| Welcome to Pumpitout. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| If this is it...Part 2: Cults, cultures, LaRouche and 9/11 | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: May 26 2010, 05:26 PM (288 Views) | |
| Jenny | May 26 2010, 05:26 PM Post #1 |
|
If this is it... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kA8iLIhzJpw “...Girl don't try to make up phony reasons I'd rather leave than never believe...” ~mixed feelings re:911truth Part 2: Cults, cultures, LaRouche and 9/11truth The words cult and culture have a common Latin root, cultus :care, adoration, from colere to cultivate. Their definitions have some over lap: http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/culture Relevant definitions:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cult Relevant definition:
Thus a cult is not necessarily bad—its a synonym for fandom. But of course, thanks to criminal activities of phony religious organizations, the word cult is usually assumed to mean an exploitive organization: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult
Cult can be used fairly to describe any sub-culture ; as a pejorative term, cult can describe a dysfunctional, malignant and authoritarian subculture. This is relevant because there has been an on again off again attempt to paint the 9/11 truth movement as a malignant cult by detractors, particularly self appointed “debunkers”. The rub is—there's a bit of truth to this idea. Manufacturing Culture There's a great book called Manufacturing Consent: http://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499#noop It analyses how news is reported and subtly spun to convince the mainstream culture of what is reasonable and normal. The result being the most outrageous actions come to be reluctantly tolerated with a shrug of “what can you do?” from the majority of progressives. I see it as a type of uber concern trolling: “Yes, its horrible what the CIA and Ollie North might have done, but we can't throw him in prison for the rest of his life and abolish the CIA—be reasonable.” And people are convinced—in spite of glaring evidence of guilt to make “reasonable” concessions, until they've been reasoned out of taking ANY effective action. This works especially if the manipulator plays to the target's sense of fair play, justice, “reason”--all the while manipulating the above in bad faith with the sole goal of evading responsibility. Good, kind, and otherwise intelligent people can fall prey to this tactic. Early in the Bush years, the criticisms of blistering incompetence—coupled with a frustration of a feeble opposition party—led many progressives to be seduced by the sport of Bush Baiting, and chastened by fellow progressives as being inhumane and unnecessarily cruel. Predictably the right pointed to this as a sign progressives were full of hate and rage, and they(Republicans) were victims even though they were in the White House and had a majority. Boo hoo... But the point is, by distracting from the valid criticisms of incompetence and moving the focus to alleged “hate”, not only did progressive discussion become divided, but the real problem of how to confront bewildering incompetence –and putting pressure on Democrat politicians to do their job--fell by the wayside. Don't get me wrong—I see nothing wrong in abusing a political figure who deserves it. It when the activity becomes a substitute for effective action that its gone a bit far—or people have given up on effective action. What does this have to do with the 9/11 truth movement? There are signs the 9/11 truth Movement was being shaped into a culture early on—a culture that would push people into habits of criticism without effective action, as well as other self defeating habits. Why do this? Because cultures are a very effective way of managing people indirectly. Once people accept the culture and identify with it personally, they have automatic initial responses to those who appear to threaten that culture. And if they don't pick up on the threat, real or otherwise, once informed about it, real or otherwise, they are inclined to go with the flow unless they have a good reason not to. Even if they don't agree, they're inclined to not challenge the situation unless they have opposing facts. Even then, they inclined to fade away and not say anything instead of rocking the boat. These people aren't stupid—they're just human. Manufacturing Culture is an effective way of using people's humanity as a weapon of disinformation. There are parallels with Authoritarian cults, but a manufactured culture is not identical. To completely control someone in a cult you have to control their living situation. Only a handful of people involved in the Truth Movement fit this description; I'll cover them later. However many techniques proper cults use to control people or discourse have been observed in 911Truth: [Techniques I've observed or have been documented by others are underlined and/or bold]
Found at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult_checklist What many people miss is these exact same techniques are used by self identified “debunkers” to control members of the ultra rationalist sub-cultures like those found at JREF. Watch this video on cults and judge for yourself how many manipulation techniques you've observed or been exposed to in Truther or Debunker subcultures: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4-Hms7bHqY The biggest difference between dangerous recognized cults and this observed manufactured culture in 911 Truth, while both demonize and vilify people who have left groups with valid criticisms, recognized cults tend to prefer those people were brought back where they can be controlled, the manufactured culture would prefer those people to stay way, presumably because, unlike the proper cult, they know they don't have the resources to completely control ever aspect of people's life. Its safer for people running the show for critics to be kept out, and if possible, not acknowledged. Most of the time this is effective in making the critic give up on the Truth Movement, which by this time has become synonymous with this manipulative artificial culture. In the case of the debunker sympathetic ultra rationalist who has legitimate criticisms of his/her own side, they quickly learn to “not go there” or risk being labelled as a stupid irrational person. Many of us took umbrage at the idea smear against 9/11 truth as a cult—especially considering how dishonest and transparent the attempt was: Dazzled by Disinfo: 911cultwatch.org.uk http://truthaction.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2389 Not only did they link to Nico blog as a top resource(until they were shamed into removing it)--a bizarre thing for a “debunker” operation to do--but makes perfect sense if they were part of the disruption/stalker machine. They also linked to the Screw Loose Change run by two hardcore republicans, with a right-wing agenda clear to anyone who reads their personal blogs. brainster.blogspot.com thechiefbrief.blogspot.com These people are often the first to leap on what the perceive as cult behavior and cult connections, at it is clear in context they mean this as a destructive cult, not a sub-culture. There is in reality no truth to the idea truthers as a group belong to an authoritarian destructive cult—BUT there are indications the small group of disruptors/stalkers might belong to such an organization attempting to manufacture an authoritarian cult-like culture inside the 911 truth movement and the supposed debunkers knew about it all along. Lyndon Larouche and 9/11 Truth What follows will come as a shock to many people, particularly the Webster Tarpley fans, especially fans of his 9/11 theories—they aren't Tarpley theories at all. They're Lyndon Larouche's 9/11 theories. From http://laroucheplanet.info/pmwiki/pmwiki.php?n=Cult.NineEleven
Tarpley has a history of tarting up Larouche drivel into something that passes at first glance as rational:
http://lyndonlarouchewatch.org/larouche-classics.htm A revealing statement[bold mine]:
http://forum.laroucheplanet.info/comments.php?DiscussionID=4&page=12 What does this mean for the 9/11 Truth movement? Several things: 1: Webster Tarpley's theories are Lyndon Larouche's theories 2: any fan of Tarpley's theories are actually fans of Larouche's theory, though they may not know it. 3: by promoting LaRouches 911 theory, Tarpley is almost certainly still part of the of the Lyndon Larouche PAC 4: and by extension has those resources to draw of to help him in his “mission”. 5: If there is organized activity to manipulate the 9/11 truth movement via cult-like manipulations, the Larouch PAC is the most likely source. 6: Endorsing Webster Tarpley is endorsing Lyndon Larouche Some people may not understand why this is a bad thing. “Yeh, the guys a nutter, but maybe he's right about some things.” Maybe, but its not responsible to promote a source that is dishonest and draws its support from a a criminal organization who takes a mafia approach to handling critics: http://www.lyndonlarouchewatch.org/miles.htm http://lyndonlarouche.org/nancy-kissinger.htm http://imagine2050.newcomm.org/2010/02/10/fair-and-lyndon-larouche-of-soul-mates-and-front-groups/ [9/11truth isn't Larouche's only "project". You'll find many instances of racist/offensive material directed at Obama originates with Larouche's—attempts to undermine real critics of Obama?] http://washingtonindependent.com/55566/was-barney-franks-nazi-questioner-a-larouchie Putting the Kennebunkpost Hoax into perspective: www.dailykos.com/story/2007/9/21/143911/917 Just because 9/11 was not done by “the Arabs” does not mean it was done by “the Jews”, or even Israel. And for the rare sincere Truther, who is NOT a-Nazi wannabe and who believes there's value in researching possible Israeli involvement, they'd do themselves a favor to NOT use sources from a political cult leader implicated in murder. Nor would they want to associate themselves with the criminal cult tactics used by fake truthers and debunkers alike in the wake of the Kennebunkport Hoax. In closing be aware: there is a malignant artificial culture infecting the 911 Truth movement. It has been there from almost day one, and overlaps (as much as it can get away with) genuine activism. [/bIt plays off of your justified fears, gains trust appealing to truths you know, takes advantage of your sense of fair play and free speech to try to convince you to discard intellectual discrimination and critical thinking skills. A person started out researching 9/11 and find themselves surrounded by people pushing the New Lizard World Order run by Jews that used Directed energy space beams on 9/11. And no closer to either understanding what happened or a new investigation. It sounds insane, but this happens. Good, kind, and otherwise intelligent people falling prey to ignoring and/ or excusing the worse theories and/or behavior because of their investment in the culture. It takes a serious shock for many of them to snap out of it—unfortunately for many that wake up call comes in the form of vicious cult-like harassment when they refuse to toe the party line agenda, that's more interested in promoting Jews/alien/space beam rubbish than justice for the victims of 9/11. http://coljennysparks.blogspot.com/2010/05/if-this-is-itpart-2-cults-cultures.html Next: If this is it..Part 3: Kennebunkport and WQ2RX: past and future attacks in 9/11Truth Edited by Jenny, May 31 2010, 04:30 PM.
|
 |
 
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
|
|
| « Previous Topic · The Drama Club · Next Topic » |
12:44 PM Jul 13