Originally posted by septic
reply to post by kybertech

---

Good thread, it's interesting to see how folks allegedly from opposite "sides" circle the wagons and agree certain topics are off limits.

“The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum.”
― Noam Chomsky

Originally posted by firelight
reply to post by kybertech

---

Its getting harder and harder for even the hardcore deniers to ignore the obvious. Certain sites and their "usual suspects" will do their best to throw digital sand into the eyes of the curious, but the 911 genie is already out of the bottle. Most of the conspiracy sites are likely operated by our friends at Langley, for our own good of course.

The sites that allow discussion of all topics and aren't afraid of the weak-kneed sacred cows of the controlled sites, are the sites that are blurring the line between conspiracy theory and conspiracy history.

“The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum.”
― Noam Chomsky

www.goodreads.com...

[More evidence that] the 9/11 movement is diverting energy and attention away from far more serious crimes -- and in this case crimes that are quite real and easily demonstrated.

Originally posted by snowcrash911

Originally posted by firelight
reply to post by kybertech

---

Its getting harder and harder for even the hardcore deniers to ignore the obvious. Certain sites and their "usual suspects" will do their best to throw digital sand into the eyes of the curious, but the 911 genie is already out of the bottle. Most of the conspiracy sites are likely operated by our friends at Langley, for our own good of course.

The sites that allow discussion of all topics and aren't afraid of the weak-kneed sacred cows of the controlled sites, are the sites that are blurring the line between conspiracy theory and conspiracy history.

“The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum.”
― Noam Chomsky

www.goodreads.com...

We can all quote Chomsky:

[More evidence that] the 9/11 movement is diverting energy and attention away from far more serious crimes -- and in this case crimes that are quite real and easily demonstrated.

― Noam Chomsky

Oh... And snitchjacketing is merely a way for the feeble-minded to redefine a CIA agent as "somebody who disagrees with me". It feeds into the persecution/victim playing gambit mentioned earlier, meant to support fringe theories in lieu of actual evidence. After all, if something is unwanted and despised it must be true, forgetting that such involuntary ostracism can be explained just as easily by the inherent nuttiness of the something in question.

Testimonials. Testimonials are quotations, in or out of context, especially cited to support or reject a given policy, action, program, or personality. The reputation or the role (expert, respected public figure, etc.) of the individual giving the statement is exploited. The testimonial places the official sanction of a respected person or authority on a propaganda message. This is done in an effort to cause the target audience to identify itself with the authority or to accept the authority's opinions and beliefs as its own. Several types of testimonials are:

Official Sanction. The testimonial authority must have given the endorsement or be clearly on record as having approved the attributed idea, concept, action, or belief.

Four factors are involved:

Accomplishment. People have confidence in an authority who has demonstrated outstanding ability and proficiency in his field.This accomplishment should be related to the subject of the testimonial.
Identification with the target. People have greater confidence in an authority with whom they have a common bond. For example, the soldier more readily trusts an officer with whom he has undergone similar arduous experiences than a civilian authority on military subjects.
Position of authority. The official position of authority may instill confidence in the testimony; i.e., head of state, division commander, etc.
Inanimate objects. Inanimate objects may be used in the testimonial device. In such cases, the propagandist seeks to transfer physical attributes of an inanimate object to the message. The Rock of Gibraltar, for example, is a type of inanimate object associated with steadfast strength.

Personal Sources of Testimonial Authority:

Enemy leaders. The enemy target audience will generally place great value on its high level military leaders as a source of information.
Fellow soldiers. Because of their common experiences, soldiers form a bond of comradeship. As a result, those in the armed forces are inclined to pay close attention to what other soldiers have to say.
Opposing leaders. Testimonials of leaders of the opposing nation are of particular value in messages that outline war aims and objectives for administering the enemy nation after it capitulates.
Famous scholars, writers, and other personalities. Frequently, statements of civilians known to the target as authoritative or famous scholars, writers, scientists, commentators, etc., can be effectively used in propaganda messages.

Nonpersonal Sources of Testimonial Authority:

Institutions, ideologies, national flags, religious, and other nonpersonal sources are often used. The creeds, beliefs, principles, or dogmas of respected authorities or other public figures may make effective propaganda testimonials.

Factors To Be Considered:

Plausibility. The testimonial must be plausible to the target audience. The esteem in which an authority is held by the target audience will not always transfer an implausible testimonial into effective propaganda.

False testimonials. Never use false testimonials. Highly selective testimonials? Yes. Lies (fabrications)? Never. Fabricated (false) testimonials are extremely vulnerable because their lack of authenticity makes them easy to challenge and discredit.