List of disinformers?

[Niall]

Re: List of disinformators?

Just a reminder that the C's said (in Session 020223), in response to a question about a particular source, "All is of value if examined with an open mind and proper perspective." The concept of "perspective" is strong throughout the sessions (you can review occurrences of that word in the sessions to see it), and often goes hand-in-hand with the recommendation to cultivate objectivity. So, even disinformation may be of value if you can recognize it as such -- easier said than done, of course. This is a complicated topic.

That's very well put PopHistorian. For example, if NOS was to look for the long thread on this forum on David Icke's work, he'd see how complicated it is to reach a point where you can say this person or that person is a 'disinformator' or this/that information is disinformation. It takes work, but the process of doing it is fun and, more importantly, the things you learn in one area can be applied to other areas in ways you weren't expecting.

 

[Buddy]

Re: List of disinformators?

Just a reminder that the C's said (in Session 020223), in response to a question about a particular source, "All is of value if examined with an open mind and proper perspective." The concept of "perspective" is strong throughout the sessions (you can review occurrences of that word in the sessions to see it), and often goes hand-in-hand with the recommendation to cultivate objectivity. So, even disinformation may be of value if you can recognize it as such -- easier said than done, of course. This is a complicated topic.

That's very well put PopHistorian. For example, if NOS was to look for the long thread on this forum on David Icke's work, he'd see how complicated it is to reach a point where you can say this person or that person is a 'disinformator' or this/that information is disinformation. It takes work, but the process of doing it is fun and, more importantly, the things you learn in one area can be applied to other areas in ways you weren't expecting.

That's also very well put, Kniall. I suppose its easy to forget about that extra aspect of the process of doing your own research as fun and benefiting in unexpected ways. Thanks to both of y'all for that reminder.

 

[Novus ordo seclorum]

Re: List of disinformators?

For example, if NOS was to look for the long thread on this forum on David Icke's work, he'd see how complicated it is to reach a point where you can say this person or that person is a 'disinformator' or this/that information is disinformation. It takes work, but the process of doing it is fun and, more importantly, the things you learn in one area can be applied to other areas in ways you weren't expecting.

I did that actually, your are right.

 

[Novus ordo seclorum]

Re: List of disinformators?

Lol, I messed up a post a little. I meant that I did that research on David Icke, you were right.

 

[Deleted member 8431]

Re: List of disinformators?

I agree. And as another side to self-protection issues, especially in a sue-happy country like the U.S., if someone were to haul you into court on a charge of libel or slander and the best you can do is point a finger at a list maker (so and so said so!), then it's probably not going to help your case much. It would still beg the question '...so, what is your personal agenda for broadcasting "X is a disinformator"'? You'd be much better off knowing why and that comes from doing your own research, OSIT.

And so I think as well. In that specific situation for an example, having done the Work yourself (with the help of others of course via networking for instance) will put you up in a far better position because you will have so much more data and know exactly (or better at least) where you are from, going and why this person is let's say a disinformation artist/agent.

Also, it often brings us into various other places in which we find interest and/or that helps us connecting even more dots. You never know what kind of "surprize" will fall down the sky. Sometimes, looking for a specific thing will lead you to a completely different but far more relevant place. Never forget that. Our world is an open system. ;)

Solely pointing at a piece of paper without anything to back up your claims is about as relevant as pointing at the Bible saying the universe was created exactly 6000 years ago because the book says so and that it comes from God Him/Her/Itself.

Peace.

 

[Deleted member 8431]

Re: List of disinformators?

Lol, I messed up a post a little. I meant that I did that research on David Icke, you were right.

You know, finding out that someone we like is a disinfo agent isn't always fun (I'm not necessarily implying you liked Icke).

I did like David a lot though. I thought he was an honnest and well-intentioned man and that's quite all it took for me, that, and the sense of learning about "real things".

Same for Alex Jones (although it didn't take me long to start to dislike this very loud and disturbing clown), Michael Tsarion, Alex Collier and all the other famous characters.

When people talk about reptilians and alien influences on humans for instance but completely avoid the issue of psychopathy, that's already a big red flag for me. (Just one example.) They make it seem like there's nothing that can't be done, aliens own us, we are wortheless, leave us to our end, oh no wait, saviors are on the way! Quick, spread light and love in the universe so you shine like a distress beacon and they'll pick you up on the way to Andromeda, Hollow Earth (or whatever paradise they praise.)

That kind of crap.

Have fun learning my friend! I think we all do so far!

Peace.

 

[lewis_86]

Re: List of disinformators?

Agree with the sentiments expressed earlier that even disinfo can be useful, at times. Even in terms of up to date, mainstream media; if you can look at the information being presented and assess the way it is being conveyed, how the truth might be being distorted/exaggerated, it can give you insight into what is currently being pushed. This works with the news; if you can step back, you often get a bigger perspective on what is being said, and how they often hand you the conclusion you are supposed to take away from it.

Also think it's worth bearing in mind that there may well be a percentage of people out there who are providing alternative history’s, news, views, etc but who are themselves not fully aware of the extent to which power structures/culture creation operates, for example. This doesn't make them automatically bad people, or even deliberate Cointelpro (I don't mean to state the obvious here, but it's am important distinction to make, I think). The crux of this being that not everyone is right about everything, all the time. I think intuition can sometimes be used to distinguish charlatans though.

Deciphering the agenda that a piece of media may or may not come loaded with (as well as the explicit message) is of paramount importantace in helping people develop their own views. With that in mind, it's timely that the UK are currently, under the advice of Education Secretary Michael Gove (tosser) attempting to distinguish certain college subjects as basically being inferior. This includes English Language, which is not deemed as a “facilitating subject”; therefore it is less important that English Literature, along with Media and various other studies. This means top Universityes don't see it in the same light as other subjects.

Gaining an understanding of how the Media and Language can be used to manipulate opinion like its fact, is vital to understanding the crux of what it happening in the world, and also what has happened in the past. By demoting these subjects academically, they are essentially attempting to disarm the younger generations from not only engaging in this form of critical thinking, but also severing an avenue which allows for the safe guarding of one’s own mind. It doesn’t really surprise me, but I do find it timely

 

[lewis_86]

Re: List of disinformators?

An article which mentions some of the changes I refered to in the previous post, as to the way A-Level subjects are to be catogorised:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/feb/04/russell-group-soft-subjects

This comment from the page sums up some of what I feel about it:

"I'm always 'nervy' when the word empowerment is used by a group or a business... and when they are committed to something which will lead the consumer to an informed choice... then I'm pretty sure I'm being patronised and conned, all in one go..."

 

[crystal]

Re: List of disinformators?

Disinformators are the one who distorts the information. The names u have mentioned are the ones who have given useful information but its up to u to agree or disagree to some of their assumption...do ur own research!!!...
I agree with that sometimes disinformation can be useful its up to u regarding how u analyze the information given...and separate truth from unwanted exaggeration...

 

[ajseph 21]

I feel that disinfo is almost like a stocking full of coal on christmas. You go in anticipating something of value and you "weigh" it out so to speak, but when you take the knowledge out to apply it you realize the best thing to do is burn it. Alex Jones and others give an appearance of "wakefullness", but upon further inspection you see the same mechanization from them as the people they claim to wake up.

 

[oneopenmind]

For myself many different alarm bells go off when I begin noticing the Main Stream Media (MSM) seemingly bombarding the populace with new buzz words like "truthiness", & "sustainability" and especially when almost over nite major corporations are striving towards a more "sustainable" future on web page after web page. I usually ask, sustainable for whom? And, what do these words actually mean? What is the real hidden subtext of these words? Usually when a campaign of this type hits the populace, what I am really witnessing is another aspect of the ponerization process by the psychopaths in charge, or one of the many processes of programming. I almost never put stock in anything anyone is saying without first coming to the forum & running a search of the person, or the idea, or the company involved and then after reading everything I can find related to the subject here, do I then feel I know enough to make a decision about it, OSIT.

Yes, I too, have been disappointed to find some of the people I thought were proponents of truth, were in fact either disinformation specialists themselves, or were unconsciously being led by handlers & disinformation agents. But, I am forever grateful for learning the truth every time, because this is also one of the ways to put some sacred cows out to pasture, especially when one pays close attention to how we were mislead in the first place. This is the beginnings of critical thinking. Picking up a couple books on reasoning & fallacies in reasoning helps too, OSIT. Usually if a so called "proponent of truth" suddenly pops up, becomes popular in a relatively short time, and never really addresses these three major problems on earth 1. Psychopaths & the ponerization process 2. Israel & zionism 3. Aliens as extradimensional beings with their negative hidden agenda (4th density/bi-density feeders) - you can almost certainly smell something rotten, especially if they avoid these topics when brought to their attention, then it's probably time to take the trash out with the rest of the garbage. (meaning subject matter of proponent only, not the proponent himself ). Hopefully while learning & growing & seeing certain aspects of one's nature here in the forum & then applying that knowledge about ourselves in daily life, one should begin to develop levels of discernment & with that the ability to dissect truth from disinformation. This does not happen over nite. This only comes with lots of hard, & sometimes unpleasant work on ourselves. I have felt an affinity to the quote that Laura uses in her signature file below:

From Laura's Sig:
He who learns must suffer
And even in our sleep pain that cannot forget
Falls drop by drop upon the heart,
And in our own despair, against our will,
Comes wisdom to us by the awful grace of God.
Agamemnon, Aeschylus

 

[SocietyoftheSpectacle]

here's a Good Video on Various gate Keepers and How their Narrative has changed over time,
( Took a Month to put together apparently )

http://<iframe width="640" height="...hA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[angelburst29]

A leading purveyor of fake news in the 2016 presidential election has died outside Phoenix at the age of 38.

Paul Horner, writer of fake news about 2016 election, found dead Sep 27, 2017
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/paul-horner-fake-news-writer-found-dead/

Maricopa County Sheriff's Office spokesman Mark Casey said Tuesday authorities discovered Paul Horner dead in his bed on Sept. 18.

Casey said the Maricopa County medical examiner performed an autopsy which showed there were no signs of foul play. He said Horner had a history of prescription drug abuse and that "evidence at the scene suggested this could be an accidental overdose."

Horner was known for writing false stories and disseminating internet hoaxes that often went viral on Facebook and hoodwinked thousands of people.

They included a story falsely claiming former President Obama was gay and a radical Muslim, and another saying protesters were being paid thousands of dollars to demonstrate at Donald Trump's campaign rallies.

Horner took on greater prominence during the presidential election when false stories were widely shared on social media during the race between Trump and Hillary Clinton.

In an interview with The Washington Post in 2016, Horner said he thought Trump won the White House because of him. Horner said Trump's supporters didn't fact-check his stories before posting them.

"My sites were picked up by Trump supporters all the time. I think Trump is in the White House because of me. His followers don't fact-check anything — they'll post everything, believe anything. His campaign manager posted my story about a protester getting paid $3,500 as fact. Like, I made that up. I posted a fake ad on Craigslist," he told The Washington Post in November.

Even members of President Trump's inner circle, including Mr. Trump's son Eric and then-campaign manager Corey Lewandowski, shared links to Horner's content. Horner's stories also made their way to Google News, known to feature stories from reputable news sources.

J.J., Horner's brother, said Paul considered his work satire and explained that his brother's unique eye for hoaxes and hypocrisy at a young age later worked as clickbait in the internet world.

"So I think that was a lot of the genius behind a lot of his work was pushing ideas that either people wanted to believe or thought was possible," J.J. said.

Casey said toxicology reports from the medical examiner's office are still pending. The case will remain open until those results are known and a cause of death is finalized.

J.J. Horner said they grew up in Minnesota before moving to Arizona as teenagers. He said his brother was drawing and making political cartoons at a very young age and took an interest in politics.

Horner said while his brother was pigeonholed as a supporter of Mr. Trump after a Eric Trump shared one of his stories, he was always transparent about his views and it was obvious that he wasn't.

"I think he just wanted people to just think for themselves and be credible for their actions," J.J. Horner said. "Read more; get more involved instead of just blindly sharing things."

After the election, Facebook and Googe cracked down on hoax websites.

 

[angelburst29]

Paul Horner, writer of fake news about 2016 election, found dead Sep 27, 2017
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/paul-horner-fake-news-writer-found-dead/

The rash of fake news from so-called “mainstream” and legacy news outlets is continuing, with the latest example coming from none other than The Associated Press. In fact, this story comes with no small amount of irony: A fake news story about someone who wrote fake news.

AP caught running fake news about death of fake news pusher
https://www.naturalnews.com/2017-09-28-ap-caught-running-fake-news-about-death-of-fake-news-pusher.html

A story reporting on the death of Phoenix resident Paul Horner, 38, a “leading purveyor of fake news in the 2016 presidential election,” the newswire service — out of journalistic laziness or Left-wing motivation — contained the following paragraphs:

Horner was known for writing false stories and disseminating internet hoaxes that often went viral on Facebook and hoodwinked thousands of people.

They included a story falsely claiming President Barack Obama was gay and a radical Muslim, and another saying protesters were being paid thousands of dollars to demonstrate at Donald Trump’s campaign rallies.

Let’s take the gay/Muslim claim first.

While there is no evidence whatsoever that Obama was gay, there is plenty of evidence to suggest that he was at the very least a Muslim sympathizer. Consider:

— According to some published accounts including this one, Obama has worn a gold ring on his wedding ring finger for more than three decades with the phrase in Arabic, which is said to be the first part of the Shahada, the Islamic proclamation of the oneness of God.

— Obama’s administration backed and otherwise supported the Muslim Brotherhood, an organization committed to opposing Western influence and values.

— This report says that while attending a Catholic school in Indonesia as a youth, his listed religion was “Islam” (See No. 4 in the accompanying graphic).

But while these pieces of ‘evidence’ may be anecdotal at best, Obama as president regularly deferred to Islamic interests over those of, say, Israeli interests in the dangerous, volatile Middle East, as the so-called “nuclear deal” with Iran, Israel’s arch-enemy, so aptly demonstrates. As Ben Shapiro writes at the National Review:

Barack Obama has done his best for nearly eight years to undermine the state of Israel. He’s signed a treaty that enshrines an Iranian path to a nuclear weapon while funding their global terrorist activities to the tune of tens of billions of dollars. He’s repeatedly undercut Israel’s image on the world stage, labeling Israel a mere outgrowth of the Holocaust and suggesting that Israeli intransigence stands as the chief obstacle to peace.

As for the claim that protestors at Trump rallies were not paid, this is demonstrably false.

In March 2016, Fox News ran a story complete with pictorial proof that Alt-Left organizations were hiring protesters — in this case, paying them $15 an hour — in “temporary paid positions to protest Donald Trump Rally” in Wisconsin.

“We are seeking people to protest the Donald Trump rally in Janesville, WI,” the ad claimed. “We are willing to pay $15 an hour for a maximum of 4 hours for this service.” Later, the ad said, “We’ve already had one listing removed because of Trump supporters flagging it.”

Previously, Trump associate Roger Stone, writing at the Daily Caller news site, reported that the campaign of then-Democratic presidential contender Hillary Clinton and billionaire Leftist George Soros were “behind violent riots at Trump rallies,” not the campaign of Sen. Bernie Sanders, who was at the time running against Clinton for the party’s presidential nomination

Stone wrote: This free speech-busting goon squad operation is directed by supporters of Hillary Clinton. It is paid for mostly by George Soros and MoveOn.org and pushed by David Brock at Media Matters for America. It’s also funded by reclusive billionaire Jonathan Lewis…

A march and demonstration against Trump at Trump Tower essentially fizzled [in early March 2016] when only 500 “protesters” of the promised 5000 showed up. Infiltrating the crowd, I learned most were from MoveOn or the Occupy movement. Soap was definitely in short supply in this crowd. Several admitted answering a Craig’s list ad paying $16.00 an hour for protesters.

Clearly, Trump protesters were being hired and paid specifically to show up at his rallies and cause trouble. The AP, however, would have you believe that’s “fake news.”