The United States of Apathy

apathy-quotes-6

“Five percent of the people think; ten percent of the people think they think; and the other eighty five percent would rather die than think.” ~ Thomas Edison

To examine the world today, politically and socially, is complex task. There are indeed so many complexities to the postmodern world that it is as if the more you learn, the less sure you become. It’s difficult to define exactly what postmodern even is.

The best way to analyze problems in order to find solutions is to simplify their dynamics. If we were to boil down the problems of the social and political problems of the world today we would find that there are some consistencies in what at first might seem like disconnected concoctions.

One of the main shared qualities is perhaps the tendency to for people act either as exploiters in pursuit of gaining control or, in contrast, are apathetic to exploiters. These behaviors – being exploitative or being apathetic to exploitation – are nearly never spontaneous but have been instituted into our societal systems. Indeed these modes may be so deeply engrained that we mistake them as being ‘natural’, and they go unnoticed. But an honest look at our present – the steering of our perceptions through media and tightening of laws regarding the sharing of information on subjects that might shake apathy – reveals that there exists a tendency among those at the top of our societal pyramid to limit our sensitivity to our own exploitation at the bottom of the pyramid.

It is surely not a natural tendency to be so exploitative, or to be so tolerant of exploitation. But today, there have never before been so many people so apathetic to to the exploitation going on around them, and the evil perpetuated against humanity has never been so extensive. Such unprecedented extremes can only be achieved by inches; by careful manipulation.

The Five Percenters

“There is natural ignorance and there is artificial ignorance. I should say at the present moment the artificial ignorance is at about eighty-five percent.” ~ Ezra Pound

The Nation of Gods and Earths is a community organization that began in New York City. The group, distinct from Nation of Islam, was founded by Clarence 13X, a member of Malcolm X’s N.O.I. congregation, before Clarence and then Malcolm left the N.O.I. The Nation of Gods and Earths, or Five Percenters, numerically theorized the pyramid system in the same manner as Edison and Ezra.

The theory is that 85% of people are lost. The 85% are easily misled and manipulated and die without knowing who they really are. The 10% are the exploiters of the poor and lost, the 85%. The 10% are responsible for and benefit from societal manipulation. And then there are the 5% – those who attempt to do the right thing and free the minds of the 85% from life under the thumb of the 10%.

The relationship between these natural roles within an exploited society can best be understood through the adage of the Wise Monkeys. This set of four is most often seen as a set of three, but there are indeed four parts. The Wise Monkeys are commonly known as Hear No evil, See No Evil and Speak No Evil. These are reactions, born out of fear. The fourth monkey is Fear No Evil, and he holds his dantien or lower abdominal region, the area of the body from which all actions root, as the Asian cultures that originally used the monkey allegory believe.

4 wise monkeys - speak see hear fear no evil

The 85% are described as blind and deaf to evil, and are like the monkeys with hands over eyes and ears. The 10% are referred to as the rich slave makers of the poor, and are like the monkey covering its mouth, holding the secrets of evil. And the rare 5% are known as the poor righteous teachers, or fear no evil, the fourth monkey. Fear No Evil does not take action or reaction in fear. In fact he is depicted in a meditative position. Symbolizing truth, the antithesis of evil, he exists without fear; fear of outsiders, fear of alternative perspective or lifestyles, fear of the truth, fear of what reality may be seen, heard or spoken.

Tricked to Do Evil

Perhaps this approximation of 85-10-5 has always been about constant in pyramidal/oligarchical societies. Perhaps there have always been around 10% who are slave makers, 85% who are oblivious and apathetic to their own bondage, and the 5% who seek to instigate consciousness among the 85% so that the 10% don’t kill us all.

Perhaps the point in time where modern became postmodern is when we developed the ability to kill ourselves via our own unsustainable routine.

The oligarchical pyramid system was and still is the norm in our society, no matter its perforations and peripherals, or how many people yet see it. All the world’s woes can be traced to this same dynamic: the greed and trickery of the 10%, the stark unaware apathy of the 85% and the righteous awareness of the 5%.

United States of ApathyBut it doesn’t have to be this way. As we start to acknowledge the paradigm of the oligarchical pyramid system we were born into – as seen through the representation of the 85%, 10%, 5% equation – we can understand more clearly the dynamics of individual and societal consciousness, and ultimately change the paradigm of our society for the better, growing the 5% over the revolutionary tipping point.

Will you be like the fourth monkey, the righteous teacher, the rebel who responds to postmodern greed and apathy by raising awareness among the unknowing?

Or will you cover your eyes and ears, and keep working to satiate the greed of those our society is constructed to benefit the most?

“A man can’t ride your back unless it’s bent.” ~ Martin Luther King Jr.

Simply acknowledging reality is enough to begin to enhance our understanding of it, and contribute to its betterment, just as acknowledging our consciousness is enough to begin its enhancement. In this twisted postmodern time of exploitation and energetic imbalance, a righteous teacher performs a profoundly powerful task, so valued across time and space. Like the fourth monkey, without fear, they act in the name of freedom, exemplifying the Five Freedoms of the First Amendment – those of free speech, press, religion, petition and assembly. Essentially these are the right to question, communicate, speak out, stop, and act. In this manner the First Amendment is not only a description of some of our inherent rights, but a prescription to protect those rights – the right to be a righteous rebel.

“When Government turns against the people, rebellion becomes a responsibility” ~ Unknown

[For more on the First Amendment, check out Ethan’s 2010 article for OpEdNews.com entitled Patriotism Defined, First Amendment Explained]

Previous articles by Ethan:

About the author:

Ethan Indigo SmithAuthor, activist and Tai Chi teacher Ethan Indigo Smith was born on a farm in Maine and lived in Manhattan for a number of years before migrating west to Mendocino, California. Guided by a keen sense of integrity and humanity, Ethan’s work is both deeply connected and extremely insightful, blending philosophy, politics, activism, spirituality, meditation and a unique sense of humour.

The events of September 11, 2001 inspired him to write his first book, The Complete Patriot’s Guide to Oligarchical Collectivism, an insightful exploration of history, philosophy and contemporary politics. His more recent publications include:

  • Tibetan Fusion a book of simple meditative practices and movements that can help you access and balance your energy
  • The Little Green Book of Revolution an inspirational book based on ideas of peaceful revolution, historical activism and caring for the Earth like Native Americans
  • The Matrix of Four, The Philosophy of the Duality of Polarity on the subject of the development of individual consciousness
  • 108 Steps to Be in The Zone a set of 108 meditative practices and steps toward self discovery and individual betterment, including techniques to develop balance, transmute sexual energy and better the self
  • and the controversial book, Terra-ist Letters, a work that humorously contrasts the very serious issues of global nuclear experimentation promotion and global marijuana prohibition

For more information, visit Ethan on Facebook and check out Ethan’s author page on Amazon.

Owned And Operated – Methods Of Control For The Awakening World

Documentary Film: Owned & Operated is a mosaic of the world through the lens of the internet. Showing our lives as consumers, under the thumbs of privileged individuals and their methods of control.  The world is awakening, and the experience is something outside the normal rules of social interaction, causing excitement in those who are not served by the current system… and fear in those who are pampered by it.

This documentary attempts to present these events using the video, audio and written content uploaded to the internet by the collective human consciousness comprised of every individual participant.

Oh yes, change is coming… and it will be more dramatic than anybody can imagine.

slaughterlambs

Psychologists Explain 9/11 Denial Despite Hard Scientific Evidence

false-flag

 

Below is a transcript of the key parts of the video:

Why are people resistant to looking at the hard evidence regarding 9/11?

Marti Hopper, Ph.D (Licensed Clinical Psychologist):
At this point, we have nine years of hard scientific evidence that disproves the government theory about what happened on September 11.  Yet, people continue to be either oblivious to the fact that this information exists or completely resistant to looking at this information.  So, the question becomes: Why?
Why is it that people have so much trouble hearing this information? From my work, I think we would be remiss not to look at the impact of trauma…
As we know, the horrors of what happened on 9/11 were televised all over the world. They were televised, in fact, live.  We witnessed the deaths of almost 3,000 of our fellow Americans.  We know that this had a very severe and traumatic impact on a majority of the population.   I, myself, cried for weeks after September 11.
A friend of mine, who is a psychologist in practice here in Boulder, said that her case load increased tremendously after 9/11.  People who she had not seen in ten years were coming back into her practice.
So, I think it’s safe to say that collectively, as a nation, because of what happened on September 11, we experienced trauma.

9/11 Truth Conflicts with Our Worldview, Causing Cognitive Dissonance

Frances Shure, M.A. (Licensed Professional Counselor):
Why do people resist this information – the information that shows that the official story about 9/11 cannot be true?  What I’ve learned is that, as humans, each of us has a world view.  That worldview is usually formed, in great part, by the culture that we grow up in.
When we hear information that contradicts our worldview, social psychologists call the resulting insecurity cognitive dissonance. For example, with 9/11 we have one cognition, which is the official story of 9/11 – what our government told us, what our media repeated to us over and over – that 19 Muslims attacked us.
On the other hand, we have what scientists, researchers, architects, and engineers are now beginning to tell us, which is that there is evidence that shows that the official story cannot be true.  So now, we’ve lost our sense of security.  We are starting to feel vulnerable.  Now we’re confused.

Our Psychological Defenses Kick In When Our Beliefs Are Challenged

Robert Hopper, Ph.D. (Licensed Clinical Psychologist):
9/11 truth challenges our most fundamental beliefs about our government and about our country.  When your beliefs are challenged or when two beliefs are inconsistent, cognitive dissonance is created.  9/11 truth challenges the beliefs that our country protects and keeps us safe, and that America is the good guy….
When your beliefs are challenged, fear and anxiety are created. In response to that, our psychological defenses kick in and they protect us from these emotions.  Denial, which is probably the most primitive psychological is the one most likely to kick in when our beliefs are challenged.

It’s Easier to Deny the Truth

Danielle Duperet, PhD:
America is a powerful nation.  It has never been attacked.  We were confident.  We felt secure.  And all of a sudden, that security collapsed.  People started to be fearful with all of the rumors, with all of the news.  People didn’t know what to think, which is a very, very uncomfortable state to be in.  Eventually, our mind shuts off.   Just like when a computer is overloaded, our minds get overloaded.  We can’t handle it anymore and we shut down. It’s easier to deny it and move on with our lives.
Frances Shure, M.A. (Licensed Professional Counselor):
What some will tend to do is deny the evidence that is coming our way and stick to the original story, the official story.  We try to regain our equilibrium that way. Another thing that we can do is decide to look at the conflicting evidence and be sincere and open minded, and look at both sides of the issue.  And, then make up our own mind about what reality is.

We Will Do Just About Anything to Defend our Mental and Emotional Homes

Dorthy Lorig, M.A., Counseling Psychologist:
If we can think of our worldview as sort of being our mental and emotional home, I think that all of us will do just about anything to defend our homes, to defend our families.  I see that with people.  I saw that with myself when my brother tried to talk to me about it: “Don’t mess with me. Don’t mess with my home.  Don’t mess with my comfort with how things are.”
About a week later, I read a lengthy article by professor Griffin about why he believes the official account of 9/11 cannot be true.  It was a very well researched article.  I was in my office at the time.  I sat there and felt my stomach churning. I thought that maybe I was going to be sick. And, I leaped out my chair and ran out the door and took a long walk around the block – around several blocks – and just broke down.
I understand now that my worldview about my government being in some way my protector, like a parent, had been dashed.  It was like being cast out into the wilderness. I think that is the closest way to describe that feeling.
I sobbed and I sobbed.  I felt that the ground had completely disappeared beneath my feet.  And, I knew at some point during the walk that at some point I was going to have to become active educating other people about this.  For me to retain any sense of integrity, I was going to have to take some action.  I couldn’t just let something like this go.

 9/11 Truth Challenges Our Fundamental Beliefs About the World

Robert Hopper, Ph.D. (Licensed Clinical Psychologist):
Many people respond to these truths in a very deep way.  Some have a visceral reaction like that have been punched in the stomach.  To begin to accept the responsibility that the government was involved is like opening Pandora’s Box.  If you open the lid and peak in a little bit, it’s going to challenge some of your fundamental beliefs about the world.

Initial Reactions to Hearing Contradictory Evidence about 9/11

Frances Shure, M.A. (Licensed Professional Counselor):
Following are some of those spontaneous initial reactions to hearing the contradictory evidence about 9/11:
Robert Hopper, Ph.D. (Licensed Clinical Psychologist):
I don’t want to know the truth or I will become too negative and psychologically go downhill.
I’m not sure that I want to know.  If this is true then up will be down and down will be up. My life will never be the same.
Frances Shure, M.A. (Licensed Professional Counselor):
Fran, I refuse to believe that that many Americans can be that treasonous.  Someone would have talked.

Initial Reactions are Based on BELIEFS, NOT Scientific Facts

But these are BELIEFS.  They are NOT scientific fact.  But, these beliefs do KEEP US FROM LOOKING AT THE EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE.

9/11 Truth Contradicts People’s Paradigm

David Ray Griffin, Ph.D., professor/author:
You have empirical people who will simply say: look at the evidence and if it is convincing, I will change my mind.
Other people are paradigmatic people. They have a paradigm.  They say, this is the way the world works and I am convinced that this is the way that the world works.  9/11 doesn’t fit into that paradigm.  So, I don’t have to look at the evidence.  It’s paradigmatic.
And then there is a third type of person that we often call wishful thinkers.  I call it wishful and fearful thinking.  So, they simply will not believe something that they fear to be the truth.  And, I find that to be, maybe, the most powerful factor of people rejecting 9/11 truth and not even entertaining the evidence.
Frances Shure, M.A. (Licensed Professional Counselor):

The Truth is Not Bearable

So, whenever we say “I refuse to believe”, we can be sure that the evidence that’s coming our way is not bearable and it is conflicting with our worldview much too much.
Robert Hopper, Ph.D. (Licensed Clinical Psychologist):
Denial protects people from this kind of anxiety.

A Common Emotion is Fear

Frances Shure, M.A. (Licensed Professional Counselor):
As I thought about all of these responses, I realized that what is common to every one of them is emotion of fear.  People are afraid of being ostracized, they are afraid of being alienated, they are afraid of being shunned.  They are afraid of their lives being inconvenienced – they’ll have to change their lives. They are afraid of being confused.  They are afraid of psychological deterioration.  They are afraid of feeling helpless and vulnerable.  And, they are afraid that they won’t be able to handle the feelings coming up.

When Presented with the Truth, Those in Denial Become Angry, Indignant, Offended,  and Ridicule the Messenger

None of want to feel helpless and vulnerable.  So, we want to defend ourselves.   And, the way that we often do that is with anger.  Then we become angry.  And, when we become angry, then we become indignant.  We become offended.  We want to ridicule the messenger. We want to pathologize the messenger.  And, we want to censor the messenger.

Raise Awareness with Gentle Dialogue and Gentle Questioning

Robert Hopper, Ph.D. (Licensed Clinical Psychologist)
So, how can we overcome this resistance in denial?  The first thing is to meet people where they are at.
John Freedom, M.A., Personal Development Counselor:
One thing is that we need to raise people’s awareness about this – what I would call gentle dialogue and gentle questioning…  It doesn’t work to challenge people’s beliefs or immediately tell them “I know the truth about 9/11.”  A good way is to ask open ended questions that lead to open dialogue and discussion about it.
Danielle Duperet, PhD:
One of the ways to deal with the trauma is to find the answers.  That’s why I think it is of such importance to have a comprehensive investigation.

Pride is Another Reason People Deny 9/11 Truth

Robert Griffin, Licensed Psychologist:
I believe that to become the type of country that we think we are, we have to face some of the things that are not as we think they are… Thinking that we are above such things – that it could happen in other countries, but it couldn’t happen here – that’s a lack of humility.  That’s excessive pride.  As, so not being able to see our dark side or our weaknesses is the most dangerous thing.
David Ray Griffin, Ph.D:
The observation that pride is one of the basic human flaws is absolutely correct.  This is especially true for Americans because we for a long time looked at other nations and said, “They are in such bad shape.  But, luckily we don’t have those problems.  We don’t have leaders that would do those things that were done in the Soviet Union, or done in Germany, or done in Japan… This is a type of pride that Americans have.
A feature of American history that makes particularly liable to this pride is this notion of exceptionalism – that America is the exceptional nation.  That began from the beginning as this country was formed.
People would say that there was so much evil in the European countries, so much cheating, so much lying, so much using the people for the ruler’s purposes.  But not in America! We have leaders who are free from those sins.  This has made 9/11 particularly difficult for Americans.
Robert Griffin, Licensed Psychologist:
Everyone can make mistakes.  But, our ideals and our principles get us back on track.
John Freedom, M.A., Personal Development Counselor:

9/11 is One of the Defining Issues of Our Time 

This is one of the defining issues of our time.

Questioning is Patriotic

Robert Griffin, Licensed Psychologist:
So, we need to understand that questioning is patriotic.  Questioning is what we are supposed to do.  That’s our duty.

The Real Perpetrators Must be Held Accountable

Frances Shure, M.A. (Licensed Professional Counselor):
When we come to the national level, when something like 9/11 happens, we need to be sure that we have a real investigation into who the perpetrators are.  And, then we need to make sure that those people are held legally accountable. It’s part of the healing process on an individual level and the collective level.
consciouslifenews.com

 

Everything Is A Lie: The Deliberate Intent To Deceive People Is At An All Time High

You might think that it’s not important to question EVERYTHING. Where would it end, right? But, as human beings, our very existence depends on the accuracy of the information we rely upon. So, ask yourself – would you rather live AND die based on lies or on truth?

all-you-ever-kneww

From pollution to politics, the era of deception and duplicity has reached new heights and hijacked almost every form of media in the world. In the last frontiers for truth such as the internet, disinformation operations are in full swing to discredit and destroy any semblance of authentic and factual information available to the public.

How many more lies will people around the world accept as truth? Some say a global awakening is taking place, but at what cost? Will it take the destruction of most of the earth and its resources before people are enlightened?

The escalating media and political reports are so far fetched, cunning, and so beyond reality, it’s as if each is trying to top the other with one sinister plot after the next. To demonstrate the outright lies by national governments and the media, let’s take three examples from the last year alone, including the H1N1 scandal, airport body scanners and the BP oil disaster.

The H1N1 Scandal

Last year, the H1N1 scandal reached its pinnacle in the fall of 2009 when the world united on the internet with a consensus and practical understanding of the World Health Organization’s orchestratration to deceive the masses. From radio, internet, television, newspapers, magazines, outdoor posters, signage and promotions, you could not escape the flu hype campaigns so diligently pursued by all the malicious agendas at play who only wanted one thing – to promote a dangerous H1N1 vaccine. After hundreds of reports exposed the criminal activity by all levels of government, we left the same people in power to do it all over again.

According to preliminary reports, another round of pandemic vaccine campaigns are scheduled for the 2010/2011 season and they’re already underway. However, there appears to be a recombination that has changed the H1N1 lab created virus into a more lethal form and it is not a hoax, but it may be yet another CDC lab experiment.

The CDC has recently issued a Health Advisory in connection with two summer outbreaks of H3N2 in Iowa. Other reports from Russia and India indicate that a real epidemic may be upon us if the virus steadily recombines and acquires new genetics. Even though a new strain may have accidentally evolved in eggs, reassortment of H1N1-H5N1 has been a legitimate concern for years. The WHO first suggested the reassortment of H1N1-H5N1 in 2004.

If this is really the case, how will the public react after all the lies from health agencies who have sworn to protect us? Will they hype another vaccine and if so, will the public even respond?

Body Scanners

They’ve been approved all over the world and marketed as the next greatest airport scanning technology. The U.S., U.K., Russia, Australia, Europe and Canada have all installed airport body scanners which have potentially devastating health effects.

Many of these scanners are reportedly using terahertz (THz) waves, the radiation that fills the slot in the electromagnetic spectrum between microwaves and infrared. Evidence suggests that although the forces generated are tiny, resonant effects allow THz waves to unzip double-stranded DNA, creating bubbles in the double strand that could significantly interfere with processes such as gene expression and DNA replication.

As the path toward rolling out wider use of whole-body scanners in U.S. airports ran through the White House, Obama expedited their deployment because the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Transportation Security Administration (TSA) didn’t need legislation from Congress to start using the devices at any of the 560 U.S. airports.

The White House ignored all the scientific evidence presented which suggested negative health effects. Politicians and regulatory agencies then covered up the bad publicity on naked body scanners and focused on the presumed benefits under the guise of public safety.

Privacy commisioners and airport authorities have also insisted that there were no risks of images being stored or personal details being revealed to security screeners. Now there’s new evidence to show that the scanners can do just that.

According to a CNET report, another federal agency, the U.S. Marshall’s service, admitted that it had actually stored over 30,000 images recorded by a full-body scanner used at a Florida courthouse.

A watchdog group called the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) obtained over 100 of the images and states on its web site that, “The images, which are routinely captured by the federal agency, prove that body scanning devices store and record images of individuals stripped naked.” The group has filed a lawsuit to suspend the deployment of body scanners at airports.

EPIC also discovered that the TSA actually specified to manufacturers that the machines have the ability to send and store images. The TSA says that these functions are only for testing and training and insists on its web site that the airport body scanners are delivered to airports with storage and recording functions disabled.

Again, the upper levels of the echelon are caught lying and deceiving, yet they are still left to their own devices to further manipulate and continue misrepresenting facts to the gullible public.

BP Oil Disaster

When news unfolded about the April 20, 2010 BP oil disaster, it went from bad to worse. Instead of immediately mobilizing for action in the face of a massive public health threat, the response was to cover-up, deny and respond with ignorance. After all the public will always believe them, or so they thought.

The Obama administration, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, U.S. Coast Guard commandant admiral Thad Allen, energy and climate-change policy adviser Carol Browner, BP and all their contituents conspired to deliberately mislead the public from the inception of the disaster to present day. What’s worse is they all agreed to further disseminate toxins in the Gulf by spraying 1.8 to 2 million gallons of the neurotoxin Corexit which was exposed by over a hundred scientists, toxicologists and other experts who have unequivocally classified the irresponsible aerial spraying of the chemical dispersant as a large-scale, uncontrolled non-consensual human and environmental experiment is being conducted in the Gulf region.

The media was grossly censoring the extent of the devastation in the Gulf. The poisons–oil and corexit are destined to spread globally, but honest reporting was and still is restricted, and many independent investigators have been arrested. Read 30 Facts Evidencing that The Gulf Oil Crisis Was Planned.

On June 12, 2010, The Institute of Atmospheric Sciences and Climate (ISAC) released “Risk of Global Climate Change By BP Oil Spill“, a document detailing how the BP spill may cause irreparable damage to the Gulf Stream global climate thermoregulation activity. Read Gulf Loop Current Destroyed: May Lead To Shut Down of Atlantic Thermoregulation, Rapid Cooling.

According to Dr. Gianluigi Zangari, an Italian theoretical physicist, and major complex and chaotic systems analyst at the Frascati National Laboratories in Italy, the Loop Current in the Gulf of Mexico has stalled as a consequence of the BP oil spill disaster. Zangari notes that the effects of this stall have also begun to spread to the Gulf Stream. This is because the Loop Current is a crucial element of the Gulf Stream itself and why it is commonly referred to as the “main engine” of the Stream.

The concern now, is whether or not natural processes can re-establish the stalled Loop Current. If not, we could begin to see global crop failures as early as 2011.

Zangari’s assessment is based on daily monitoring of real-time data oceanographic satellite public data feeds called “Real-Time Mesoscale Altimetry” from the Jason, Topex/Poseidon, Geosat, Follow-On, ERS-2 and Envisat satellites.

These satellite feeds are captured and made publicly available by NASA, NOAA and by the Colorado Center for Astrodynamics Research (CCAR) at the University of Colorado at Boulder.

The CCAR is now being accused of scientific fraud and tampering of data directly associated with the events surrounding the Loop Current phenomenon and its current anomalies. Various reporters have spear-headed the charge including radio personality Dr. Bill Deagle who has featured Dr. Zangari on his radio show The Nutrimedical Report where he detailed the events leading up to the destruction of the Loop Current in the Gulf.

Dr. Zangari has stated that he will no longer use CCAR data due to its unreliability.

Organized and Professional Disinformation Operations

Well-funded and highly-organized disinformation operations are in full-swing throughout the internet. From forums to comment boards and even professional websites that have only one purpose: Defame, distract, and destroy the truth.

However organized, the tactics are very predictable in a world filled with lies and half-truths. This, sadly, includes every day news media, one of the worst offenders with respect to being a source of disinformation.

Disinformation campaigns are launched against those seeking to uncover and expose the truth and/or the conspiracy. The H1N1 scandal was a prime example of how hundreds of operations can be launched to sway opinions on the facts. For every fact-based article on the realities of the H1N1 vaccine, there were both very primitive and sophisticated counters on message boards, comment forums and hundreds of alternative and mainstream websites.

Stephen Barrett’s Quackwatch.com and supporters such as skeptic.org.uk and skepticblog.com are examples of websites which promote both synthetic and organic disinformation on almost any topic that does not concur with mainstream thought.

There are specific tactics which disinfo artists tend to apply, as H. Michael Sweeney has brilliantly detailed. Also included with this material are eight common traits of the disinfo artist which may also prove useful in identifying players and motives. The more a particular party fits the traits and is guilty of following the rules, the more likely they are a professional disinfo artist with a vested motive. People can be bought, threatened, or blackmailed into providing disinformation, so even “good guys” can be suspect in many cases.

A rational person participating as one interested in the truth will evaluate that chain of evidence and conclude either that the links are solid and conclusive, that one or more links are weak and need further development before conclusion can be arrived at, or that one or more links can be broken, usually invalidating (but not necessarily so, if parallel links already exist or can be found, or if a particular link was merely supportive, but not in itself key) the argument. The game is played by raising issues which either strengthen or weaken (preferably to the point of breaking) these links. It is the job of a disinfo artist to interfere with these evaluation… to at least make people think the links are weak or broken when, in truth, they are not… or to propose alternative solutions leading away from the truth. Often, by simply impeding and slowing down the process through disinformation tactics, a level of victory is assured because apathy increases with time and rhetoric.

It would seem true in almost every instance, that if one cannot break the chain of evidence for a given solution, revelation of truth has won out. If the chain is broken either a new link must be forged, or a whole new chain developed, or the solution is invalid an a new one must be found… but truth still wins out. There is no shame in being the creator or supporter of a failed solution, chain, or link, if done with honesty in search of the truth. This is the rational approach. While it is understandable that a person can become emotionally involved with a particular side of a given issue, it is really unimportant who wins, as long as truth wins. But the disinfo artist will seek to emotionalize and chastise any failure (real or false claims thereof), and will seek by means of intimidation to prevent discussion in general.

It is the disinfo artist and those who may pull their strings (those who stand to suffer should the crime be solved) MUST seek to prevent rational and complete examination of any chain of evidence which would hang them. Since fact and truth seldom fall on their own, they must be overcome with lies and deceit. Those who are professional in the art of lies and deceit, such as the intelligence community and the professional criminal (often the same people or at least working together), tend to apply fairly well defined and observable tools in this process. However, the public at large is not well armed against such weapons, and is often easily led astray by these time-proven tactics. Remarkably, not even media and law enforcement have NOT BEEN TRAINED to deal with these issues. For the most part, only the players themselves understand the rules of the game.

Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation

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. Become incredulous and indignant.

Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used to show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the ‘How dare you!’ gambit.

3. 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’ from a ‘bunch of kids on the Internet’ which can have no basis in fact.

4. Use a straw man.

Find or create a seeming element of your opponent’s argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.

5. 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.

6. Hit and Run.

In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain critical reasoning — simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent’s viewpoint.

7. Question motives.

Twist or amplify any fact which could be 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.

8. Invoke authority.

Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough ‘jargon’ and ‘minutia’ to illustrate you are ‘one who knows’, and simply say it isn’t so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.

9. Play Dumb.

No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.

10. Associate opponent charges with old news.

A derivative of the straw man — usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with – a kind of investment for the future should the matter not be so easily contained.) Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually then be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues — so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.

11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions.

Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the ‘high road’ and ‘confess’ with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made — but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, ‘just aren’t so.’ Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later, and even publicly ‘call for an end to the nonsense’ because you have already ‘done the right thing.’ Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for ‘coming clean’ and ‘owning up’ to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.

12. Enigmas have no solution.

Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to lose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.

13. Alice in Wonderland Logic.

Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic which forbears any actual material fact.

14. Demand complete solutions.

Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best with issues qualifying for rule 10.

15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions.

This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.

16. Vanish evidence and witnesses.

If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won’t have to address the issue.

17. Change the subject.

Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can ‘argue’ with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.

18. 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.’

19. Ignore facts presented, demand impossible proofs.

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, it may be required that 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.

20. 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.

21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body.

Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed an unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed. Usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim.

22. 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.

23. Create bigger distractions.

If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.

24. Silence critics.

If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by destroying them financially, emotionally, or severely damaging their health.

25. Vanish.

If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen.

Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist

1) Avoidance

They never actually discuss issues head-on or provide constructive input, generally avoiding citation of references or credentials. Rather, they merely imply this, that, and the other. Virtually everything about their presentation implies their authority and expert knowledge in the matter without any further justification for credibility.

2) Selectivity

They tend to pick and choose opponents carefully, either applying the hit-and-run approach against mere commentators supportive of opponents, or focusing heavier attacks on key opponents who are known to directly address issues. Should a commentator become argumentative with any success, the focus will shift to include the commentator as well.

3) Coincidental

They tend to surface suddenly and somewhat coincidentally with a new controversial topic with no clear prior record of participation in general discussions in the particular public arena involved. They likewise tend to vanish once the topic is no longer of general concern. They were likely directed or elected to be there for a reason, and vanish with the reason.

4) Teamwork

They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams. Of course, this can happen naturally in any public forum, but there will likely be an ongoing pattern of frequent exchanges of this sort where professionals are involved. Sometimes one of the players will infiltrate the opponent camp to become a source for straw man or other tactics designed to dilute opponent presentation strength.

5) Anti-conspiratorial

They almost always have disdain for ‘conspiracy theorists’ and, usually, for those who in any way believe JFK was not killed by LHO. Ask yourself why, if they hold such disdain for conspiracy theorists, do they focus on defending a single topic discussed in a News Group (NG) focusing on conspiracies? One might think they would either be trying to make fools of everyone on every topic, or simply ignore the group they hold in such disdain. Or, one might more rightly conclude they have an ulterior motive for their actions in going out of their way to focus as they do.

6) Artificial Emotions

An odd kind of ‘artificial’ emotionalism and an unusually thick skin — an ability to persevere and persist even in the face of overwhelming criticism and unacceptance. This likely stems from intelligence community training that, no matter how condemning the evidence, deny everything, and never become emotionally involved or reactive. The net result for a disinfo artist is that emotions can seem artificial. Most people, if responding in anger, for instance, will express their animosity throughout their rebuttal.

But disinfo types usually have trouble maintaining the ‘image’ and are hot and cold with respect to pretended emotions and their usually more calm or unemotional communications style. It’s just a job, and they often seem unable to ‘act their role in character’ as well in a communications medium as they might be able in a real face-to-face conversation/confrontation.

You might have outright rage and indignation one moment, ho-hum the next, and more anger later — an emotional yo-yo. With respect to being thick-skinned, no amount of criticism will deter them from doing their job, and they will generally continue their old disinfo patterns without any adjustments to criticisms of how obvious it is that they play that game — where a more rational individual who truly cares what others think might seek to improve their communications style, substance, and so forth, or simply give up.

7) Inconsistent

There is also a tendency to make mistakes which betray their true self/motives. This may stem from not really knowing their topic, or it may be somewhat ‘freudian’, so to speak, in that perhaps they really root for the side of truth deep within.

I have noted that often, they will simply cite contradictory information which neutralizes itself and the author. For instance, one such player claimed to be a Navy pilot, but blamed his poor communicating skills (spelling, grammar, incoherent style) on having only a grade-school education. I’m not aware of too many Navy pilots who don’t have a college degree. Another claimed no knowledge of a particular topic/situation but later claimed first-hand knowledge of it.

8) Time Constant

There are three ways this can be seen to work, especially when the government or other empowered player is involved in a cover up operation:

  • ANY NG posting by a targeted proponent for truth can result in an IMMEDIATE response. The government and other empowered players can afford to pay people to sit there and watch for an opportunity to do some damage. SINCE DISINFO IN A NG ONLY WORKS IF THE READER SEES IT – FAST RESPONSE IS CALLED FOR, or the visitor may be swayed towards truth.
  • When dealing in more direct ways with a disinformationalist, such as email, DELAY IS CALLED FOR – there will usually be a minimum of a 48-72 hour delay. This allows a sit-down team discussion on response strategy for best effect, and even enough time to ‘get permission’ or instruction from a formal chain of command.
  • In the NG example 1) above, it will often ALSO be seen that bigger guns are drawn and fired after the same 48-72 hours delay – the team approach in play. This is especially true when the targeted truth seeker or their comments are considered more important with respect to potential to reveal truth. Thus, a serious truth sayer will be attacked twice for the same sin.

Remarkably, even media and law enforcement have NOT BEEN TRAINED to deal with these issues. For the most part, only the players themselves understand the rules of the game.

Marco Torres is a research specialist, writer and consumer advocate for healthy lifestyles. He holds degrees in Public Health and Environmental Science and is a professional speaker on topics such as disease prevention, environmental toxins and health policy.


Reference Sources 89, 152, 170, 183, 260

Source: PreventDisease.

False Freedom and Free Will

Flickr-freedom-Aimee-Heart

Am I as free as I am told?

False Freedom

Napoleon talked about freedom in the following way:

Stupid people, cowardly people, since the continuation of oppression does not give you the necessary energy, since you content yourselves with useless complaints when you could be roaring, since you are millions and you let a dozen children armed with little sticks control you as they wish, obey! Walk and do not worry about your wails and, at least, try to be unhappy if you cannot be free.”

 

During the French Revolution, millions of people died in the name of freedom. They vainly believed that the master was the enemy and that, if they killed him, they would become their own masters. What an illusion! Nowadays, the French must follow more laws than ever before. The country does not even exist anymore; it has become an integral part of the European Union. Amazingly, France is still considered as a free and democratic country. Isn’t it strange.

Two lies are constantly conveyed about freedom. First, it is said that my freedom stops where another person’s freedom starts. That is false, because when another decides to have a bigger freedom than mine, there is no more left for me. Secondly, it is assumed that being free means doing what one wants. That is also false, because the one who wants is the emotional body of desire governed by ego. In both cases, we are talking about false freedom.

In reality, I live in a cage named ego, where, unconsciously, I act either as a subservient white sheep or a rebellious black sheep. The walls of my cell are built out of a stone called survival; the bars at my window are made of a metal named fear. Only I can create my prison; only I can open its door. The key has the shape of two words: free will. I am ready to believe any lie from the authorities in order to keep my rights and privileges – that don’t even exist.

In fact, the State can kill me, put me in prison, seize my property, and even my children. As Étienne de la Boétie once said: “They are tall because we are kneeling down.” Why do I become a prostitute, and perform shameful duties and revolting obligations? Because I am afraid of losing what I have or not having what I want.

Free Will

Free will represents the faculty to make a choice without any other authority beside individual will, outside any influence by solicitation or external constraint. Inside any human being resides this capacity to decide what to do and what not to do. Freedom of will implies freedom of choice. It is only possible in thinking and conscious living beings. The principle of freedom rests on free will and the power of decision, two aspects that are specific to human beings and none other.

Free will is not a right imparted by a constitution or a State, neither is it an attribute given by God or nature. It is inherent to a human being and belongs to her. As its owner, she cannot lose it and nobody can steal it away from her. The DECISION is the corner stone on which rests the transformation from slavery to liberty.

It is at the crossroads of its two fundamental vectors: the choice that can (mind) and the will that wants (emotional/vital). Why do we so often hear “I would like to, but I can’t”, or “yes, baaat…”, or again “I have no choice”? When I pretend that I have no choice, I lower myself to the level of an animal. I choose to behave like one by refusing to take the necessary decision. In fact, I always have a choice! The question to ask is: “Do I want to?” When it is asked, the true answer will come out: “I don’t want to decide because I am afraid of…”

Free will is manifested when the emotional/vital body puts itself in the service of the mind. Only fear can destroy will and stop me from exercising my power of decision. Either I transcend my fear and express my free will, or I let my fear take control of my body, and I submit to the will of another. I have the power to choose. To do so, I must take the decision to use my free will.

Here is a concrete example. When Mado says that she owns no driver’s license, many people tell her: “So, you cannot drive anymore?” She then explains that she uses the car regularly. “How do you do it?” She answers: “I use a very simple, three-step procedure. I put the key in the ignition, I push on the gas pedal, and I turn the wheel.” When I decide to live as a Personocratia*, everything becomes possible.

True Freedom

When Ghis was brought to prison in 2008, she had to wear handcuffs and shackles. She was placed in a locked cage inside a prison truck. Through the window, she could see people outside driving their cars. That is when she realized that they were slaves while she was free. This awareness is what brought her to say what has become one of her favorite quotes: “True freedom is inside!” Yet, she was being treated like an animal going to the slaughterhouse. [read the full account of her story in her book Madame Ghis, Escape in Prison]

How could she say that she was free? Simply, true freedom is an internal state of being that is both durable and without reason. It cannot be affected by external conditions. Ghis was conscious of being the creatrix* of her experience and she remained in peace with her creation.

When I say that I have no choice, I lower myself to the level of animality. In fact, I always have the choice between behaving as an intelligent, unconscious animal, the victim of the State, God, or Nature, or to remember who I am, an unlimited creatrix*, owner of the following attributes: liberty, invincibility, omniscience, pure joy, peace, and love. My prison is internal and the key for the door lies in my hands.

The Solution: The Transfer of Power

True freedom is accessible to me when I make the transfer of power from ego to soul, when I stop to behave out of fear and to be attached to results. I do what my soul tells me, even if I am afraid. I concentrate on the means instead of the end. The internal process that I go through during an experience allows me to grow in consciousness. This accelerates the permeation of spirit inside my body and allows me to dissolve the wall of death covering my cells.

There is a direct relationship between consciousness and action. As soon as I listen to my ego and his unquenchable thirst for security, I remain imprisoned, the slave of needs, habits, desires, beliefs. True freedom and invincibility are the direct result of my listening to my internal authority. This is a new, mysterious path that is deadly for the ego, but it is the only one that does not lead to a dead end. True freedom is not something I can buy; it is an internal state. No law can guarantee it. Nobody can remove it from me. It is already in my possession. All I need to do is “dis-cover” it.

Before a man can become free, he must choose freedom.” – Jeff Knaebel

Authors: Ghis and Mado

Personocratia: word that means “individual governance”. It designates any human being (living and terrestrial) who remembers who she is, Idessa, unlimited creatrix, and who behave as such in daily life.

Creatrix: feminine word for ‘creator’.

This article is offered under Creative Commons license. It’s okay to republish it anywhere as long as attribution bio is included and all links remain intact.