probably one who believes 911 was an inside job, that the kids in Sandy Hook were actors and probably those in Lakeland FL.. not going to give the OP any legitimacy of answering him directly
Printable View
probably one who believes 911 was an inside job, that the kids in Sandy Hook were actors and probably those in Lakeland FL.. not going to give the OP any legitimacy of answering him directly
Oh, I think he may be referring to a number of such matters ... but, given the recent headlines involving the shooting in Florida, I suspect it's another of those odd ducks that think Newtown was made up and that the feds - in an impressive and unprecedented level of coordinated manipulation involving a hundred or more people pretending to be residents, parents, and students - managed to coordinate the whole thing. I just want to see if he'll admit to it or not. I'm guessing not. (After all, aren't we all part of the same grand conspiracy?)
Whether it is legal and, assuming it was legal, whether I would think it was legitimate would depend on exactly what was done and why. But the answer to your second question seems obvious: if it is currently legal for the government to do it and you think it ought not to be then lobby Congress and/or your state legislature to make it illegal.
The use of Deception to present pseudo-events as "real" is indeed "legal". In fact, as explicitly shown, the Justice department employed Deception to the extent that they invented a completely fake shadow persona with the made-up name David P. Khoury. They even went further and created an entirely fake court case.
Time to face facts.
Not only is this practice legal - it is being used.
How far did you go in school? Do you know anything about the science of Deception?
Do you know anything about Counterdeception?
It looks like you suffer from some sort of "follower" syndrome. Maybe you're just in denial about Deception and have absolutely no clue about how it works.
I suggest you study up.
Again - another "follower" who resorts to back-handed ad-hominem attacks.
People like you are serial "believers" who blindly accept what their TV tells them. Even in the face of OBVIOUS lies.
You make a great "follower".
I agree that lobbing Congress and State legislatures is the path to having this type of thing stopped. However, I find it interesting that certain people here are in denial about this. Even when it is quite obvious that Deception and Psychological Operations do exist. And that the US government has invested tremendous resources in developing them.
You have already admitted your ignorance about Deception. You know nothing about the science or implementation - yet you firmly assert things that you apparently "believe". I find that interesting - yet sad. In fact, i pity your child-like intellect.
The fact is that Deception operations exist and are being used to achieve policy objectives.
Frankly, i was expecting much more than the typical idiotic denial response from a forum like this one. Aren't the forum members here supposed to be on a higher level? Obviously not.
How about if you simply exit this thread and focus your attention elsewhere.
Here is a direct question for you: Do you think that the use of Deception and Staged Atrocity Propaganda is a legitimate form of stagecraft that should be tolerated here in the United States?
Yes or no.
Stay off my thread.
OK, for the sake of argument - lets say that the US signed the UN Small Arms Treaty and that provision of that Treaty require the US to take affirmative steps to disarm the population of semi-automatic firearms as a "first step" measure by the year 2020.
Let's say that factions within the US government have decided to use Staged Atrocity Propaganda to achieve that policy goal.
What is your position on the use of Deception against domestic target audiences?
Multiple degrees and credentials including a graduate degree and teaching credential.
In general, sure.Quote:
Do you know anything about the science of Deception?
Do you know anything about Counterdeception?
So, what deception are YOU referring to? Certainly, you didn't post to resurrect an investigation from nearly 4 years ago?
Name one that you believe recently occurred. You seem to be afraid to do that. Why?Quote:
I agree that lobbing Congress and State legislatures is the path to having this type of thing stopped. However, I find it interesting that certain people here are in denial about this. Even when it is quite obvious that Deception and Psychological Operations do exist. And that the US government has invested tremendous resources in developing them.
Perhaps if you stop being cryptic and just spit out the recent event that spurred your recent posting you might dazzle us with your investigative and deductive acumen.Quote:
Frankly, i was expecting much more than the typical idiotic denial response from a forum like this one. Aren't the forum members here supposed to be on a higher level? Obviously not.
So, are you claiming that the Florida shooting did NOT happen? Or, that the shooter was a government actor of some kind? And that shooting and others are merely staged events by actors? And, do you believe that no one really died?Quote:
OK, for the sake of argument - lets say that the US signed the UN Small Arms Treaty and that provision of that Treaty require the US to take affirmative steps to disarm the population of semi-automatic firearms as a "first step" measure by the year 2020.
Let's say that factions within the US government have decided to use Staged Atrocity Propaganda to achieve that policy goal.
That is not a yes or no type question despite your assertion to the contrary. The term “Deception and Staged Atrocity Propaganda” is not one with any precise definition. It is impossible to know from that term exactly what acts are included and what acts are not. You’ve chosen a term that is a bit loaded with a negative connotation, which of course suits your purposes in arguing against the conduct you opppose. But I don’t form opinions based on loaded imprecise terms. As I said before, I would want to know exactly what acts the government did and why to form an opinion of whether it is something that is legitimate for the government to do. We know that all governments lie in some circumstances. And indeed we expect that governments will lie in certain circumstances. Thus it is not a simple black and white issue.
And exactly what acts of “deception” does the government undertake to achieve its goal? Again, details matter. I will note that signing the treaty is not what makes it binding in the U.S. As the Constitution makes clear, the treaty must also be ratified by the Senate before it can take effect. And frankly, the Senate would not today approve entering into such a treaty. Even if it did, any provision in the treaty that conflicts with the Constitution would be invalid. The president and Congress would therefore be foolish indeed to enter into such a treaty without first assuring that enough of the the public would support it so that their re-election chances would not be damaged by it, and without ensuring it would pass Constitutional muster. That’s not to say that presidents and Congress have never done anything foolish; certainly they have.
That's what "I decline to feed the troll" means - is that I intend to stay off your thread.
You're the one who brought me back.
I don't know why two intelligent men like Carl and Tax are bothering with your nonsense.
Because the question itself is not “nonsense.” The belief by some in this thread that his question is founded by belief in government conspiracy theories that have very little evidence to support them is not supported by anything the OP has said and I will not, as others have done, assume what the OP’s beliefs on any conspiracy theory may be. And in any event, those beliefs are not relevant to the questions asked. Even if he/she believes in a conspiracy theory that I and most others might deem wacky that does not mean the underlying question about what is legal for the government to do is itself nonsense. One can surely ask if it would be legal for the government to engage in a particular act even if that person does not believe the government has actually done it. After all, one can ask if rape is illegal without himself being a rapist, right? So I suggest separating out the question being asked from whatever assumptions you have as to the beliefs prompting the question, as the latter isn’t really relevant.