knows Like Me", and so on.

Let it be said that one thing these words are NOT is original. Every person I have ever encountered in this liftime who was in denial of a serious personal problem or maladjustment has used the same themes, in the same ways, and not a few times even the very same words. It really does bring home that point about something other than the individual human as the source of such comments, because the sameness alone is staggering. It is not difficult to understand some of the various inspirations, over the years, for the endless popularity of the phrase "Seen one, seen 'em all." Likewise with heard one...

Your reactions are the exact equivalent of someone who claims that the 10 different physicians - who have attempted, over the course of several years, to convince her to have the precancerous, huge, hairy, purple wart growing upon the tip of her nose removed - were all hallucinating, and/or conspiring against her. While insisting that there is no wart there at all, the denying victim of it is none-the-less completely unable to bypass its many adverse effects upon her life and health. She cannot see around it, past it or over it, and certainly not through it. Consequently, she bumps into things like doors, walls, other people and lamp posts, trips over footstools and throw rugs, and injures herself frequently, staying constantly sore, aching and covered with bruises and abrasions, some of which become infected and cause scars. That huge, hairy, precancerous, purple wart on the tip of her nose is naturally the first thing about her that others, especially those who care about her and feel concern for her health and state of mind, will notice and mention. Most will steer clear of her after she immediately accuses them of being in collusion with the conspiring doctors, in trying to convince her that there is an imaginary wart on her nose.

Sooner or later, if the wart's owner is very, very fortunate, it will cause her to take a serious enough fall to results in a broken nose requiring sugery to repair it, and that will include the forced removal of the wart. If not, then inevitably the denial that the wart exists at all, let alone that it is a big and dangerous one, will guarantee that it becomes cancerous. Then it will have to be acknowledged and the denier will be fortunate to lose only the entire nose and a small portion of the surrounding face. If the denial keeps on for long enough the cancer from what was once a mere wart will metastasise and become lethal.

Either way, all that anyone's denial, even Ruth's, about any aspect or iota of reality, inner and outer alike, ever has achieved or ever will is to delay the inevitable for but the briefest while, and to ensure that the pains and troubles caused by those conditions the denial seeks to hide will get steadily worse until they reach the stage of the denier's total devastation, one way of another.

EsoQuest, that "delivering a shock" sounds an awful lot like what is known in psychology and in substance abuse treatment as an intervention. Would that we could have provided Ruth with such. I would assess what has been done here, the humble, sincere and repeated efforts by this group of Forum members to confront her with her denials and with the issues they deny, to have been an attempt at intervention. We may still learn much from the failure and from Ruth's profound denial, IMO.

There is too that old saying about being able to lead a horse to water but not to make it drink. Even a horse that is desperately thirsty will not drink if it is hydrophobic. N'est ce pas?

M
 
Superman Returns: WING TV repels Pathological Pirates AKA Rense & Co

Bravo. I agree Laura. Identify the crimes and the criminals.

For efforts on my end, it is merely a bit more convenient that I can now prove one low-end crime - that of entrapment- in connection to 9-11. A crime which suggests very ominous implications...internment plans, etc.

Having taped confession, photos and some* law enforcement help, this is a crime-case proving future plans against American citizens by the 9-11 factions.

Not only can/should we seperate it from "Jewish" issues, let alone from WW II questions...we should also see how Daryl Smith and other anti-Zionist agents discourage expose of yet a higher level of conspiracy: the national security state Dolan speaks of.
Smith attacks UFO folk, like yourselves, while his cohort, Hufschmid (who preaches *wakeful vigilance all the time, so I say he knows plenty about his new partnership) never ceases mentioning the diversion of hoaxed Apollo photos. My thinking about these fake anti-Zionist campaigns is:
Okay, who's higher than the ZIonists, that they would be throwing out inside ZIonist info just to serve? The national security state. The very area that they forbid discussion of: Space tech, and all the strange questions that go with it, which you ask.

BUT EVEN THEN, even if this be accurate concerning the work of these particular individuals, your point is more important:
STICK WITH THE CRIMES THEMSELVES, FIND ANY/ALL CRIMINALS AND CHARGE THEM WHEN IT COMES TO 9-11.

Forget the tar-baby that IS ...Jewish this and that.

Even Michael Hoffman has suggested people do this: avoid honing in too much on Zionism and press on....PRESS CHARGES AGAINST ALL THE CRIMINALS WITHOUT RESPECT, CONCERN FOR THEIR* PREFERRED IDEOLOGIES. IN THIS WAY, WE PRESERVE OUR WAY OF DECENCY.

Thanks, Laura. And the thoughts on NS State being part of Smith's backing, concern is a side issue, just as Smith and his ilk are themselves side issues. WE CAN FINISH THE JOB AND TRY THE 9-11 CRIMINALS. INDEED, JUST IDENTIFY SPECIFIC CRIMES AND CRIMINALS.

I am only too happy in this at times 'agoraphobic' microcosm of my own to have the priveledge of exposing just one of those low-end crimes. The pleasure comes in knowing that this small entrapment harkens to the highest plans they have for us. But we are not finished and we've got their number. I have told SMith no less: pleny of agents out there, criminals, besides the hard-core Zionists involved with 9-11.
And we're GONNA GET THEM.
Jupiter Jefferson
 
Superman Returns: WING TV repels Pathological Pirates AKA Rense & Co

Uh-oh Mr. Fifth Way,
I've got a question for you now. Why did you feign ignorance and apathy about the dangers I mentioned, and then suggest that I take it to another forum? Since it turns out you KNOW David Childress, and since I'd already mentioned these dangers WERE connected to Childress and Thomas's being disinfo/entrapment agents, why on earth would you write in claiming NOT to know, not to care how these "dangers" (which have PASSED, friend) refer to Childress, who you know.

Before answering, I suspected you already KNEW the answer to the questions you asked me, fifth way. You have just confirmed it by your own words, Mr associate of David Childress.

And no, it was not EM Waves. I personally met the group of occultists who gave this attack: to burn down my HEART friend, not my little old neurons.
And in this context, your question as to what I mean by finding protection in Christ Jesus, will not be answered...not be me, and not now/here. EM waves or anything else: I don't care, and now you might consider caring.

You are on my shit list as a suspect. If not, then why...no problem for you right? You're safe in that case, right? GOOD. ANd guess what, "fifth way"...
SO AM I, and I...WE....are not finished until we bury all those 9-11 Terrorists in their own bullshit.

Capiche? bene.
I AM READY. ANd tell me, are ye?
 
COINTELPRO in Action - Rense's Response?

Hello Laura, Ark, members of the SOT group and all who are members of this forum. I am brand new to the forum but not to the teachings. I was looking for a place to begin an introduction but couldn't find one. Is there a place for new forum member to get aquainted. I am a bit overwhelmed with all the categories, rooms, divisions etc.
 
COINTELPRO in Action - Rense's Response?

Hello Laurua, Ark, members of the SOT team and general members of the forum. I am not sure if I accidentally sent the last message or not. I am only very moderately computor savvy here :( and I'm rather confused by the complexity and intricacies of this site.

I was looking for a place to kind of begin my coming into the forum, but couldn't find one. Are you supposed to just pick a topic and start in? Is there no place for beginners to introduce themselves and shown around?

I am not a beginner with the teaching however. I have been reading Lauras Wonderful writings for over 4 years here and have covered quite a bit. I have read all of the Wave Series and the Adventures Series, most of Amazing Grace, Ascension The True Quest for the Holy Grail. and numerous articles and Podcasts, and books she has recommended. All of this I did in preparation to join her school only to find out that I had to also be apart of the forum for I think a minimum of 3 months. So here I am. :) I hope I am in the right place.

For some reason I also had a very hard time signing on here. I could not get a pass word sent to me even though I tried and tried for weeks. I also sent emails to Jason asking for help but never got a reply. I finally had to set up a whole new server and screenname to get accepted and had to illicit the help of a PC expert. So finally I made it. I hope others didn't have to go through that much just to become a Forum membr. Maybe the STS's were doing whatever they could to block me and tangle the communication.

I now see my last message posted just above this one, so somehow I guess I did hit a wrong key and accidentally sent it in without it being finished.

So maybe someone could help me out a lil' with how to go about things here. :) THANKS!
 
COINTELPRO in Action - Rense's Response?

The "Whats on your mind" section is specially designed for this.
As for the forum, just read what calls you. You will get it in a few weeks.
 
Superman Returns: WING TV repels Pathological Pirates AKA Rense & Co

Jupiter Jefferson said:
Why did you feign ignorance and apathy about the dangers I mentioned
Hmmmm... How would you arrive at the conclusion that I feign anything? Only as short back as in you previous post to me you apparently saw clearly that what you where referring to could not be followed without the context:
Jupiter Jefferson said:
I'm responsible for the confusion.
The change in you position seems quite extraordinary considering the small and unspecific amount of additional data you received in the meantime:
I said:
Very intersting.
I know Childress. Thanks for elaborating Jupiter.
Jupiter said:
(and by the way occult shaman who created considerable sizzling in my chest for nights, not kidding. Felt like broiling steak inside. But that too, passes the way of Jesus Christ.)
Still don't understand: Passes the way of Jesus Christ???
Your broiling sensation sounds more like being targeted by a psychotronic/EM weapon.
More odd however is that you then say:
Jupiter Jefferson said:
...and then suggest that I take it to another forum?
I don't remember doing this, which rereading my post confirmed. So why would you say I did, when it is clearly established that I did not. Why would you state an obvious lie? Is your intent to confuse or to manipulate? Then you continue by twisting your unsubstantiated accusations to sound like facts, while at the same time you attempt to make me appear "uncaring"
Jupiter Jefferson said:
Since it turns out you KNOW David Childress, and since I'd already mentioned these dangers WERE connected to Childress and Thomas's being disinfo/entrapment agents, why on earth would you write in claiming NOT to know, not to care how these "dangers" (which have PASSED, friend) refer to Childress, who you know.
The word "KNOW" has an extremely wide range of meanings. The way I "KNOW" Childress is that I read some of his stuff and that I met him on some conference and I may have exchanged a few words. The reason I mentioned it at all, is to show that I have now (after your elaborate and much appreciated answer) a point of reference.Why on earth would you jump from that to an interpretation that assumes I "KNOW" him intimately, know his true agenda (that you seem to be exposing only just now) and that I may be a close associate of him.
Jupiter Jefferson said:
Mr associate of David Childress.
Than you continue your assumption by further suspecting that...
Jupiter Jefferson said:
already KNEW the answer to the questions you asked me, fifth way.
Then you further try to manipulate by stating additional falshoods like
Jupiter Jefferson said:
You have just confirmed it by your own words
I can only access that your unreasonable behaviour/respons is very suspect to say the least.
Jupiter Jefferson said:
And no, it was not EM Waves. I personally met the group of occultists who gave this attack: to burn down my HEART friend, not my little old neurons.
That may or may not be the case. However, again your tone of voice suggests that you see hostility in my attempt to share some additional information (that I thought you may not have), while at the same time you don't miss to point out the notorious occultist. Why?
Jupiter Jefferson said:
And in this context, your question as to what I mean by finding protection in Christ Jesus, will not be answered...
Ah-ha! Now we come to the button of it.Why on earth would you not want to answer such simple question?

Why on earth would you instead try to shoot down the questioner with full force, pull all the stops, call him the enemy and even resort to polemic?

Could it be that my question about your Jesus reference may have "scratched" you just a tiny bit?

See, the problem is, this forum knows me and my position quite well. By trying to make it appear that I am the "associate" you completely discredited yourself and potentially invalidated everything you said previously - Capiche?
Jupiter Jefferson said:
I AM READY. ANd tell me, are ye?
Take a wild guess.
 
COINTELPRO in Action - Rense's Response?

About that notorious email and its specific sentence:
Giving you a heads up, your members are being informed.
What I am seeing is that a variety of "new" people popped up on this forum. While this is a good thing in principle, it feels like a number of "them" are here to confuse manipulate and twist - even try to discredit experienced long time posters.

And I think that is meant by "being informed".

So all be extra cautious and discerning and don't let anybody get away with anything!
 
COINTELPRO in Action - Rense's Response?

Fifth Way said:
What I am seeing is that a variety of "new" people popped up on this forum. While this is a good thing in principle, it feels like a number of "them" are here to confuse manipulate and twist - even try to discredit experienced long time posters.
Strange that I had the same thoughts as I was reading the various threads. The characteropath, OP's, psychopaths, (COP's for short haha) seem to be crawling out of the woodworks lately.
 
COINTELPRO in Action - Rense's Response?

I had exactly the same impression: A wave of newbies after the podcasts, all devoted to make us see how intolerance rules here. They come asking in apparent ingenuity, to then put a show and be dismissed, acting as evidence of the intolerance.
Then come more, saying "see Laura, it is being spread the word here you censor anyone who is not agree with you..."
This are not newbies, not even zero-posters, but agents. Some were activated, some where sent.
For the real newbies: Do feel welcome please.
 
COINTELPRO in Action - Rense's Response?

FifthWay said:
What I am seeing is that a variety of "new" people popped up on this forum. While this is a good thing in principle, it feels like a number of "them" are here to confuse manipulate and twist - even try to discredit experienced long time posters.

And I think that is meant by "being informed".

So all be extra cautious and discerning and don't let anybody get away with anything!
Some guidelines from another thread:


mk31 said:
I don't think it helps any of the parties involved if questions about the topic are responded to
with ridicule. First time poster here but from an outsider's perspective on this forum there
seems to be some elitism from some of the senior members. I've just started reading your
book, "the High strangeness..." and so far have been quite taken with it Laura but I'm surprised
and I think it's unfortunate that you would take this kind of tone even when you feel your position to
be solid and correct. I am the first to admit that I have much to learn about "the true
nature of reality" but the fact that I and other's are here states the fact that we are curious
and our questions are an attempt to come closer to this understanding.
Let's not be disingenuous mk. If you are aware of our work, you are certainly aware of 1) the possibilities of hyperdimensional manipulations; 2) the work of Andrzej Lobaczewski - Ponerology - which actually obviates the necessity for hyperdimensional explanations though it doesn't negate such as a reality. Fact is, ponerological networks of deviant personality types form pretty much the same way that fat collects together on the soup.

As you might suppose if your neurons were firing, at this point in time, we've had a LOT of experience dealing with attack and attackers, both the blatant and more subtle "butter wouldn't melt in my mouth" kind. We can spot 'em usually in the first sentence. You have been spotted.

For any readers who want to have the "experience" just read the following threads from start to finish:

http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=1093

http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=395

... where we do actually take the time to allow the "agents" to express themselves and then, gradually, as the discussion proceeds, see that they expose themselves in quite dramatic ways. I want to point out that these types do the same stuff over and over again; you'd think that they would get creative and try something different.

Observation and evidence indicates that, certainly, individuals can behave as agents without being conscious that they are fully functional ponerological (network of evil) elements; that's a given. But based on the fact that you were just "attracted to this discussion" like a moth to a flame suggests otherwise.

Now, sure, I could do the pas de deux with you for a few days, maybe a week, and eventually you would be outted in your full schizotypal glory, but why bother? I have better, more creative things to do - like finish the second edition of our 9/11 book in which we are taking the gloves off across the board. I've also got two other books in progress, one of which is about people just like you: a layman's guide to Ponerology "Wolves and Sheep."

Speaking of sheep, did you ever hear the term "Wolves in Sheep's Clothing?"

Sure you have. The concept is that there are wolves among us that dress up like sheep, pretend to be just innocent questioners, try to act like they are civilized and just "doing this for your own good." Well, when anybody says that they "hate to say this, but it's for your own good," run like hell. It's a sure sign of the Wolf in Sheep's Clothing.

Now, for any readers of this thread who want to get the REAL Scoop, start with our work on Ponerology
Political Ponerology: A Science on The Nature of Evil adjusted for Political Purposes

And then move to some more directed studies of psychopathy and other types of deviant behavior:

The Psychopath: The Mask of Sanity

You will also notice many links on the sidebar in the psychopathy section to articles, both on our site and offsite, that will educate you so that you, too, can spot deviants like "mk" in the first sentence. Among these articles is a review/synopsis of psychologist George Simon's book cleverly entitled: In Sheep's Clothing.

From this most interesting book we learn about folks like mk in the following:

psychologist George Simon said:
There are two basic types of aggression: overt-aggression and covert-aggression. When you're determined to have something and you're open, direct and obvious in your manner of fighting, your behavior is best labeled overtly aggressive. When you're out to "win," dominate or control, but are subtle, underhanded or deceptive enough to hide your true intentions, your behavior is most appropriately labeled covertly aggressive. Now, avoiding any overt display of aggression while simultaneously intimidating others into giving you what you want is a powerfully manipulative maneuver. That's why covert-aggression is most often the vehicle for interpersonal manipulation.

The Process of Victimization

For a long time, I wondered why manipulation victims have a hard time seeing what really goes on in manipulative interactions. At first, I was tempted to fault them. But I've learned that they get hoodwinked for some very good reasons:

1. A manipulator's aggression is not obvious. Our gut may tell us that they're fighting for something, struggling to overcome us, gain power, or have their way, and we find ourselves unconsciously on the defensive. But because we can't point to clear, objective evidence they're aggressing against us, we can't readily validate our feelings.

2. The tactics manipulators use can make it seem like they're hurting, caring, defending, ..., almost anything but fighting. These tactics are hard to recognize as merely clever ploys. They always make just enough sense to make a person doubt their gut hunch that they're being taken advantage of or abused. Besides, the tactics not only make it hard for you to consciously and objectively tell that a manipulator is fighting, but they also simultaneously keep you or consciously on the defensive. These features make them highly effective psychological weapons to which anyone can be vulnerable. It's hard to think clearly when someone has you emotionally on the run.

3. All of us have weaknesses and insecurities that a clever manipulator might exploit. Sometimes, we're aware of these weaknesses and how someone might use them to take advantage of us. For example, I hear parents say things like: "Yeah, I know I have a big guilt button." - But at the time their manipulative child is busily pushing that button, they can easily forget what's really going on. Besides, sometimes we're unaware of our biggest vulnerabilities. Manipulators often know us better than we know ourselves. They know what buttons to push, when and how hard. Our lack of self-knowledge sets us up to be exploited.

4. What our gut tells us a manipulator is like, challenges everything we've been taught to believe about human nature. We've been inundated with a psychology that has us seeing everybody, at least to some degree, as afraid, insecure or "hung-up." So, while our gut tells us we're dealing with a ruthless conniver, our head tells us they must be really frightened or wounded "underneath." What's more, most of us generally hate to think of ourselves as callous and insensitive people. We hesitate to make harsh or seemingly negative judgments about others. We want to give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they don't really harbor the malevolent intentions we suspect. We're more apt to doubt and blame ourselves for daring to believe what our gut tells us about our manipulator's character. [...]

While, from a certain perspective we might say someone engaging in these behaviors is defending their ego from any sense of shame or guilt, it's important to realize that at the time the aggressor is exhibiting these behaviors, he is not primarily defending (i.e. attempting to prevent some internally painful event from occurring), but rather fighting to maintain position, gain power and to remove any obstacles (both internal and external) in the way of getting what he wants.

Seeing the aggressor as on the defensive in any sense is a set-up for victimization.

Recognizing that they're primarily on the offensive, mentally prepares a person for the decisive action they need to take in order to avoid being run over.

Therefore, I think it's best to conceptualize many of the mental behaviors (no matter how "automatic" or "unconscious" they may appear) we often think of as defense mechanisms, as offensive power tactics, because aggressive personalities employ them primarily to manipulate, control and achieve dominance over others.

Rather than trying to prevent something emotionally painful or dreadful from happening, anyone using these tactics is primarily trying to ensure that something they want to happen does indeed happen. [...]

Denial - This is when the aggressor refuses to admit that they've done something harmful or hurtful when they clearly have. It's a way they lie (to themselves as well as to others) about their aggressive intentions. This "Who... Me?" tactic is a way of "playing innocent," and invites the victim to feel unjustified in confronting the aggressor about the inappropriateness of a behavior. It's also the way the aggressor gives him/herself permission to keep right on doing what they want to do. This denial is not the same kind of denial that a person who has just lost a loved one and can't quite bear to accept the pain and reality of the loss engages in. That type of denial really is mostly a "defense" against unbearable hurt and anxiety. Rather, this type of denial is not primarily a "defense" but a maneuver the aggressor uses to get others to back off, back down or maybe even feel guilty themselves for insinuating he's doing something wrong. [...]

Selective Inattention - This tactic is similar to and sometimes mistaken for denial It's when the aggressor "plays dumb," or acts oblivious. When engaging in this tactic, the aggressor actively ignores the warnings, pleas or wishes of others, and in general, refuses to pay attention to everything and anything that might distract them from pursuing their own agenda. Often, the aggressor knows full well what you want from him when he starts to exhibit this "I don't want to hear it!" behavior. By using this tactic, the aggressor actively resists submitting himself to the tasks of paying attention...

Rationalization - A rationalization is the excuse an aggressor tries to offer for engaging in an inappropriate or harmful behavior. It can be an effective tactic, especially when the explanation or justification the aggressor offers makes just enough sense that any reasonably conscientious person is likely to fall for it. It's a powerful tactic because it not only serves to remove any internal resistance the aggressor might have about doing what he wants to do (quieting any qualms of conscience he might have) but also to keep others off his back. If the aggressor can convince you he's justified in whatever he's doing, then he's freer to pursue his goals without interference. [...]

Diversion - A moving target is hard to hit. When we try to pin a manipulator down or try to keep a discussion focused on a single issue or behavior we don't like, he's expert at knowing how to change the subject, dodge the issue or in some way throw us a curve. Manipulators use distraction and diversion techniques to keep the focus off their behavior, move us off-track, and keep themselves free to promote their self-serving hidden agendas. [...]

Lying - It's often hard to tell when a person is lying at the time he's doing it. Fortunately, there are times when the truth will out because circumstances don't bear out somebody's story. But there are also times when you don't know you've been deceived until it's too late. One way to minimize the chances that someone will put one over on you is to remember that because aggressive personalities of all types will generally stop at nothing to get what they want, you can expect them to lie and cheat.

Another thing to remember is that manipulators - covert-aggressive personalities that they are - are prone to lie in subtle, covert ways. Courts are well aware of the many ways that people lie, as they require that court oaths charge that testifiers tell "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth." Manipulators often lie by withholding a significant amount of the truth from you or by distorting the truth. They are adept at being vague when you ask them direct questions. This is an especially slick way of lying' omission. Keep this in mind when dealing with a suspected wolf in sheep's clothing. [...]

Covert Intimidation - Aggressors frequently threaten their victims to keep them anxious, apprehensive and in a one-down position. Covert-aggressives intimidate their victims by making veiled (subtle, indirect or implied) threats. Guilt-tripping and shaming are two of the covert-aggressive's favourite weapons. Both are special intimidation tactics.

Guilt-tripping - One thing that aggressive personalities know well is that other types of persons have very different consciences than they do. Manipulators are often skilled at using what they know to be the greater conscientiousness of their victims as a means of keeping them in a self-doubting, anxious, and submissive position. The more conscientious the potential victim, the more effective guilt is as a weapon.

Aggressive personalities of all types use guilt-tripping so frequently and effectively as a manipulative tactic, that I believe it illustrates how fundamentally different in character they are compared to other (especially neurotic) personalities. All a manipulator has to do is suggest to the conscientious person that they don't care enough, are too selfish, etc., and that person immediately starts to feel bad. On the contrary, a conscientious person might try until they're blue in the face to get a manipulator (or any other aggressive personality) to feel badly about a hurtful behavior, acknowledge responsibility, or admit wrongdoing, to absolutely no avail.

Shaming - This is the technique of using subtle sarcasm and put-downs as a means of increasing fear and self-doubt in others. Covert-aggressives use this tactic to make others feel inadequate or unworthy, and therefore, defer to them. It's an effective way to foster a continued sense of personal inadequacy in the weaker party, thereby allowing an aggressor to maintain a position of dominance. [...]

Playing the Victim Role - This tactic involves portraying oneself as an innocent victim of circumstances or someone else's behavior in order to gain sympathy, evoke compassion and thereby get something from another. One thing that covert-aggressive personalities count on is the fact that less calloused and less hostile personalities usually can't stand to see anyone suffering. Therefore, the tactic is simple. Convince your victim you're suffering in some way, and they'll try to relieve your distress. [...]

Vilifying the Victim - This tactic is frequently used in conjunction with the tactic of playing the victim role. The aggressor uses this tactic to make it appear he is only responding (i.e. defending himself against) aggression on the part of the victim. It enables the aggressor to better put the victim on the defensive. [...]

Playing the Servant Role - Covert-aggressives use this tactic to cloak their self-serving agendas in the guise of service to a more noble cause. It's a common tactic but difficult to recognize. By pretending to be working hard on someone else's behalf, covert-aggressives conceal their own ambition, desire for power, and quest for a position of dominance over others. [...]

A recent scandal involving a tele-evangelist resulted in his church's governance body censuring him for one year. But he told his congregation he couldn't stop his ministry because he had to be faithful to the Lord's will (God supposedly talked to him and told him not to quit). This minister was clearly being defiant of his church's established authority. Yet, he presented himself as a person being humbly submissive to the "highest" authority. One hallmark characteristic of covert-aggressive personalities is loudly professing subservience while fighting for dominance.

Seduction - Covert-aggressive personalities are adept at charming, praising, flattering or overtly supporting others in order to get them to lower their defenses and surrender their trust and loyalty. Covert-aggressives are also particularly aware that people who are to some extent emotionally needy and dependent (and that includes most people who aren't character-disordered) want approval, reassurance, and a sense of being valued and needed more than anything. Appearing to be attentive to these needs can be a manipulator's ticket to incredible power over others. [...]

Projecting the blame (blaming others) - Aggressive personalities are always looking for a way to shift the blame for their aggressive behavior. Covert-aggressives are not only skilled at finding scapegoats, they're expert at doing so in subtle, hard to detect ways.

Minimization - This tactic is a unique kind of denial coupled with rationalization. When using this maneuver, the aggressor is attempting to assert that his abusive behavior isn't really as harmful or irresponsible as someone else may be claiming. It's the aggressor's attempt to make a molehill out of a mountain.

I've presented the principal tactics that covert-aggressives use to manipulate and control others. They are not always easy to recognize. Although all aggressive personalities tend to use these tactics, covert-aggressives generally use them slickly, subtly and adeptly. Anyone dealing with a covertly aggressive person will need to heighten gut-level sensitivity to the use of these tactics if they're to avoid being taken in by them.
In short, mk, I got your number in the first paragraph (and the rest of your pals, too.) As The Gardener sez: its a Trolls Siege.
 
COINTELPRO in Action - Rense's Response?

Youngfox said:
"...there's also a group called the Rendon Group that is all about controlling public opinion on government actions that people are reporting on their site meters. Considering that the Rendon Group has contracts from BushCo to spread pro-war propaganda, it's hard to imagine that they aren't also targeting left-leaning blogs, possibly trying to circumvent productive anti-war discussion by bomb-throwing and other nonsense."
Professional trolls* by Joshua Holland

behind netvocates (and it's link to customscoop)

A little corporatist cointelpro to stir the internet pot...ugh.
 
Superman Returns: WING TV repels Pathological Pirates AKA Rense & Co

FW, my experience has been that "Jupiter" is sincere even if there are a few Sacred Cows he can't let out to pasture, like the whold Dead Man on a Stick shtick. He also tends to be a bit paranoid and his experience with Childress et al sort of spooked him badly. Obviously something happened, but whether or not his assessment is objective is certainly in question. I do think it was interesting data. But as we know, those who can't let go of sacred cows of religion often have difficulty in being objective in other areas.
 
COINTELPRO in Action - Rense's Response?

Interesting article in "New Scientist"

New Scientist said:
Software that follows an online discussion and picks out the most relevant post and the most influential participant could provide an automated synopsis of chat-rooms debates and email chatter.

The software was developed by Eduard Hovy and colleagues at the Information Sciences Institute, University of Southern California, US. They say single out the key post or email from thousands of messages.

To start, they manually categorised the messages according to their purpose - identifying, for instance, requests for information, answers to such requests and social chit-chat.

Then they used a lexical database to look for similarities in the vocabulary of each message and find relationships between them. Another lexical analysis technique was used to measure the degree to which a message was useful to posters, based on the language used in replies.
Page ranking

To integrate these different analyses, the team modified an algorithm called Hypertext Induced Topic Selection (HITS), which is normally used to rank web pages according to the links between them. But, instead of using it to search for the web page most relevant to a particular query, they used the algorithm to find the most influential post in a conversational thread.

The dataset used by the team was threaded discussions between students on the USC undergraduate computer science course. The software was found to be 70% accurate at picking out the most relevant post, when compared to human analysis.

"I think people will want to try this technique to untangle threads in conversation records of all kinds, including message boards," Hovy says.
Rich structure

Jon Kleinberg, a computer scientist from Cornell University, New York, who developed the HITS algorithm, believes the approach has potential.

"It is a very nice application of link analysis," he told New Scientist. "Exploiting the fact that human conversations have a rich structure beyond the raw text they contain." Kleinberg, however, notes that the software is not yet fully automated, as the messaged have to be categorised.

Categorisation is "notoriously difficult", Hovy concedes. To do this, "one has to combine the number of responses, the types of responses and the authority levels of the responders all together. We've only begun to untangle the threads".

The research was presented at the Human Language Technology Conference 2006 in New York, US, in May 2006.
 
Back
Top Bottom