thus, my 'boiler room 101' comment.

quit farting in the elevator, and acting like no one knows who did it.

Who could resist this sophisticated display of chicken feathers?

---

YES, you are a genius, that's their objective -

and here is yours...

---

Proemio, on page 11, way back when -
re: Ed Haas and the 'conversation in Hebrew' (It):

---

The rabbis not only are behind 911, they also are in the process of trying to light the big match, and you DEMAND we obsess about a "he said, she said" situation? Or, which wannabe 'dear leader' should the sheep follow to TheTrueTruth to - where?

It's an unresolvable diversion, while the chicken get twirled with ever greater insane intensity.

It's also no different than discussing 'targeted' FAKOG (fast acting knock-out gas) in an airliner.

You confirm this "unresolvability" by your own 'speculations' as to the motives of the various characters involved. That's all there is, another round of speculation about something unsubstantiated and making no difference whatsoever as to "who dunnit" - for that, there is more than enough to call a Grand Jury and worm up the gallows.

You MUST know all that, or your self-assessed 'stature' is grossly overhyped...

So, which is it: "rabbis' little helper" or "as dumb as vain"?

---

Right - depending on what the meaning of the word THEM is...

---

I will copy and paste the above, every time you attempt to smear, buried in a post to someone else, in the hope that I will miss it. I used "highly respect" in a parody of a situation; a situation where "a great deal of respect" was used. I could have said "madly in love" since a parody is "a form of satire that imitates another work of art in order to ridicule it.

From Page 9:


I cite Arden:


From Page 9:



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 commentatorbecome 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 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.

Well, you're full of shit as usual.

Never, EVER, do I EVER look at porn sites - sorry, just has ZERO interest to me - and yet - AND YET, I have been bombarded with these ads through Anonymouse approximately ONE THIRD OR MORE of the time I use said proxy through this site.

Not only that, but I clear cookies and cache regularly (since I'm a security and privacy nut). And I suspect that others will echo my claim.

So your 'theory' holds ZERO water.



BAG Anonymouse and look for something else. End of story.




(Or, are you looking toward it achieving the same ends that 'Three Stooges' accuse you of?)

AAAAaaaaaaannnnnnd.....just as I expected, the \'site owner\' is attempting to ban my IP.  Why? For telling the truth, as usual....

Sometimes the truth ain\'t pretty. And in THIS case, the truth is that this site owner has SEVERELY compromised principles.

Which is I why I could care LESS about (re-)applying for membership here. Because the Dictator-in-Chief is a sorry and sad victim of False-Pride, lack of scruples, and an asshole attitude.

Three Stooges, make yourselves at home. You fit PERFECTLY here.

Not until you apologize, asshole.

Apologize for what? For letting you go on for days, instead of 'saving' you right away?
If anything, the owner showed undue restraint, tho understandably.

When you showed up again, I thought "cool - maybe we just had a friendly-fire incident"...
I guess I was wrong.

That whole event was a rotten, poultry-stinking setup from the get go.
You where either misled (everyone is at least once) or in on it - I still hope the former.

That's why I said: "crying shame" - a waste...
Whatever; in the end it is/was a relative tempest in a tea pot, and makes no difference to me...

Its a subtle game that is being played by the intell services.

I am not saying that Jewish organized crime was not involved.

I am saying that the intell services are trying to redirect blame away from the White House, Pentagon and its financial backers like Rockefller and Rothschild....and move the blame to outside the country to Mossad and the "State Israel."

This is the game that counter intell is playing.