Not that I Like You -
this is the News, this is the news,
{Hiver spinners to activates amoung s the ideas of what a spinning
patterns
is - in the ideas of what it is to see the ideas of what a Trues Darks
Sides
Places is Not yet at alls we woulds say ... not this Guy Yets ickys
Secondaries places is self spining to exrtract it's at IT based patterns
of what
a self contols methods is. Proof - ? What is Really served at the
"LethBridge"
easy Bakeds Portal ovens serving Deli - chickens feet with the nail on?
What?
Oh Religious PD's. "They are it"
o)
center interspacking systems is on lines
interpack Go
Hip , Quest - Jack Dogs knows -
who has 4 Big Huge offices in that Big white House?
Actually it;s a warehouse of immenseness, second to whos - the KK
k anyways? Not that I know thems.
It's their Title
Bone a Petite -
I have a "News File" a File is a serious thing
it's calleds offerinGs, -
I'm Going upstairs now to Find out what it that things wanted(s)
- & I am Taking a wooden spoon
Apparentlyies - it Just had to give me the information to confirm the
sale of concepts - But I had to give something to You.
It was that H. C. Rreligeous? got me to stub my foot hard against the
Tablet coffee Table.
If that was the confirmation -
What was the information
You Have the con
"Sir Arthur C.B.E. Wholeflaffers A.S.A." <science@zzz.com> wrote in
message
news:963d3358-beab-4e3f-8f94-b435bd2f12cb@k9g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
Internet Debunking Agenda by "Harold Ensle" <hensle@ix.netcom.com>
The debunking efforts are directed toward making
the UFO subject non-existent in the perception of
all users. This is accomplished by diminishing all
serious UFO discussion to the smallest amount and
by trying to discrediting any discussion that does
occur.
This is accomplished through a variety of tactics.
If a serious case is discussed, the disinformant
will purposely use specious arguments employing
common fallacies of logic. He will always try and
misdirect the discussion into irrelevant topics.
Once this occurs, the disinformant has already
succeeded. The most effective misdirection is to
turn the discussion to the poster himself. By
ridiculing the poster, he both "discredits" and
diverts at the same time. A person who is defending
himself against accusations is no longer discussing
the UFO evidence.
Who and how many are required to carry it out? The
abilities of the disinformant should include:
1. A general knowledge of the topic.
2. A general knowledge of science
(only enough to sound convincing).
3. A adequate debating ability.
This is all that is required. The disinformant
does not need to have any knowledge of the cover-up,
or be associated with any government organization.
He can simply be hired. However, it would be better,
if the employed disinformant have some association
to the government where he demonstrated loyalty
(e.g. Ex-military, CIA or Ex-CIA bureaucrat etc.).
He would be hired on some pretense, for example,
to combat the unhealthy increase in delusional UFO
believers, who would be less prepared if there was
a real(worldly) threat to national security.
The UFO disinformation effort would involve three
people. Two who concentrate on the UFO related
news groups (most often cross-posted) and one
who is responsible for the team, its goals and
the overall UFO disinformation on all newsgroups.
Each of these three people have opened 3-5
accounts under various invented names, all of
which can be changed depending on the circumstances.
This way, they can avoid overplaying a single ID
and also use the other ID's to add support to a
particular position. They can even respond to
their own posts to obtain a desired effect. The
two man team each maintain a primary ID that is
used to form a common and known presence in the
group.
One of the team I will call the "pointman".
His primary-ID purpose is to establish the standard
level of belief and to respond to a large number
of posts promoting this standard. That is he must
directly support the official line which is:
1. There is no evidence that UFO are alien craft.
2. All observations are the result of:
a. Misidentification of natural phenomena
b. Misidentification of aircraft
c. Hallucination
d. Hoax
3. There is no reason to investigate the phenomenon
4. Anyone who disagrees with these first three
statements is either:
a. Ignorant of the facts (or lack of)
b. Delusional
c. Stupid
d. Tricked by UFOlogists
The other I will call the "player". His primary-ID
purpose is to play various roles (over an extended
period) which can be any mindset from fanatic
skeptic to true believer, though the believer
side is preferred so that a good-cop bad-cop type
interaction can occur. However, the player has
certain rules by which he must abide in the
role as "believer":
1. He can never support a UFO case that has real
evidence (i.e. difficult to debunk)
2. He can never support a UFO case that is perceived
as having public support. (i.e. classified as
a specific need-to-debunk case.)
Other than these limitations, he can essentially
promote himself as a believer in virtually anything.
He probably would not want to be too ridiculous though,
so that his position would not be dismissed out of hand.
The head of the team I will call the "boss". He does
not have a primary ID, but will post under a specific
ID when needed. If the pointman gets tied up too
much with a stubborn believer, the boss will step
in to take over the specific argument so that the
pointman can continue his general debunking duties.
The boss will also do a lot of lurking so to monitor
the overall success of the team.
If the believers do not relent, the misinformants will
get more and more insultive to make the newsgroup
unpalatable. They will not do it with their main ID's
(having already established their characters), but
will post under new ID's with nothing but the rudest
possible insults.
Can we know who specifically these people are, or
at least their current posting ID's? The first rule
is that they would never post under a real name.
Even if they had a home page associated with an
ID, I guarantee that the page would be fake, even
with a fake photo (if included). This is one of
the advantages of newsgroup disinformation. One
can be a complete non-entity.
The easiest one to spot is the pointman, because
he follows the party line as described and uses
the specific debunking methods here described.
He also posts with the greatest frequency of the
three. A year ago the pointman's primary ID
was Twitch.
There are interesting reasons why this ID was
dropped. About March of 2001 after what could
best be described as an audit of his posts, it
was realized that his methods were not sufficient.
He was actually proactively debunking, that is he
would actually introduce new UFO topics to debunk.
The problem with this was, despite his debunking
intentions, he was still stimulating conversation
on the topic. Furthermore, by supplying topics,
there was an implicit admission that there was
something that needed to be explained/debunked.
He was given new directives at that time which were:
1. Never introduce a UFO related topic. The topic
must be introduced by someone else, before any
discussion can occur.
2. Never provide any information related to a UFO
case. Only respond to information provide by others.
3. Never admit the existence of any evidence, no
matter how meagre the evidence might be.
4. Increase the insult level to about 3 times as
much as the "Twitch" level.
5. Use a normal name to increase credibility.
("Twitch" was too similar to "Jerk")
Essentially they wanted a dumbed-down more insultive
version of Twitch. The pointman thus began posting
under the name of Michael Davis.
I do not know who the player was during Twitch's
time. There were so many debunking wierdos then,
it could have been anybody. Certainly Twitch
posted under some other names as well, but it is
hard to catch them since these IDs are used less
frequently. I always suspected Bosch to be Twitch
as well. I mean, he was always following up on
Twitch's posts and pandering to him like Twitch
was some deity. Knowing Twitch's ego, this would
be his second ID of choice. Furthermore, I couldn't
imagine any real person being such a limp noodle.
The boss at that time was posting by the name of
John Case (and several other names). His most
recent ID is Bruce Hutchison.
The player has currently made himself recognizable.
He is none other than our very own E.L.! The key to
seeing this deception is the simple fact that EL
carefully follows the two rules of the player.
In fact, he can be used as a sort of reverse
barometer to know which UFO cases are good. Any
case that EL supports can be guaranteed to be a
lousy case, either a hoax, or virtually without
evidence. Any case that EL complains about can be
guaranteed to be an excellent well-supported case.
Another give-away is the interaction between Davis
and EL. Normally Davis would be insulting EL like
there was no tomorrow, but he seems to give EL a
lot of leeway. EL on the other hand is often
pandering to Davis, even though, he should surely
see or expect Davis's disdain for him because
of his(EL's) "believer POV".
With more than usual "believer" traffic these days,
the disinformants have re-entered with new ID's
contributing nothing but insults. Twitch/Davis has
entered as Pete Charest. There are others that are
also suspicious, but it is not obvious who they
really are.
The bottom line is, if there is nothing to UFO's,
why is there this transparent debunking effort?
Why are these skeptics even here? There was a time
when I was a skeptic. Not only did I not believe
in UFO's, I didn't even care. In those days, I
would have never read anything in this newsgroup
and certainly wouldn't have posted anything.
The only possible answer is, either the "debunkers"
are being paid, or...they have some strange
mental problem which requires them to go find
people to insult. I suspect that there are skeptics
here for both reasons.
H.Ellis Ensle
The following are some insightful replies to the above post:
Anonymous <nobody@hyperreal.pl>
Subject: Re: Usenet UFO Debunking Agenda//Skeptics exposed as
"frauds!"
"Rick Boston" <vze2m22i@verizon.net> wrote:
Great post Art...H.Ellis Ensle is very perceptive in regards
to the dirty tricks disinformants play...
I have often wondered the same thing
The bottom line is, if there is nothing to UFO's, why is there this
transparent debunking effort? Why are these skeptics even here?
If there is nothing to the UFO subject...Why are they
hired by the Gov to spread their lies ???
I have known for quite some time that the evil MD
uses many puppets, and he has been caught doing
so several times...Yep, old Petey Boy is one of his
dirty socks, along with HVAC and others, I don't
bother trying to keep up with all his alter-ID's,
there is no point, If it sounds like MD and walks like
MD, I will treat it like MD, into the circular filing can...
Rick Boston
How about a "get out of jail free" card? Surely 100s of
those hapless millions who are faced with doing time in
big brother's ever-burgeoning corporate gulags would be
happy to so engage in such despicable activities as you
have briefly outlined hereinabove. Did I say 100s? What
about 10s of 1000s to be more realistic. Cut 'em a deal
and they'll do just about anything, no? Desperate men...
Also, why kill "Christians" when you can use them for
slave labor (like Constantine did). Prisoners are good
workers. Make them believe that you want to help them
and you've got loyal soldiers until the day they die.
Helping them might be keeping them alive for another
day. That's what I mean by helping. See what I mean?
After all you saved their life, and so they owe you!
Years shaved off a prison sentence is the same thing.
I mean, put yourself in the position of the oligarchy.
You'll take by *force* whatever you want whenever you
want it. You don't answer to anyone. Everyone answers
to you. Put yourself in that position. You'll use the
cheapest labor you can find. Prisoners are expendable.
Prisoners are a dime a dozen. Many of their prisoners
have white-collar professional backgrounds, computer
hackers, check forgers, stock brokers, you name it.
Any one of these desperados can hit a keyboard for a
few hours a day in exchange for alleged good behavior.
Mayhaps good behavior translates as "debunking quota",
and proficient "debunkobots" get to go home and work.
This would explain a lot of their egregiously filthy
and dishonorable conduct. Their lives depend on it!!
That "Orwellian Nightmare" of Eric Blair sounds like a
walk in the park compared to what this world is become.
But these usenet newsgroups which discuss "para"normal
activities (such discussions of UFOs, ETs, God, Angels,
NDEs, past lives, karma, psychic powers, ghosts, etc.
etc. are normal not "para"normal as debunkers contend)
are open to the public thus that is why the oligarchy
wants to discourage serious readers from reading -and-
posting messages and engaging in substantive dialogue.
The oligarchy wants to subdue anything and anyone who
they don't already control. If they don't control you
then you are speaking your mind freely on these fine
newsgroup forums undaunted by BB's debunking efforts.
Why do you think ETs don't exist or UFOs are "Venus"?
It's because the oligarchy do not control ETs and so
ETs couldn't possibly exist! Do you get the picture?
The oligarchy know ETs exist but they also know that
they're uncontrollable, and so they "debunk" all ETs.
Big brother does not control whatever is para-normal.
That's what "para"-normal really means, anything and
anyone which is not under their control. By contrast,
"normal" means everything/everyone they control, and
if not utterly, then to whatever degree is managable.
I find judicious use of a killfile helps tremendously
by keeping the number of debunker posts to a minimum.
This frees me up to read more of the worthwhile posts
and also to focus more on my own writing and research.
I see very little of the debunkers nowadays. I'm free
to write about "para"-normal subjects without concern
for what the "debunkers" say. To me, they don't exist.
And while a few sockpuppets will pop up from time to
time, they are consigned to my "killfile" bit bucket
as soon as they rear their ugly heads=>* p l o n k *
Enough of these hopeless "debunkers". Back to work...
Re: Internet Debunking Agenda Exposed!!//Do not be misled by
DEBUNKERS!!
- - -
In article <rvaW8.27321$15.9092@www.newsranger.com>, <Unknown> says...
Internet Debunking Agenda by "Harold Ensle"
So what if there are debunkers? Who made you the judge and jury to
decide who
should contribute and who shouldn't or to determine what is "filthy"
and what
isn't. If people do not want to be abused by insults they can stop
responding
to those who insult them. It's as simple as that. People always have a
choice.
They also have the choice whether or not to perpetrate the same
behavior on
their abusers, seek revenge, initiate some other form of interaction,
leave,
etc. Usenet, like the world at large is full of myriad choices.
Anyone with personal experience can not be made to doubt their own
knowing,
especially those who have also been exposed to government
investigators
questioning them about what they have learned and experienced. The
fact that the
government is interested and spends time looking into experiencers'
reports
seems to say they are still attempting to solve the mystery themselves
rather
than, as you say, having the primary aim of "debunking." Even if they
did, who
cares. Does anyone believe the government anymore about anything?
People are potentially just as swayed and misinformed by so-called
expert
"researchers" who think they have all the answers, when actually, what
they have
is their own suppositions based on what they selectively decide is the
"truth"
from the information they have garnered from various sources outside
of any
personal experience of their own. They select information based on
their desire
to support their basic hypothesis, whatever that may be. If the
researcher is
not completely free of all belief in mythology of any kind, their
research is
flawed. Choosing data primarily because it supports myth is
intellectually
inferior, yet it is done all the time;i.e,, volcanic eruptions,
floods, etc seen
as "proof" of biblical or other mythology.
At least in Usenet, there is no resident guru who, having adopted the
role of
"shepherd" (read: cop), decides what will or will not be acceptable
information.
They seek adulation, not discussion. Kind of reminds me of
evangelical pastors
at the pulpit. Sound familiar to you? Presenting information
provided by
others as though it were "truth" for all to unquestioningly accept?
Defending
this so-called "truth" to their dying breath? Kind of like those who
accept
Michael Wolf Kruvant at face value and don't even consider opposing
information
that interferes with their blind *belief* and *faith*
Have you considered that most people are *not* interested in what
experiencers
have to say? They don't want to hear it. Ordinary people, not
"secret agents"
are the best debunkers. They just tell you to shut up. They just
can't
anonymously call you names, though I'm sure some would like to. Aliens
are just
that: Alien. What have people always done with the unfamiliar (hence
possibly
threatening) entity? They kill it. If they don't do it physically,
they do it
psychologically.