Club Conspiracy Forums - Tips For Identifying Disinformation Artists And Forum Disrupters

Who can see themselves here?:-)(scroll down) I see myself too often.

Makow's site deserves better and it's time to clean out the "garbage posters". That is the ones who CONSISTANTLY abuse, fill the front page DELIBERATELY with crap responses and generally make every effort to destroy what little credability this forum has.

I personally have no problem with a bit of abuse in the context of arguing a point. We're all human. But their are posters here who add ZERO to this forum and must be deported to work camps where the truth can set them free.

EVERY time you see the same old same old...REPORT IT! Do NOT engage with the dis-info/forum disrupter. Ignore and report.

My bahviour here when I first got here was atrocious. I am actually embarrassed to read my own early posts. If I was serious about informing others about a conspiracy to enslave my friends and family I would be making EVERY effort to get the info out...NOT destroying the forum and putting off new posters and readers.

Makows site at "save the males" is excellent. Well written, well referenced articles and a man who allows dissent and even abusive responses to his views. That is rare on the net. I have never seen Makow abuse his detractors. Never.

I may not agree with everything Makow writes but pretty close to most of it. I have come to the conclusion it's a "Jewish Plot" and NOT "The Illuminati"...just another level of "useful idiots". Still, Makow is a former "Jew", who like the courageous Benjamin Freedman, is giving us ample warning and reminding us that "Jews" are human too and like anyone on the wrong path should be persuaded by common sense arguments to drop the affiliations with mad Talmudic drivel and Imperialist Zionist One Worlders. Makow reminds me NOT to fall into REAL hate against human beings as duped as the rest of us.

In closing...their are many "middle aged" men who frequent Makows site. They are often in positions of some power in the local community and when they have a look at the forum to see what they might learn they come up against abusive and mocking one liners, hard core pornography and idiots with nothing but photoshopped "Satan" cartoon images and some manic drivel from a bible quote.

Lets ALL raise the bar!

Best to all...even the wreckers. If you are just being silly then i offer the hand of friendship. If you are here deliberatley to wreck the forum or cannot reflect on what your actions are doing then I will spend 10 hours a day here getting rid of you.

Quote:

Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation

1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil
2. Become incredulous and indignant
3. Create rumor mongers
4. Use a straw man
5. Sidetrack opponents w name calling, ridicule
6. Hit and Run
7. Question motives
8. Invoke authority
9. Play Dumb
10. Associate opponent charges with old news
11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions
12. Enigmas have no solution
13. Alice in Wonderland Logic
14. Demand complete solutions
15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions
16. Vanish evidence and witnesses
17. Change the subject
18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad
19. Ignore facts, demand impossible proofs
20. False evidence
21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor
22. Manufacture a new truth
23. Create bigger distractions
24. Silence critics
25. Vanish

Eight Traits of The Disinformationalist

1. Avoidance
2. Selectivity
3. Coincidental
4. Teamwork
5. Anti-conspiratorial
6. Artificial Emotions
7. Inconsistent
8. Newly Discovered: Time Constant

1. The first and foremost sign that an Internet poster is a disinformation artist is abusive language. A shrill tone that attacks a person rather than a theory is a bad sign. So also are terms of abuse for a theory rather than a person. An example: "The nuts who push the lunatic no-757-at-the-Pentagon theory are probably off their meds."

2. Excessive zeal in attempting to take an option off the table is another bad sign. Suppose, for instance, that someone thinks they have identified a particular type of engine at the Pentagon. Attempts to close the discussion without exploring all possible alternatives (retrofitted part, salted evidence, etc.) indicates an agenda of throwing serious researchers off the track.

3. Calls for unity in the Truth Movement as a basis for failure to pursue a line of inquiry are another bad sign. There is no Truth Movement. All sorts of figures waltz into the discussion calling themselves members of the Truth Movement, and then attempt to limit discussion based on a plea for unity. Example: "We can all agree that all three WTC towers were brought down by demolition charges. But any attempt to identify the explosives as possibly nuclear, thermite-thermate, RDX etc. is just divisive. In the interests of unity in the Truth Movement, we must stop speculating about exactly what type of means may have been used to bring down the building." The fallacy of this approach should be apparent. The use of micronukes, for instance, would open up new vistas for investigation. If there is any evidence for such use, attempting to sweep this off the table is a bad sign.

4. Any use of threats is a bad sign. If one's case cannot stand on its own merits, use of threats is a sign of an agenda different from that of a search for the truth.

5. It must be remembered that the stakes in the information game are the highest possible. Our perceptions of the world determine our strategies in dealing with the world. Throughout human civilization, there have been highly successful, integrated programs to make masses of people act contrary to their actual interests through the presentation of false pictures of the world. Those pictures must be reinforced by multiple, apparently independent sources, who in turn expect a share of the profits from the deception. Those profits typically include security from injury, financial profit, sexual domination, status, rank, land, etc. The losing side in the propaganda war, whether they are called heretics or lunatics, may expect precisely the opposite outcome.

6. It must be emphasized that this process can be regarded as a game. It is a deadly serious game, but a game nonetheless. One is not insulting someone if one comes to the conclusion that this person is a conscious disinformation agent. A helpful analogy would be that of a football huddle. If one notices someone with the wrong color jersey in your huddle, the fact must be noted and corrected. Nothing personal. He is just on the wrong team, and our own team needs its privacy and trust to deliberate effectively.

Link To NOLAJBS Forum Post

P.S - I have ZERO contact with Henry Makow and hold ZERO sway with him.