posted on May, 11 2013 @ 01:24 PM
Originally posted by BenReclused
reply to post by DarKPenguiN
The best way to debunk "conspiracy theories" (whether true or not-) is to take the original event and make ridiculous theories about it which
overshadow the actual event.
Nonsense! Lying is the direct opposite of debunking!
-But this is the tactic. The lie keeps the majority from ever examining the evidence. The "lie" as it were, is the debunking.
Have you read any of the Cointelpro documents? About John Sinclaire, Ann Arbor Michigan, The White panther Party?
Call it what you will but the "lie" either becomes the "truth" (based on acceptance of the majority) OR the lie serves to keep the truth from ever
being accepted by the majority because the lie is so ridiculous.
-Again. If I want to make a "theory" disappear (whether its true or not) the best thing to do isnt to "debunk" but rather "join" the theorist and add
so much misdirection and disinformation (and lies) that the original theory morphs into something which will never be accepted.
Take anything- Heres one: Militias are dangerous and crazy. Since they are essentially NOT really that dangerous (crazy being debatable) the public
would have issues with turning against the Militia. Militia activity in the 1990s was very strong with tons of support- Enter the OK city bombing.
Enter the new leadership splitting the Michigan Militia and publicly proclaiming that they have direct contact with "God" (who talks to them)
-Support dies on the vine.
Not even saying that was a cointelpro Op (again, IDK..) but that would be how they would operate.
Cointelpro JOINED movements and tried to get very high places within those movements so they controlled them rather than "debunked" them.
EDIT: This is honestly one of my biggest red flags against Alex Jones- he has managed to explain Cointelpro (and I see people parrot what he says) in
a way it never was operated. He never mentions the things about "leaders" in the movement nor "radio DJ's" being involved- he seems to think
cointelpro is people who call his show and disagree with him or point out flaws/lies in his World view.
He obviously knows thew term but his explanation has NOTHING to do with the documents which were declassified. By the documents I would have to
suspect Jones rather than people who call in to argue with him.
edit on 11-5-2013 by DarKPenguiN because: (no reason given)