Ludite

Hide All / Expand All

No claims are being made as to the completeness of what this content captures from other venues to provide some context. Moreover, the true value in this collection for my die-hard fans are the comments of mine that are no longer published on Truth & Shadows (for valid and not-disputed reasons). Unfortunately, the links on those comments back to Truth & Shadows won't work as expected.

---

x127 Señor El Once : just the right length

2014-07-31

Dear Mr. Sims,

You wrote to Mr. Ruff:

You might want to shorten your future rants so they aren't quite so boring.

Although Mr. Ruff has not lost any love over me on other things, I thought Mr. Ruff's comment was pretty good and just the right length to get his point across. It demonstrated that he put some thought and effort into it.

Your 144 character Twitter-style tweats shot-gunned all over the discussion, Mr. Sims? Not so much.

At least Mr. Ruff's comment is easy to scroll over and ignore if it really was "quite so boring."

I think your tweats, Mr. Sims, and what substance they might have indicate an inability on your part to engage in conversation in a meaningful way, because you didn't address a single thing that Mr. Ruff wrote. So you pull an inappropriate "Israel-hating card" for which you'll rightly get creamed.

Just a thought.

//

---

x128 Señor El Once : ignore instead of engage

2014-07-31

Dear Mr. Rogue,

I object to your objection and to the manner of your engagement. Why don't you just ignore instead of engage with your bullying? Were it as bad as you claim, all you've done is feed it and provided more opportunity for a response. Ignoring it, on the other hand, could turn it into a one-hit-wonder (which the height of your aptly named "No Soul" never reached) or a hit-and-run.

Mr. TM had a point that you didn't address his re-posting of someone else's collection with anything specific that was wrong or out-of-place with the quotations. Which one in particular do you disagree with?

Ah, yes... you have a problem with his "preaching?" Remove the beam from thine own eye before trying to tackle the splinter in his, because your frequent pings-of-life-signs or pings-to-crank-new-diversional-discussions plastered from forum to forum when conversations have petered out ain't nothing more than quotable quotes from others (poorly formatted and sourced) but are habitually grinded into nearly all threads despite their marginal applicability. Tis but the same.

Keep that in mind as you endeavor to ignore and not respond to those you despise.

//

---

x129 Señor El Once : wear a mask

2014-08-01

With 75 total comments at time of writing, Mr. Rogue's contribution makes up 41% of the total. Ergo, he has ample bandwidth already stored up in this thread TO IGNORE AND NOT RESPOND to those he despises. No sense stoking the flame wars.

Mr. Rogue wrote in response to Mr. TM:

And, as far as referring to me as "the shadow", I will note that anyone who is paying attention here knows that I am Willy Whitten.

Mr. Rogue is a fool.

On multiple levels. But the one highlighted here is his internet presence and the ill-informed standards he flouts. A glorious cheat.

We shouldn't take Mr. Rogue's word at face value. Indeed, my dealings with him have uncovered many statements that have unraveled as being dishonest.

To further prove who he is, Mr. Rogue should publish his physical address, IP address, social security number, driver's license number, AARP membership number, bank account numbers (with PINs), etc. so some internet fuk can run a background and credit check are truly verify that this particular "back-stop identity" (with middle initial between a "C" and an "E") is truly a real person.

From the last Batman movie:

You wear a mask, not for yourself, but to protect those you love.

A mother still alive whose mailing address and telephone number are given out for packages? Two female and one male adult offspring?

I bet that Mr. Rogue doesn't give a fook about any of them (and most likely vice versa given his overt misogyny), which is why he is so eager to whip out his limp "Willy" and inappropriately badgers others to live online by his nudist standards.

Too bad it ain't and has never been prudent to do so on the internet, for reasons parallel to the above twirking.

And by the same token it is you and your hyperventilating "champion" who are the snidely hypocritical covert entities.

Hypocritical about what?

This is the internet, old man. We all should be "covert entities" until need-to-know or trust might dictate otherwise. No sense making it easier for the misguided & vindicative sociopaths and psychopaths. Those with a badge and a warrant can find us quickly enough, and the NSA will have our words collected, organized, and categorized in time for our trials.

Other than the above points, it should be pointed out that I'm not anonymous on the internet. Those with even middling IT skills can locate me, down to GPS coordinates for a drone strike while I slumber. I've never fixed the weak firewall when it was first exploited, because ultimately I do stand behind my words.

Had Mr. Rogue been more observant when I commissioned the review of Dr. Wood's book, the accompanying invoice that he tossed unread probably outed my exact identity. I've even told others, including Dr. Fetzer.

I haven't told Mr. Rogue, because he can't be trusted with such information. Hell, he doesn't even value his own personal information and doesn't appreciate how his actions could impact others close to him. It's a cheat that he even plays this name-game.

//

---

x131 T&S Regulars : aspire to a higher standard of discourse

2014-08-04

{2014-08-01: With 75 total comments, Mr. Rogue's contribution makes up 41% of the total.
2014-08-05: With 192 total comments, Mr. Rogue's contribution makes up 44.8% of the total.}

ruffadam
August 4, 2014 at 9:47 am

Well sadly for me and I am sure for others as well this excellent discussion has been effectively derailed. I have my personal opinions about who and what is responsible for this but suffice it to say that many of us stuck to on topic posts and then a few of us did not and here we are now with yet another excellent discussion thwarted. I take personal offense each and every time this is done and I find T+S to be a constant target for Sunstein's minions.

I find some of the regulars here to be completely unable to offer anything but the most brief and superficial comments that are on topic while at the same time being capable of incredibly long obsessive compulsive off topic rants usually involving personal squabbles. I find this derailing activity to be disgusting and insulting and damaging to the issues under consideration here. To be quite frank about it if the topic is say (How to raise a healthy apple tree) I do not really want to discuss the Ukrainian crisis or who was the best musician in the 60s. I want to discuss apple trees and how to grow the best most productive ones.

I just find it hard to believe that all the derailing that is done here is simply accidental. In fact I do not believe it is accidental at all. I just don't know what else to say than I am hostile to anyone who trolls or derails topics here, I think those who do so are despicable or possibly just mentally ill. I just don't "get it" why some individuals seem genetically unable to admit when they are wrong and change their opinions as a result of the revelation. In my opinion that particular failing that many humans have (the inability to admit mistakes) is the most damaging and costly trait there is.

I am at a complete loss as to how to deal with this persistent problem without resorting to reprehensible action such as outright censorship. I have tried to ignore the offenders to the best of my ability but they persist as only an obsessive compulsive could day after day, thread after thread, year after year. I have come to the conclusion that some people are just mentally ill and cannot stop and never will stop. People such as Brian Good for example. The only thing I can see that might help is for a blog to be set up where each person had an (IGNORE) button which they could use as they saw fit so that those they choose to ignore would have their comments blocked from their view. I don't know if such a blog option even exists but if not someone should invent it for sure.

I am sick of polluting my mind and wasting my time reading useless garbage. Perhaps the ultimate goal of the trolls and operatives is for people like myself to quit posting on blogs at all so they can by default take over. In my opinion something close to that took place already with the 9/11 conference call. The list of participants tells the whole story. Anyway I just don't have the time or energy to deal with this type of thing on an ongoing basis and it is clear that the way I am handling it now isn't working so I am going back to the drawing board and will find for myself a better way to handle trolls and scoundrels. This new method will have to be as stress free for me as possible and will require as little of my time as possible. When I do come back here I will approach this problem in an entirely new way. For now I am tired of the BS and I am cutting my losses and my stress and taking a break.

I will still faithfully read each and every article you put out Craig because I find your work to be excellent and worthy of attention.

Craig McKee
August 4, 2014 at 6:00 pm

Sometimes I feel like a school teacher who gives out a test and then slips out for a cigarette, only to return and find that the class has turned into Lord of the Flies. You guys are all poking at each other and provoking each other as if you want the discussion to careen into a ditch. I don't think that you all really do want that, but that's what it looks like sometimes. And that's what happens.

I feel like I am damned if I do and damned if I don't. If I watch the comment threads like a hawk to catch any digressions or name-calling at the time they happen then I can't get any other work done! And if I leave the discussion alone, then all hell breaks loose. Ruffadam is right.

Also, I'm all for clever turns of phrase, but there are times when I think that the appearance of cleverness is more important to some people than simple statements of opinion are. Competing sarcasm is boring and tedious, and it drives readers and potential commenters away.

Sometimes one of you says something off topic. Okay, that's not ideal but I purposely give leeway because lots of interesting things can come up. But then someone else will attack back on the basis that the thread has been derailed. This then provokes several more sniping attacks back and forth. James, your comeback on the Obama thing was a good example. You could have ignored it or you could have defended Obama, if that's what you wanted to do.

Hybridrogue1, you called James a backstabbing prick RIGHT AFTER I TOLD PEOPLE TO STOP NAME CALLING! WTF?? I don't care if you think he did it first. Jesus. And if a name is used and I don't see it right away then it looks like I condone it!

It seems that I will have to make a list of hard and fast rules. And then if any of those rules are flagrantly broken I'll have to start suspending people's posting privileges. The best discussions on this blog are when several people are involved (not just two or three), and lots of good information is put on the table. We have that sometimes but it never seems to last.


hybridrogue1
August 4, 2014 at 7:23 pm

Yes sir Craig, you are absolutely right, I was wrong to use such language. I did the blog, and myself a disfavor in doing so.

I should know better than to allow my buttons to be pushed like that.
Saying anymore would seem empty excuses at this point.
\\][//


James Hufferd
August 4, 2014 at 7:04 pm

I tried to pull out and beg off last night before the filth bombs I knew were coming really started to fall, but you saw well that worked out — bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb in message after message after message while I continued to beg mercy! Mercy!!

Craig McKee
August 4, 2014 at 8:51 pm

So let's all aspire to a higher standard of discourse even if someone else falls short of that. We can strongly argue our positions without getting personal. Because when we get personal the real discussion ends. I appreciate everyone's co-operation.


hybridrogue1
August 4, 2014 at 10:46 pm

"Your greatest teacher is your last mistake."
~someone wise
\\][//

---

x132 Señor El Once : jejune first

2014-08-06

Who were the jejune first to "squeal and oink" [not my words] at Mr. Tamborine Man's comments? One participant is already just shy of 50% of the total comments.

FTR, I didn't find Mr. TM's comments offensive or distracting, any more than I found Mr. Adam Syed's comments about the Holocaust as such. Both are marginally related and interesting. Mr. TM should have offered links to where he posted this before, because T&S should not have been his first & last place for an address of such magnitude "to all world leaders" and "to more and more people around the globe." Once Mr. TM did his one hit and if he wasn't going to stay on topic, he should run and not engage those who "squeal and oink". Mission would be accomplished without negative turns.

However, the "squealing and oinking" over-reaction I did find offensive and distracting. Just opened the door for further distractions for Mr. Adam Ruff and others to bemoan.

Because they were devoid of his original thought and seemed to have been posted for nefarious reasons (e.g., to get the copy-and-pasted brilliance to reflect onto himself, to balance bad behavior, to dominate and steer the discussion), Mr. Rogue's many "innocuous" re-postings of (one example) Global Research articles, etc. are pretty annoying. Nobody here needs Mr. Rogue to act like an RSS feed or subscription service to point out what Professor Rogue finds interesting at the moment. Geesh. Talk about a cheat.

//

23 total comments
11 from HR

---

x133 hybridrogue1 & ruffadam : squeal and oink

2014-08-06

hybridrogue1
August 6, 2014 at 3:29 pm

Ahh.. so the double slasher arrives, even without a due minimum token comment to pave his way, to squeal and oink about Mr Ruff and I; always the main targets for his attacks.

He has made it more than obvious this past half year or so, that he really has no interest in the topics being discussed here on T&S – his ONLY agenda is to slash and burn every thread that comes along here in his futile attempt to defame me and despoil my presence.

\\][//

ruffadam
August 6, 2014 at 3:29 pm

You know SEO your comment is completely off topic as well. Your criticism of HR1 is off topic simply because his comments you criticize are in fact on topic! You don't like him or me or our comments and that is fine and well but keep it to yourself because it is OFF TOPIC! I am not interested in your obsessive vendetta against HR1 or myself. I want to talk about the topic Craig posted and most of us were talking about it and having a good discussion until TM came in and pooped all over it. Now you come in and spread the poop even more and try to play like you are some kind of good guy? You are not a good guy you are intentionally disrupting the discussion. Stick your vendetta where the sun doesn't shine, I don't care what your opinion of HR1 or myself is. I get it and so does everyone else, you don't like HR1 or me, you do not need to say it again, we will not forget.

Your posts do not address the topic. Let me say that again, you do not address the topic. Your very few on topic comments are very brief and superficial and are designed to segue into your personal rants about how much you hate HR1 or myself. If you cannot discuss the topic then you should not be here, simple as that. DAMN I wish there was an IGNORE button.

---

x134 Señor El Once : tie-in's to the topic

2014-08-06

Mr. Adam Ruff writes:

You know SEO your comment is completely off topic as well.

Not really. It had tie-in's to Mr. Syed's and Mr. TM's comments. It wasn't top-level (e.g., new off-topic point), but was nested under and in response to what already was in the forum.

Your criticism of HR1 is off topic simply because his comments you criticize are in fact on topic!

His first comment to Mr. TM was on topic, but ~not~ his attitude, ~not~ his language, and ~not~ the follow-up exchanges. He would have done well to STFU. Please be more observant. Classic example of a disinfo troll purposely spoiling the comments section.

You bemoaned in a August 4, 2014 at 9:47 am comment:

I take personal offense each and every time this is done and I find T+S to be a constant target for Sunstein's minions... I find this derailing activity to be disgusting and insulting and damaging to the issues under consideration here... I just find it hard to believe that all the derailing that is done here is simply accidental. In fact I do not believe it is accidental at all.

The case has already been presented regarding Mr. TM's actions possibly fitting this mold. But unobservant Mr. Ruff craftily overlooks the Bic-lighter actions of his little buddy, Mr. Rogue, in igniting the flames. Oh, no, in Mr. Ruff's book, Mr. Rogue is totally awesome MVP, can do no wrong, and doesn't fit the Cinderella slippers of a Sunstein minion. No. Can't be. Mr. Rogue would never deliberately torpedo a discussion.

Yet he has. Every discussion that Mr. McKee has ever closed had Mr. Rogue as an active, flame-throwing participant.

I have come to the conclusion that some people are just mentally ill and cannot stop and never will stop.

Indeed. Count the comments in this thread. Subscribe to Mr. Rogue's blog. Be more observant.

When I do come back here I will approach this problem in an entirely new way. For now I am tired of the BS and I am cutting my losses and my stress and taking a break.

So much for cutting losses, stress, and taking a break. Hypocrite.

Back to Mr. Ruff's last posting:

You don't like [Mr. Rogue] or me or our comments and that is fine and well but keep it to yourself because it is OFF TOPIC!

More failures in observation, Mr. Ruff. Please point out where I expressed a dislike of either of you two in my comment. What I dislike are your hypocritical statements and diversionary over-reactions. And I'll call you out on it every time I see it, because I value truth and honesty above all else.

I am not interested in your obsessive vendetta against HR1 or myself.

Is that so? Where's the beef? You've even made repeated promises the last couple of years (a) that you don't read my comments and (b) that you ignore my comments. Was this because you're too clueless to make a decent argument to counter rationally my position? Me thinks so. You've been a hypocritical blowhard from the onset. Where's your big fat IGNORE and not rising to the occassion?

I want to talk about the topic Craig posted and most of us were talking about it and having a good discussion until TM came in and pooped all over it.

And you two diversionary WWF tag-teamers have to go and step in it and track it all over the place well before I make my posting. Show some restraint, my good man.

Now you come in and spread the poop even more and try to play like you are some kind of good guy?

Yep, I'm the good guy. As for the poop spreading, your comment come before mine. Check the soles of your shoes before smelling mine.

I don't care what your opinion of HR1 or myself is.

Prove it. Ignore me.

I get it and so does everyone else, you don't like HR1 or me, you do not need to say it again, we will not forget.

As has been pointed out again and again, you ~don't~ get it. I've made favorable comments about certain things you've written. When I've objected, I've made it known.

What I don't like is your hypocrisy, Mr. Ruff.

What I ~get~ from your hyprocrisy, Mr. Ruff, is that your comments need to be aimed at yourself. Practice what you preach.

FTR, I follow the discussions. I take in the information. I contemplate. I don't need to chime in with back-slapping "me-too-isms" and "I agree" on every single thread within every single forum. I probably know as much or more about the holocaust and Nazi practices than Mr. Syed, although from a different perspective. [I'm fluent in German and have lived there as an adult.]

And when the topic is on the fringes of either my knowledge or my interests, I don't feel compelled to muscle my way in and slap down my opinions. You'll know when I disagree.

Show some fortitude, Mr. Ruff, and IGNORE this.

As for ego-centric, sociopathic Mr. Rogue? Notice the framing: "Oh, woes me?!! I badger everyone and when someone objects, I'm the target! I'm the victim being defamed. It's all about me. Me. Me. Me. Look at my posting count!"

Used to be that outside my nookiedoo hobby horse topic, I disagreed with less than 10% of what Mr. Rogue posted (not necessary wrote). Thanks to his disagreeable "squealing and oinking" [not my words], that margin of disagreement has doubled or tripled.

//

---

x135 Señor El Once : holocaust narrative

2014-08-06

Mr. Adam Ruff writes:

[W]hy is it a crime to dispute the holocaust narrative in Germany...? Think about that for a moment Germany is threatening you with violence (arrest and imprisonment) if you express an opinion in opposition to their narrative.

The victors imposed this as such into the re-written German constitution as well as the German public's "Geist". They shamed the people with the hyped, exaggerated, and even falsified elements of the holocaust propaganda. They've had their noses rubbed in for several generations now, so that they won't forget. Hollywood makes it so they won't forget... the story that the victors want told.

And when inconsistencies in the holocaust narrative are pointed out, this gets labeled "holocaust denying" instead of what it is: "questioning holocaust exaggerations."

The Germans were so fundamentally broken down in spirit, power, and infrastructure (with occupying armies right up until the Berlin Wall came down in 1989), fixing the exaggerations to the atrocities was out of scope particularly in light of the many bad things ~all~ observed at one point or another in that era. Kind of like, "in for a penny, in for a pound."

Guilty of X, for sure. Guilty of X+Y? If you, the victor, say so. Punishment and mental torment for X is already all consuming. Sure, add some real or fiction Y to it. Doesn't change anything to the level of our shame.

With 20/20 hindsight [helped by the JFK, RFK, MLK, Gulf of Tonkin, 9/11], we can see who benefits by tacking on fiction Y to the crimes and why those in power wouldn't want it questioned. Exposed as fiction undermines the case for the state of Israel after WWII.

//

---

x136 Señor El Once : two links for free

2014-08-07

Dear Mr. Tamborine Man, you wrote:

The two posts above are from the OP in my thread at P4T.

Every comment is entitled to two links or URLs for free, e.g., sneaking under the radar for what gets automatically relegated to the moderation queue for Mr. McKee to approve.

Sorry for my snippiness, but saying -- with the wave of a hand and two abbreviations "OP" and "P4T" that later-day lurker readers may not even be familiar with and must somehow translate into a more proper website name and corresponding URL -- where your words were previously posted and "read by tens of thousands" does not cut it, particularly when you were asked for a link above and then still managed to fumble your response to that without anything clickable or enterable into my browser's address field. This is the second time around.

Dropping the URL into your comment will get hyperlinked automatically when published. The structure <a ref="myURL">myLinkText</a> is standard HTML and gives a secondary playing field to any discussion that can be independent of the textual, primary level. If anything, the formatting with square brackets [...] that you are familiar with on P4T is the bastardization of HTML. Search & replace the square brackets [...] with angle brackets <...>, and most likely you'll re-create the formatting from P4T in your posting here.

Ergo, you can follow the advice of everyone else on this forum by writing something textually that is completely and entirely on the topic while at the same time putting an advertising link around <a ref="myURL">innocuous text</a> to deliver your (spiritual) message.

Win-Win.

Word of advice, if the URL is IMPORTANT to the action desired from the reader or to substantiating something, it can be sometimes best to write it as text rather than formatted into a link around other text. Why? Because an inattentive copy-and-paste won't loose the URL; the URL is exposed as text and is retained even if the hyperlinking and other formatting are stripped.

//

---

x137 T&S Regulars : practically 50% of the commentary

2014-08-06

59 thoughts
HR: 25 (42.4%)
++++++


hybridrogue1
August 6, 2014 at 3:43 pm

My GOD!!! I have practically 50% of the commentary on the thread!!

What criminality to be so engaged.
\\][//


ruffadam
August 6, 2014 at 4:09 pm

Here let me up my total comments in order to tip the balance of power in my favor! Clearly if I post more than HR1 I become the most powerful right? I am the new leader!

ruffadam
August 6, 2014 at 4:55 pm

You have just made my case for me SEO. Thank you. May I lastly point out that your lame attempt to paint your comments as being on topic are laughable. You have virtually nothing to say that is on topic ever. You are intentionally disrupting threads.

hybridrogue1
August 6, 2014 at 4:55 pm

Again more slashing by the double slasher entity and only rhetorical jabberwacky attempting to call it topical. It is not.

As far as this thread goes, "squealing and oinking" are indeed your words now, and you can eat them.
\\][//

hybridrogue1
August 6, 2014 at 6:44 pm

No one here mentioned your name, or alluded to you in any manner until you came on slashing, disrupting, and tilting yet again one more thread on its head.
And now you want to try to associate such dripping vile techniques as something Faulkner would endorse? You attempt to side with peacemakers just after a series of unprovoked attacks?

It reminds me of the state of "Israel"…

I find you again to be utterly hypocritical deep in the center of your very being.
\\][//

ruffadam
August 6, 2014 at 10:21 pm

Your comments above and this one are OFF TOPIC!

ruffadam
August 6, 2014 at 10:34 pm

They will find me to be a rabid defender of free speech if they somehow succeed in getting such laws on the books here in America. The more the system tries to control us and steer us in the direction they want the more people like me resist and rebel. I honestly hope they try to pass such laws here and I hope they crack down very hard with flagrant police state tactics. I hope they do it because by doing it they create the rebellion that desperately needs to happen. As princess Lea said in Star Wars "the more you tighten your grip the more systems will slip through your fingers". I say bring on martial law now today! Put storm troopers in the streets and have them smash skulls with billy clubs! Arrest activists now and throw them into camps or hell just have summary executions in the streets. Nothing will speed up the demise of the NWO more than that. Bring it on!


hybridrogue1
August 6, 2014 at 10:36 pm

Yes Tamborine you certainly are confused. You don't grasp the context of what is and is not "religious", you do not understand that you are speaking from a theological perspective with your commentary.
You cannot distinguish between the sacred and the secular. This is why you can claim with a straight face that, "there was no ‘religion' at all in any of the two posts you refer to."

It is simple Tamborine, preaching the commandments of "God" is evangelical religious language, prima facea.

Whether Craig will take the time to explain something so bleeding obvious to you I have no idea. But most of us with a lick of lucidity understand these things perfectly well.

And don't you dare come back with your bullshit that this comment is an "attack", I am simply trying to explain something to you (again!) that you seem incapable of grasping. Frustration follows in your wake like the blood from a whaling ship.
\\][//



hybridrogue1
August 6, 2014 at 10:46 pm

I shall repeat here something I just posted on my blog, with the language changed to make it applicable here:
. . . . . . . . . .
My blog, HR1blog, must not be considered a franchise of Truth and Shadows, and quotes must not be lifted from this site as if they were part of Truth and Shadows.

The context and essence of the two sites are different. My site is my personal journal, even though open to public purview. But it is not a discussion site for the general public, but only for those who have previously vetted as personal friends.

Again, those who quote me from HR1blog are responsible for spreading the word written there. The onus and responsibility for such propagation is entirely in the hands of those who do so.
\\][//



hybridrogue1
August 6, 2014 at 10:57 pm

It seems as if the Final Battle approaches quickly Mr Ruff.

I am certainly not anxious, it will likely begin with an economic collapse leading to desperation, leaving most of Amerika in the situation that Gaza has been in for so many years.

I think the film TERMINATOR might be a metaphor to what is coming.
\\][//


ruffadam
August 7, 2014 at 1:02 am

Oh please TM, asking you to stay on topic is not censorship in any way shape or form and that you would suggest that Craig is flirting with 911blogger style censorship is outrageous and also for me very insightful as to your true motives. As far as I can tell you have been allowed to say what you want and I know for a fact I have been allowed to say what I want so where is the specter of censorship here at T+S? No what you are bothered by is that with my free speech here I called you out for preaching to us, which you most certainly did do. I also pointed out that it was completely off topic, which it most certainly was. Now Craig asked you to stay on topic, which you most certainly should do, and you play the victim of censorship card! So, much like the Israeli's play the victim card, you do so, when in reality you, like the Israeli's, are the one that is doing wrong. Bravo!

How about you just stay on topic and quit being a troll trying to disrupt the discussion?


ruffadam
August 7, 2014 at 1:25 am

Perhaps so. Maybe it will be a "Terminator" type scenario or my version of that being more like "The Road Warrior". It may just turn out like the Bundy ranch standoff though where Americans and people of all nations rise up in incredible numbers and say NO MORE! Maybe just maybe we will get together and bounce these sociopaths out of all leadership positions altogether. Perhaps the worst of them will be put on trial and hanged for crimes against humanity. I have a few I would nominate for that starting with Netanyahu and Obama and then moving on to the Bush family, Darth Cheney, Donald Scumsfeld, Condasleezy Rice, the Clintons, and how about also in the first batch of trials we throw in Brzezinski, Kissinger, and a selection of Rockefellers?

hybridrogue1
August 7, 2014 at 10:49 am

And now this Mr McKee,

I was duly cited and reprimanded for using the rather tepid "insult" of the word "twit" just a thread ago.

Yet I get framed thus by SEO:
"..ego-centric, sociopathic Mr. Rogue.."

Is it because SEO is civil and formal enough to use "Mr" before my name that lets him off the hook for the myriad of obvious violations of not only decor, but direct orders not to mention his rocking horse topic?

Civil Society & Polite Eloquent Discourse As Baby-Talk

Plush toy dialog, the seduction of the Anchor Man, the saccharine scripts of politicians, and "everything's better with blue bonnet on it". Conditioning and programming with the carrot… the pretense there really is no stick, that is a "false memory" because everything is beautiful in "the land of the free" where the barkers smile and hand out free colored balloons. Where the rich and famous invite you into their house to show you they are just ‘everyday people', while Oprah balloons, and shrinks, and balloons and shrinks like the phases of the moon. Yes it's candy mountain from sea to shining sea…where seldom is heard a discouraging word, and the skies are not cloudy all day, and turnips taste like cherry pie, and you're the apple of the Presidents eye, and Jesus loves you this you know, cuz the bible tells you so.

Well, THAT is all bullshit. It's "goochie goochie goo" – it's baby talk.
\\][//


+++++++++++

hybridrogue1
August 7, 2014 at 10:02 pm

Alright then, I need no explanations, nor apologies, nor do I offer any.

But I do know this, as far as all this flame-war bullshit that goes on like a carousel on the threads of T&S, I assert that I am no more aggressive or pugnacious than anyone else commenting there. I am indeed more frank and upfront with my critiques, meaning more honest and less ‘covert aggressive' [often misframed as "passive aggressive"].

Those who get the vapors over "language" are generally "shocked" theatrically, and react theatrically as well – it becomes bullshit burlesque dealing with such clowns, and their pretense to "civility", which is based primarily in sophistry and candy coated rhetoric, and hiding behind happy faces.

Some of these people are simply not very smart. Some obviously pros that have a job to do. Some are thin skinned and need assertiveness training to differentiate between aggression and assertion.

I do not claim to be perfect, nor an angel. But I can detect disingenuous bullshit when I come across it. And it is the disingenuous bullshitters who have become my main detractors on T&S.

So onward we go as it is I suppose. Let us all try to be more honest here with one another, aye?

\\][//



Tamborine man
August 7, 2014 at 11:51 pm

My dear SEO,

i completely get your point, and it's definitely appreciated. I thank you for giving me this opportunity to clarify my reasons for not supplying the URL referred to.

First of all, i don't really like the whole idea of "self-promotion" and that's the main reason i didn't add the URL to the post.
Secondly, the thread has reached 47 pages, and i can't imagine anybody would have the patience to go through them all, unless of course a person reads post #11 and get "hooked" by the subject matter, and thus wants to verify the ‘proof' for themselves!
Thirdly, to be able to confirm the proof, the person must be able to distinguish between spirituality and "the religious", as these two concepts are worlds and worlds apart. (Thanks again, SEO for alluding to this with your bracket "(spiritual)", which was most welcome and clearly, vividly, shows your power of perception to all good people here on this blog)!

I would like to add the following, hoping not to get into too much trouble because of it!
I did not achieve this proof all by myself, naturally. I was blessed with some brilliant collaborators whom i want to mention here, as without their contributions i would never have been able to sit here and write this particular post: First, Leonardo da Vinci – (Vitruvian man). Michael Mayers – (Atalanta Fugiens 1617). Le Cor busier – (Modulor). Pit Hein – (Supercirle/Superellipse). The latter, the most important, so get to know him, please!
There were others, but not known to the wider public, so shall not be mentioned here!

In passing let me just add that i normally use URL links where ever needed. F. ex. i used two links to "VeteransForTruth" in the previous thread, but i don't think anyone took any notice of that?

Cheers mate

Tamborine man
August 8, 2014 at 12:37 am

Oops! Pressed the reply button too quick!
Here's the link to the forum itself:

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?act=idx

Cheers

hybridrogue1
August 8, 2014 at 7:18 am

First of all we should note that Tamborine's commentary at P4T is placed there in this category:

Pilots For 9/11 Truth Forum > Study > Religion

"I was trying to show that ‘Life' continues after ‘death', but no one was particularly interested."~Tamborine man
______________________________________________
This comment would seem to belie the claims of vast acceptance and embrace of Tamborines efforts that he boasts to here.

Those wishing to look into the source of Tamborine's inspiration can find it here:
Toward the Light (in Danish, Vandrer mod Lyset!) was first published in Copenhagen, Denmark in 1920 by the Danish author Michael Agerskov.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toward_the_Light
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
My only commentary is that it seems that everyone but Tamborine recognize that the issues he raises are religious and theological. These issues have been debated and wars fought between ‘true believers' of various sides century after century.
I would add that the source is a letter written to the Danish churches in the 1920s – which should be another clue to the lucid mind that this issue has to do with religion.

It is not my purpose to dispel Tamborine's beliefs, nor to dispute the issues of atonement. I simply wish to get across that most people would consider his message evangelical and religious, and he should accept this and take the advice to cease and desist his evangelism as requested.
\\][//

---

x138 Señor El Once : rhetorical jabberwacky

2014-08-08

Dear Mr. Tamborine Man,

Your link doesn't take me anywhere specific at P4T. Didn't take me into a relevant forum, let alone to a specific post. From the clues given by Mr. Rogue, I located a posting of yours from Jul 21 2014, 12:44 AM. Up in the right-hand corner is a posting number hyperlinked to its permanent URL. Right-clicking on it can give you the options to copy the URL (or bookmark) to use for this purposes. For example:

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=19879&view=findpost&p=10813096

Today's edition of "rhetorical jabberwacky" from this "double slasher" is that it isn't a link to an off-site location that could be construed as "slashing, disrupting, and tilting", but what a responding participant drags back and makes an issue of. ~That~ is where the derailing can happen if it isn't on-topic.

And when it gets dragged back, hopefully it can be placed at the highest applicable level in the discussion tree, which probably shouldn't be the top-level, because obviously and logically this drag back is in reference to something already posted.

When a participant drags something back and places it at the top-most level, as Mr. Rogue did on August 8, 2014 at 7:18 am, he is effectively declaring that he wants to discuss it, really bad.

In this particular case, given that the religious or spiritual related comments are officially deemed off-topic in this thread, then (to ourselves) we need to ask why? Why the chumming of the waters? Why the baiting? And wasn't this particular participant earlier pointing his fingers at others for the off-topic distractions that occurred... And now here he is, cheating and setting a trap?

Notice the positioning of the bait, neatly nestled within a string of top-level and innocuous comments -- all made by the very same participant (44.6% of the total) -- meant to chum the waters of discussion, to make the participant appear reasonable [but obsessive] and/or to get the brilliance of the copy-and-pasted words of others to reflect onto the RSS-acting participant:

August 6, 2014 at 8:54 pm
August 6, 2014 at 9:34 pm
August 7, 2014 at 6:16 am
August 7, 2014 at 12:56 pm
August 7, 2014 at 10:02 pm [self promotion, justification]
August 8, 2014 at 7:18 am [chumming the waters]
August 8, 2014 at 8:17 am

Mr. Rogue's August 8, 2014 at 7:18 am comment clearly indicates a familiarity with the destination URL. Why didn't Mr. Rogue make his comment to Mr. Tamborine Man there, at that destination URL, when clearly Mr. Rogue understood that such discussion here on that theme isn't permitted? Oh, and Mr. Rogue from 2014-08-07:

"There will be no truce. If there is any justice, I will have [SEO's] head on a platter, and his ass out the door."

Lots of words can describe this behavior. For consistency's sake, I'll use the word: "cheat."

Let's re-purpose Mr. Adam Ruff's words from August 6, 2014 at 4:55 pm and aim them at Mr. Rogue:

You have just made my case [...]. Thank you. May I lastly point out that your lame attempt to paint your comments as being on topic are laughable. You have virtually nothing to say that is on topic ever. You are intentionally disrupting threads.

Moreover, I am just totally in the vapors, shocked and outraged beyond measure in an overly dramatic and theatrical fashion that Mr. Rogue would have the gall to write:

Those who get the vapors over "language" are generally "shocked" theatrically, and react theatrically as well – it becomes bullshit burlesque dealing with such clowns, and their pretense to "civility", which is based primarily in sophistry and candy coated rhetoric, and hiding behind happy faces.

The "pretense of civility", "taking the highroad", or so-called "goochie goochie goo" or "baby talk" are totally awesome discussion tactics that I highly recommend to all other discussion participants!!!

Let's try a Gedankenexperiment. Think up a clever and/or biting adjective to put before someone's name: [-YourCleverAdjective-]. Think up a string of them, even [-YourCleverStringOfBitingAdjectives-]. Top that with a witty sarcastic noun, [-YourSarcasticNoun-]. Now compare the difference between:

Arrgh [-YourCleverAdjective-] [-YourDebateOpponentsAlias-]! You are such a [-YourCleverStringOfBitingAdjectives-] [-YourSarcasticNoun-]! Blah, blah, blah.

Versus:

Dear Mr. [-YourDebateOpponentsAlias-]. Blah, blah, blah.

Dear Ms. [-YourDebateOpponentsAlias-]. Blah, blah, blah.

Dear Dr. [-YourDebateOpponentsAlias-]. Blah, blah, blah.

Which saluatation does not distract or undermine from the substance of the "Blah, blah, blah?" Which saluation could get your comment tossed into the bit bucket? Which salutation indicates an earnest effort? Which saluation flaunts the rules of decorum and could get you banned? [Joke] Which salutation models Mr. James Bond's nemesis best and offers due respect to Agent 007 before totally annihillating him? [/Joke]

Some of these people are simply not very smart. Some obviously pros that have a job to do. Some are thin skinned and need assertiveness training to differentiate between aggression and assertion.

Some of the "pros" would include: judges, legislators, news anchors, reporters, editors, professors, teachers, ...

Does that assertiveness training to differentiate between aggression and assertion include "hypnotic suggestion?"

I [, Mr. Rogue,] assert that I am no more aggressive or pugnacious than anyone else commenting there.

At 44.6% the total, the assertiveness levels are high. As for aggressiveness,...

"slashing", "rhetorical jabberwacky", "squealing and oinking" (on- & off-list), "dripping vile techniques", ... "snake piss," "I hardly badger everyone," "I can detect disingenuous bullshit when I come across it."

Learned from years of bullshitting himself.

And it is the disingenuous bullshitters who have become my main detractors on T&S.

Mr. Rogue stole my line in reference to him! Had Mr. Rogue not been proven -- again and again -- disingenuous in his objectivity, research, and analysis particularly in attacking subjects about which he knew jack-squat at the onset yet still attacked from his strong-hold of ignorance and even after research resulting in no acknowledgment of truths, why he and I would be the best of friends by now! A prime example of his "disingenuous bullshit" is the comments ratio or posting frequency, where his output tips the scales in demonstrating (a) unclarity in thought, (b) lack of patience, (c)_ emotions overrunning rational thought, (d) debate techniques designed to crank the carousel of flame wars.

Let us all try to be more honest here with one another, aye?

Honesty and not being blatant hypocrites.

//

---

x139 T&S Regulars : off-topic topic

2014-08-08

Total 101
RA: 30
HR: 39
SEO: 5




ruffadam
2014-08-08 at 9:54 pm

Where are Tamborine man and Senor El Once's posts dealing with the topic? Have they nothing to say about the topic? They seem to have a lot to say about other members of this blog and about unrelated issues such as religion but very little to say about the article itself or about Gaza. Kind of odd don't you think?
Reply

hybridrogue1
2014-08-08 10:49 pm

Adam, if we hear from SEO again it will most likely be a bean count (grin), and he can say that it is topical because it is directed at the participants here; whether that makes any rational sense or not.
\\][//


ruffadam
2014-08-09 at 1:57 am

I have been upping my post count lately because I am trying to supplant you HR1. Everyone knows that it is the quantity of the posts that matters not the quality! If I had to beat the quality of your posts I would not stand much of a chance to supplant you but since all I have to do is beat you on quantity I am going to give it a real try. When I pass you do I get a prize or something?

ruffadam
2014-08-09 at 1:59 am

By way of deception we make war.

ruffadam
2014-08-09 at 2:03 am

The tools once used to manipulate the masses (namely the corporate media) are failing. The fact of the matter is the corporate whore media is largely controlled by Zionist supremacists. It is a great thing for the world that their control of all media is in free fall.


ruffadam
2014-08-09 at 2:11 am

Too bad neither SEO's comments or yours are on topic huh? Perhaps that is what you really admire is SEO's ability to derail threads? Perhaps you are attempting to emulate him/her/it?

ruffadam
2014-08-09 at 2:31 am

I will say it plainly that SEO is intentionally disrupting threads and is extremely hostile but in a passive aggressive way to hide behind a very thin facade of civility. You on the other hand HR1 are very up front with your thoughts and arguments and in my opinion much more honorable for doing so. I much prefer to be told to my face that I am wrong than to have an obsessive compulsive stalker skulking around waiting to stab me in the back and hide it behind a thin facade of false civility. Your posts are usually on topic and on target while his/her/its posts are little more than lip service to the topic and a manifesto length passive aggressive tirade against you or sometimes me.



ruffadam
2014-08-09 at 2:43 am

{mcb: This is reference to Mr. Tamborine Man's comments with spiritual undertones.}

Your post was a sermon, a religious sermon, there is no doubt about it. I was the one who called you out about it being preaching. It was preaching and it was religious in nature and nothing you said above changes that not even your repeated insistence that it wasn't religious. You remind me of the cops at Waco who kept saying over the loud speaker that the Davidians should come out and they would not be harmed while Flir video images captured the feds shooting them as they tried to escape the burning building. Give it a rest man it was a sermon, a preachy sermon that had nothing to do with the topic. No matter how many times you claim it was not religious IT WAS.

ruffadam
2014-08-09 at 2:45 am

Why is it that you cannot comment on the topic?

hybridrogue1
2014-08-09 at 5:24 am

"Had hybridrogue been an honest person, he would have understood that since this letter was rejected by the whole Danish church, it could not possibly have contained anything to do with the "religious", the "theological" or the "evangelical", but must have been something completely contrary –" ~Tamborine

Martin Luther was rejected by the established church of his time. Do you doubt that Martin Luther was a religious actor Tamborine?

Do you have any arguments that make any sense at all? In my experiences here with you I have yet to come across anything you have ever said that makes sense – on any subject.

Your pathetic and pitiful excuses just make it worse for you Tamborine.
\\][//


Tamborine man
2014-08-11 at 12:45 am

I submitted four posts that exclusively dealt with the concepts of ‘Justice' and ‘injustice', and which also clearly indicated where the source to ‘Justice' originates from.
This was met with a bucket load of shit, vomit, bile, rancour and vitriol.

I shall just quote here two examples of the many that so bitterly were rejected, and would like to ask Charles Aulds, Greg Bacon and M.K. Styllinski if they too could have reacted in the same way to the following; addressed to all law makers on Earth:

"…….
Prepare your laws as though you yourselves should be judged by each and every statute, for then will your laws be just. ….

….Yea, truly, I say unto you: your obligations are many, and your responsibility is great; I ask you therefore carefully to consider that which I have said unto you. For you shall know that if out of selfishness or faintness of heart you give not care unto the poor, unto the suffering and to the unfortunate, then shall you surely taste the want and misery of the homeless and the poor in your coming lives upon the Earth until you have learned to take pity on your unfortunate fellow human beings.
……."

As a result of these foul vapours coming my way, i claimed to have proven that ALL human beings survive ‘death', and that ‘reincarnation' is therefore an absolute reality impossible to be refuted.
This is f. ex. been borne out by the fact that the human being consist of 3 aspects, namely the Physical, the Astral and the Spiritual.
Naturally, is it only the physical aspect which is the subject to decomposition and thus ‘death' by whatever means.

Neither the Astral nor the Spiritual aspects are subjugated to this process.
In short, your Thought and your Will, your free Will, your gathered memories, your gathered skills, abilities and talents, as well as your developing individuality and personality, neither of all of this consist of particles big enough to become obliterated by the power called ‘Darkness', but instead completely escapes its destructive influence.
These spiritual aspects above that makes up the true parts of your whole being, consists of finer and finer particles which functions with much higher vibrations and wavelengths than the corporeal; and for this very fact is therefore not subjected to ‘decay' or other means of destruction like fire or explosions, as these particles have no "space-filling" properties in the physical world.
So thus, the physical body is nothing more than just a "vehicle" for your Spiritual self.

You could test your own "consciousness", by trying to answer this simple question:
How can "memories", in themselves, be subjected to ‘decay'?

Accepting that no human being actually ‘dies', would obviously put a totally new spin on the "madness" and the "insanity" of any kind of warfare, and that's probably why this notion is so forcefully rejected by a couple of people in this thread!
We should bear in mind that both these persons advocate "forceful" resistance to the ‘evils' of this world, where, of course, even more innocent women and children will again meet their ‘death'. Note please, that this would be ‘their' understanding of the word "compassion", but definitely not mine!

Cheers


Charles Aulds
2014-08-11 at 5:16 am

I certainly invite ALL readers of this threat (those few who remain) to judge me by my own words, and I invite comparisons of my own posts with this one, which was obviously emotional and not, therefore, based on untainted reason.

Tamborine man
2014-08-11 at 9:54 am

Charles Aulds,
it seems that you have totally misunderstood the reasons for my post.
You wrote earlier:

"We do not excuse our own actions by pointing to the actions of others. Others are not responsible for how we behave; we can never blame our own behavior on others; that is a basic principle of honor, and a long-standing principle of manhood."

I thought the above to be a wonderful piece of writing, and why i so enthusiastically endorse it. And that is why i included your name together with Greg Bacon and M.K. Styllinski, whose posts i also found to be very lucid and well written.

And that's why i thought it would probably have been impossible for you 3 people to respond in the same way as hybridrogue and ruffadam normally do their ‘stuff'!

Sorry i didn't spell this out more clearly.

Cheers

ruffadam
2014-08-11 at 7:43 am

I would appreciate it if you would not attempt to put words in my mouth by suggesting that I advocate "forceful" resistance to the evils of the world. I do not advocate such and never have, I advocate self defense and I advocate non violent non cooperation with "evil" period. Please mention me by name next time when you are talking about me, it makes it so much clearer for the readers.

I also wonder why it is Tamborine man that you are completely unable to speak to the topic of this thread? All you seem to be able to post about are your concepts of spirituality which would be better suited to a religious discussion forum. You are preaching here and it is unwelcome because it distracts from the discussion of the topic. I personally find what you say to be mostly incoherent ramblings and I would not turn to you as any sort of authority on spiritual matters.

If we wanted to discuss life after death, reincarnation, the soul living on forever, and other religious topics we would go to a forum for those topics and discuss it there.

If David Icke came onto this forum I am sure he would be capable of speaking to the topic and would do it in a very coherent way while still getting his decidedly spiritual perspective across quite well. That would be welcomed, I am sure, by all here and we would all probably learn something from him. You on the other hand are NOT discussing the topic AT ALL. You are simply launching into incoherent sermons about your views of cosmic Karma and eternal life which I for one am not interested in. For spiritual lessons I turn to teachers worthy of my time and attention. I go to them, they do not come to me.

Why don't you start a blog about these spiritual topics if you want to discuss them so much? This blog is meant for discussing in this case Craig McKee's article entitled: (Dismantle Gaza and relocate ‘non-belligerent Arabs': Israel Institute for Strategic Studies.)

Why is it you can't discuss that topic Tamborine man? Why are you having so much difficulty talking about that?

hybridrogue1
2014-08-11 at 8:14 am

It comes to me as no surprise that Tamborine cannot distinguish between his ranting religious sermons and the calm and rational expression of personal convictions offered by Charles Aulds.

Now to Tamborine's characterization of the criticisms he received, he says:

–"This was met with a bucket load of shit, vomit, bile, rancour and vitriol."

This is hysterical nonsense. Several of us pointed out that this blog is not the Church of Truth and Shadows, nor the Tabernacle of Twinkle-Toed Fairies.

And now despite Mr McKee telling Tamborine in pointed and specific language not to post religious messages on this blog, here we have a repeat of the exact same thing yet again. This indicates to me, and I am sure to others here, that Tamborine has no respect for Mr McKee, his blog, nor the readership and other commentators here.

I think that Mr Aulds' response to Tamborine explains the distinction I speak of here. And if Tamborine is baffled by our acceptance of Mr Aulds' comments, while we complained about his own; this is hardly surprising; as Tamborine seems to be perpetually in a state of mental, and or emotional confusion. The fact that he disputes that he is talking blatant religion can only be interpreted as a state of delusional denial and deep conceptual error.
\\][//

---

x140 Señor El Once : topic to the fourth level discussion

2014-08-11 at 2:15 pm

Technically, Mr. Adam Ruff's 2014-08-09 at 2:11 am was published ~before~ my 2014-08-08 at 5:48 pm comment, because an accidental third URL sent my comment into the moderation queue over the weekend.

Contrary to Mr. Ruff's wishful and ignornant predictions, my actual comment was on topic to the fourth level discussion about links.

Curious, my unpublished comment [2014-08-08 at 5:48 pm] accurately predicted how Mr. Rogue's 2014-08-08 at 7:18 am chumming of the waters would lead to a topic distraction that came into fruition on 2014-08-09 at 1:30 am.

As if a baton were handed off between agents, Mr. Ruff writes on 2014-08-06 at 4:09 pm :

Here let me up my total comments in order to tip the balance of power in my favor! Clearly if I post more than HR1 I become the most powerful right? I am the new leader!

And on 2014-08-09 at 1:57 am:

I have been upping my post count lately because I am trying to supplant you HR1. Everyone knows that it is the quantity of the posts that matters not the quality!

At the time of writing, there are 101 comments: Mr. Ruff had 30, Mr. Rogue 39, and I had 5 (not including the unpublished comment).

Mr. Ruff boldly writes on 2014-08-09 at 2:11 am

Too bad neither SEO's comments or yours are on topic huh? Perhaps that is what you really admire is SEO's ability to derail threads? Perhaps you are attempting to emulate him/her/it?

And then chums the waters again immediately (2014-08-09 at 2:31 am) with:

I will say it plainly that SEO is intentionally disrupting threads...

Mr. Ruff evidently is never going to live down be called a "hypocrite," because he offers so much fodder to the label. It doesn't take much Ctrl+F (on-page searches) with a given participant's alias to quickly see badgering disruption to the threads by the baton-passing conspirators.

Here is a bit of an oxy-moron by a proud high school graduate:

[SEO] is extremely hostile but in a passive aggressive way to hide behind a very thin facade of civility.

Yes, indeed, I use a thin facade of civility to package arguments that destroy my debate opponents' points, arguments, and cases, thus in that sense only could possibly deemed "extremely hostile" to their blatant and willful errors.

Stroking something, Mr. Ruff writes:

... [Mr. Rogue,] Your posts are usually on topic and on target...

The credits leading to Mr. Ruff's high school diploma did not include any classes that could give him an appreciation of statistical analysis, let alone the chops to carry something like that out, even on the small subset of comments here. What significant percentage of Mr. Rogue's postings are nothing more than a copy-and-pasting cheat of somebody else's words to obtain "reflected brilliance"? [I give Mr. Rogue kudos for developing the habit, after much badgering, of crediting his sources better. Still has room for improvement.] So when Mr. Ruff kisses Mr. Rogue's hiney with:

You on the other hand HR1 are very up front with your thoughts and arguments and in my opinion much more honorable for doing so.

How much of the above impression comes from Mr. Rogue's actual words or from words borrowed from others?

In one of his bait-setting traps, Mr. Ruff writes at 2014-08-08 at 9:54 pm:

Where are Tamborine man and Senor El Once's posts dealing with the topic?

When Mr. Ruff demonstrates his abilities for "irrational argument" and makes good on his promises to "ignore and not read comments" from me, that's when we get ignorant statements like above. Already addressed on 2014-08-06 at 4:30 pm:

... I don't need to chime in with back-slapping "me-too-isms" and "I agree" on every single thread within every single forum... [W]hen the topic is on the fringes of either my knowledge or my interests, I don't feel compelled to muscle my way in and slap down my opinions. You'll know when I disagree. ... What I dislike are your hypocritical statements and diversionary over-reactions.

Mr. Ruff's doesn't disappoint us with his hypocrisy 2014-08-08 at 9:54 pm:

... seem to have a lot to say about other members of this blog and about unrelated issues such as religion but very little to say about the article itself or about Gaza. Kind of odd don't you think?

Mr. Ruff wrote 2014-08-09 at 1:59 am

By way of deception we make war.

I see.

Mr. Ruff wrote on 2014-08-09 at 2:11 am:

Perhaps that is what you [Mr. Tamborine Man] really admire is SEO's ability to derail threads? Perhaps you are attempting to emulate him/her/it?

Let's go with "~it~" for its ability to make Mr. Ruff look ridiculous for even suggesting it.

Maybe the admiration is Mr. Ruff for willy... Mr. Ruff tries to emulate him both in actually derailing and then in dropping hypnotic suggestion that someone else derailed it!

Through Mr. Ruff's increased spamming of this forum to 30%, Mr. Rogue gets his spam reduced from 44.6% down to 39%. The two of them alone now command 69% of the comments, nearly four times the combined but failing efforts of Mr. Tamborine Man (at 13%) and SEO (at 6%). We humbly acknowledge the supremacy of Mr. Ruff and Mr. Rogue to derail the thread.

The theme of baiting the forum gets a third ping, also from Mr. Ruff but much earlier 2014-08-06 at 10:34 pm:

... I honestly hope they try to pass such laws here and I hope they crack down very hard with flagrant police state tactics. I hope they do it because by doing it they create the rebellion that desperately needs to happen. ... I say bring on martial law now today! Put storm troopers in the streets and have them smash skulls with billy clubs! ... Bring it on!

Had about as much to do with Gaza as Mr. TM's spirituality postings.

And were Mr. Ruff to justify his statements further, the counter from Mr. TM would be that Mr. Ruff's wishful rebellious thinking is but one way to confront (and assist) evil, but a different tactic would be found in understanding Mr. TM's themes.

Here's the analogy. When playing the game of Monopoly, the participant who is the banker almost always cheats, temptation being so great. This might inspire participants like Mr. Ruff to violently overturn the game board and send pieces to the far-flung corners of the room, some possibly never to be found.

Mr. TM, on the other hand, makes participants cognizant of the fact that they are just playing a game that has no power over their real, spiritual selves. This gives real power in being able to stand up and walk away from it.

//

---

x141 Señor El Once : hope they crack down very hard with flagrant police state tactics

2014-08-11

Mr. Ruff wrote to Mr. TM on 2014-08-11 at 7:43 am:

I would appreciate it if you would not attempt to put words in my mouth by suggesting that I advocate "forceful" resistance to the evils of the world. I do not advocate such and never have, I advocate self defense and I advocate non violent non cooperation with "evil" period.

Hmmm. Yet within this very thread on 2014-08-06 at 10:34 pm, the very same Mr. Ruff wrote:

... I honestly hope they try to pass such laws here and I hope they crack down very hard with flagrant police state tactics. I hope they do it because by doing it they create the rebellion that desperately needs to happen... I say bring on martial law now today! Put storm troopers in the streets and have them smash skulls with billy clubs! Arrest activists now and throw them into camps or hell just have summary executions in the streets... Bring it on!

So the record shows that Mr. Ruff does not "advocate 'forceful' resistance to the evils of the world." Instead, he seems to be advocating for liberty-limiting laws, "flagrant police state tactics", "martial law now today," and "storm troopers in the streets smashing skills with billy clubs." Which team is Mr. Ruff playing for?

Mr. Ruff seems to be cheering the arrival of NWO, because he seems to think that once its deprivations are upon us, then will rise up the resistance to overthrow it. [Or the NWO will be implemented.]

Mr. Ruff seems to think that having the storm trooper's boots upon our throats will only then inspire us to speak up and resist.

Indeed. This is quite different than resistance. It is playing into the hands of NWO. Bad strategy.

And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like... if, during periods of mass arrests, ... people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?
~Alexander Solzhenitsyn

Mr. Ruff's efforts to supplant Mr. Rogue as the most prolific contributor is still 9 comments shy of matching Mr. Rogue and fulfilling his 2014-08-07 at 4:09 pm boasts of upping his "total comments to tip the balance of power in [his] favor." The two of them nonetheless command 69% of the discussion.

Rather ironic then that Mr. Ruff would accuse me with my pitiful five comments: "SEO is intentionally disrupting threads." Thread to thread, I simply don't have the numbers... Or Mr. Ruff's drive (2014-08-09 at 1:57 am):

I have been upping my post count lately because I am trying to supplant you HR1. Everyone knows that it is the quantity of the posts that matters not the quality!

Gives new meaning to Mr. Ruff's comment from 2014-08-09 at 1:59 am:

By way of deception we make war.

//

---

x142 T&S Tag-Team : irrelevant bullshit

2014-08-12

hybridrogue1
August 11, 2014 at 8:15 pm

Do you really think anyone cares about your irrelevant bullshit Beancounter?
\\][//

ruffadam
August 11, 2014 at 8:46 pm

SEO you are an obsessive compulsive stalker and your post has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE TOPIC!

Furthermore your pseudo analysis skills have once again failed you in your attempts to discredit me with my own words. I find it comical almost that you do not seem to understand simple points. For example when I said "bring on the NWO" you do not seem to grasp the point I was making that the worse they get the faster the resistance grows as a natural consequence. In other words they are naturally creating their own demise. That point in no way advocates violence but you just do not "get it" apparently. I think your misunderstanding stems from your obsessive compulsion to attack HR1 and myself. As to my point about upping my post count let me explain that was sarcasm aimed at you that you obviously missed. Your constant OCD driven counting of HR1 posts was getting so old and tired that I thought I would sarcastically highlight how stupid it was.

Now I have opened the door for even more of your off topic ranting and raving for which I apologize to the forum in advance. I just think it is shameful that you absolutely refuse to discuss the topic at hand and instead focus all of your obsessive attention on attacking HR1 and myself. You are a stalker in every bad and scary sense of the term. TALK ABOUT THE TOPIC for a change why don't you?


hybridrogue1
August 11, 2014 at 9:05 pm

Yup Mr Ruff,

The Beancounters act has been a bore for a long time – It is getting so old, it's like watching reruns of stupid old soap operas, soap commercials and all.
\\][//

hybridrogue1
August 11, 2014 at 10:21 pm

I think that Mr Once has been stuck to the doorknob the last four days…
{grin}…he finally got it open!
\\][//



ruffadam
August 12, 2014 at 1:51 am

Even the quotes of mine, which you took totally out of context by the way, do NOT advocate violence in any way shape or form. I was simply theorizing about how the coming police state and resulting revolution might play itself out. You seem to be strangely unable to understand context or inference in my and HR1's comments. In any case it does not matter to me one bit if you think I contradict myself or not I am confident that most readers understand my meaning.

I really am tired of you continually going off topic Tamborine Man, it is disrespectful to Craig and to us all. I sense in you the same obsessive compulsion to keep doing this though that I find in SEO. I have resigned myself to the fact that neither you or SEO are going to stop actively trying to disrupt threads. I have also resigned myself to the fact that you are both OCD to the point that you will literally NEVER stop doing it. So by all means spam the shit out of this forum with more of your off topic garbage and I will decide for myself if I want to tolerate it or not. Right now the ONLY reason I tolerate it is because I enjoy reading Craig's excellent articles and some of the superb commentary about them.
Reply
hybridrogue1
August 12, 2014 at 4:49 am

May Tamborine man soon rest in peace, and leave us in peace.
Regardless and either way, be gone damned spot, BE GONE!
\\][//

---

x143 Señor El Once : proper discussion behavior

2014-08-15

Some confusion exists about proper discussion behavior, whereby some have been going ape-shit over what they consider to be off-topic and derailing, somewhat purposely ignorant of the facts (a) that it takes at least two to tango and (b) that their ape-shit reactions were far more derailing than the individual off-topic comments were if simply left alone.

Discussions in online forums are like ping-pong tournaments. When a ball is served over the net, one can hit the ball back or let it go. If the served ball were headed out of bounds, letting it go is the wisest course of action. Sure, although the last one hitting the ball has the last word, readers serious about the subject subconsciously award points for those that remain in bounds.

Whether or not a served ball would have been out of bounds, if you return the serve, the opportunity is created for a valley and for the ball to be hit right back again. And again. And again.

It doesn't matter whether or not your returns are "smashing" and energetically punctuated with curses about "lame serves, wimpy hits, top-spin, back-spin, side-spin," etc. because this enables the back-and-forth volley to continue, possibly much deeper into topics "undesired".

Letting the ball go is how you stop the volley, at the cost of losing the last word. Leaving the ping-pong table (e.g., thread, discussion topic) for another is how you stop it. Leaving the tournament (e.g., T&S forum) altogether is how you stop it for yourself permanently.

Participants should note that they get to choose the tables that they want to play at. They are under no obligation to play concurrent games with any and all who lob a ball across the net.

Furthermore, it should be noted that energetic volleys starting from level 2+ do not necessarily derail discussions, even if they are off-topic. Why? Because when played by fair and objective players, theoretically a new level 1 comment can bring the overall forum's discussion back on-topic.

"Keep in mind that when someone goes off topic and seems to be provoking a thread-derailing argument, they succeed much more readily when everyone jumps in and argues with them."~Craig McKee 2014-08-13

What derails the entire forum are these three elements together:
(1) The topic is out-of-bounds.
(2) One or more participants continue the discussion but with a level 1 comment, being too lazy, too devious, or both to locate an appropriate level n (where n>1) comment to reply to, which would "contain" the off-topic back-and-forth and not give it the last words in the forum.
(3) Ape-shit over-reactions and unsportsmanlike conduct.

To a certain degree, #1 and #2 could be tolerated. #3 is what puts it over the top. Although some try to frame this #3 as "frank and honest," when used in a knee-jerk fashion and repeatedly, it turns into a purposeful tactic designed to torpedo the forum and deserves to be called out.

Here's a good example from Mr. Ruff on August 11, 2014 at 8:46 pm:

SEO you are an obsessive compulsive stalker and your post has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE TOPIC!

It wasn't just an over-reaction. The first half of that hypnotic assertion is a lie.

How so? What other forums have I "stalked" Mr. Ruff onto? Has Mr. Ruff ever received an email from me? What comments have I ever left on a forum that he controls? Does Mr. Ruff even have a blog for comments to be made on? Is Mr. Ruff on Facebook? Paraphrasing Jed Klampet, "California is a place I don't want to be," and Mr. Ruff won't find me there "stalking" him. [Brings up why Mr. Ruff didn't say "obsessive compulsive CYBER stalker". One could consider the omission of the adjective "cyber" to be a low-down, dirty cheat that have the facts further undermine his reputation here.]

Yep, I'm a religious fanatic; fanatical about Truth with a capital "T". Dishonesty pushes my buttons and will result in me lobbing the ping-pong discussion ball back to point it out.

It should be noticed that Mr. Rogue and Mr. Ruff have been having a field day on:
http://conspiracypsychology.com

Looks like they found a new home! Kudos and please keep it up!

Although Mr. Rogue has repeatedly INVITED me and all lurker readers to follow him there and tag-team in the fun via the many links posted, I have not "stalked" over there to give him or Mr. Ruff the raspberries. [I've got a life.] Yet another way the "OCD stalking" malframing gets destroyed. [And were I to venture into the discussions of that disinfo website, it wouldn't be to attack either Mr. Rogue or Mr. Ruff, but to aid and support their efforts in exposing the dishonesty of its owners-on-the-disinfo-attack.]

Here's a test for those prone to ape-shit over-reactions:

     F-F-F-FOURTH GENERATION NOOKIEDOO!!!

Instructions: Don't smash anything back across the net. Just let this go. Don't reply. STFU.

I'm serious. I don't really want to discuss NOOKIEDOO, but I know how NOOKIEDOO pushes buttons. Ignore it and this entire comment, and you'll pass the test.

Let this ball go by. Don't volley it back so I can lob another one back. Don't reply. STFU.

That's the test.

P.S. This comment was started on Monday. It wasn't finished. Real-life got in the way. I'm not obligated. And I might not have finished it, were it not for Mr. Rogue asking so nicely for it.

Let the record show how I let their ping-pong balls fall to the floor. They got the last word. Woo-hoo! And they'll get the last word after this. Woo-hoo some more!

But so addicted to T&S are they, they've been desperately trying to stoke conversations since. Mr. Ruff's pictures of protest at the "The November Man" premiere were marginally on-topic. Mr. Rogue's essay on "Believe" isn't just off-topic; it's as if he's trying to get Mr. Tamborine Man to come out and play with more spirituality postings. [NOT something that I advocate.] Mr. Rogue regularly uses T&S as if he were its RSS feed and as if T&S were an appropriate repository for everything he might have penned for other purposes elsewhere. Has hypocritical Mr. Ruff called Mr. Roge on any of his off-topic comments? Nope. It's why the "hypocritical" adjective applies as a valid fact and isn't ad hominem. [Pointed out so Mr. Ruff will improve his demeanor.]

What comment from me would be complete without the stats? At 134 total comments so far, Mr. Rogue (55) and Mr. Ruff (39) together make up 70% of the contribution to this forum, as Mr. Ruff falls further behind Mr. Rogue.

P.P.S. This embodies a second test of the participants. It is posted as a level 1 comment, to see how quickly and by whom another level 1 comment comes to "get the last word", and what the nature of that comment will be. Will it be original and on-topic? Will it be original and off-topic? Will it be a copy-and-paste whack-job of someone else's words marginally related to the topic?

// "double slasher leaping out with a screech like a banshee"~Mr. Rogue

---

x144 Señor El Once : a way for the referee to stop a potential ping-pong volley

2014-08-18

Dear Mr. McKee,

Touche' in pointing out a way for the referee to stop a potential ping-pong volley! El-oh-el!

I truly hadn't foreseen your removal of my comment coming, because I stated that I didn't want to discuss push-button "N" themes that even I am burned out on. By golly its removal really shoots holes into my publication stats on this thread, with 3 of my 9 comments (33.3%) requiring your watchful eye to get sent back into the moderation queue.

Sorry to make you work.

With my comment removed so promptly, the results are inconclusive with regards to whether certain participants could curb K9 Pavlonian reactions to specific words beginning with "N".

Comment sequencing got juked pretty fast, though.

The second part of the test was:

[This comment] is posted as a level 1 comment, to see how quickly and by whom another level 1 comment comes to "get the last word", and what the nature of that comment will be. Will it be original and on-topic? Will it be original and off-topic? Will it be a copy-and-paste whack-job of someone else's words marginally related to the topic?

Shooketh one tree, and observeth the nuts falling out from many trees.

Bravo for the tag-teaming efforts! Based on the "agitprop" acquisition, one might rightly think that three participants conspired off-list to draft and coordinate their efforts published here to achieve goals previously spelled out (last line 2014-08-07).

My, the creative fiction that some are co-authoring about my supposed MO as a paid "agitpropist!" Let's set this straight yet again.

I am the "duped useful idiot." I could be duped into also sorts of weird things. Properly applied math, science, and reasoning to all of the evidence are what tip me one way or another. I get shocked by the refusal of some to acknowledge when the same math, science, and reasoning falls short in supporting other beliefs.

My stable of wild-ass bat-shit crazy hobby-horses that have duped me in the past has been down-sized by natural attrition, leaving only one that I regularly ride. Another shock is that nuggets of truth persist from these disinfo detours that a certain class of participants still refuses to acknowledge. [For example, "no planes at the WTC" spawned "imagery manipulation" that did happen on 9/11, but the extent of such manipulation is uncertain. Four different versions of the helicopter shot of the 2nd WTC plane as well as the Pentagon security camera footage are two examples confounding the "jejune" argumentation boiling down to "an all-or-nothing" false-choice about imagery manipulation.]

~IF~ I were a paid "agitpropist", here's what you could expect:

- A dramatic increase in the frequency of my participation across the board on all forums and venues.

- A dramatic reduction in the length of my comments, whereby breaking a long posting into multiple shorter postings results in more paid-to-post rewards.

- Lots of twitter style twatter to juke my paid-to-post rewards. I'd be the new T&S WalMart Greeter!

- Lots of comments that ain't nothing more than a copy-and-pasted quotation and link to someone else's work, because they count towards my paid-to-post totals, are innocuous, serve to make me appear more reasonable, while also steering the discussion.

- A dramatic increase in the number of venues where I participate, whereby much of my comments in one venue are duplicates from what I posted in another venue.

- An increase in the number sock-puppets to my hobby-horse(s) in a given forum, some to help champion and some to serve as foils who arguments are easily destroyed.

- A dramatic reduction in efforts to preserve my words (for the public), because disinformation can only be protected with lies, and built-up lies that eventually get exposed undermine the preservation efforts.

- An increase in the number of blogs, websites, and facebook identities to help differentiate and legitimize my stable of sock-puppets. However, these web efforts will be poorly maintained, falling quickly into disrepair. Too much legacy is bad baggage that isn't carried forward.

- No admission of being in error.

- No chinks to my "anonimity armour."

- etc.

"Señor… Do you write/post anywhere else besides this blog? I'd be very interested to read. Thanks."

As a matter of fact, I do. But I re-publish to those endeavors on a haphazard schedule, like when I have authored sufficient material to merit collecting, formatting, and publishing properly. Aside from blatant procrastination and laziness, the delay in its re-publication on my venue is strategic by allowing debates on other venues to conclude and cool. Thus, comments authored but never published on (or removed from) the original venue aren't animated too early.

I'm not one to advertise my blog. Now that I'm asked (twice), I would have provided a link, but I already reached my two URL quota with Mr. Rogue's gopher-holes.

Follow either of those two links to Mr. Rogue's efforts and you'll quickly find an unhinged comment aimed at me, quite possibly with a URL to my blog.

Or you could follow Mr. Rogue's advice about searching for it. Google "Señor El Once" including the double quotation. In my tests, the second page of search results starts offering hits to my blog.

//

---

x145 hybridrogue1 : agitpropist we could expect

2014-08-18

hybridrogue1
August 18, 2014 at 2:38 pm

"~IF~ I were a paid "agitpropist", here's what you could expect:.."~Señor

Is that so? To the contrary, in my opinion what was just posted that this quote is a small portion of, is actually what we could expect.

But I do thank the anonymous entity for once again promoting my blog, specifically those two threads. For if those who visit read and pay attention to the arguments there in, I think any lucid person would come to the same conclusion that I have, that the entity is in fact an agent of agitprop.

\\][//

---

x146 Craig McKee : shocked that you're surprised

2014-08-18

August 18, 2014 at 5:07 pm

I'm shocked that you're surprised. Pretty much out of nowhere you brought up a subject that had been nixed and you dared others to comment on it. I can't imagine what purpose this could possibly have served other than to "test" me to see if I would allow it.

The purpose of my (some would say not frequent enough) interventions is not to censor people or subjects if that can be avoided, but it is to try and keep the discussion productive. Had I allowed your challenge (essentially it was a taunt), then there would have been no further productive discussion. It's one thing to react to someone else (that can be done inappropriately, of course), but it's quite another to provoke for no reason.

---

x147 Señor El Once : testing the restraint of the drooling Pavlov dogs

2014-08-18

{email}
Dear Mr. McKee,

You were not being tested. The restraint of the drooling Pavlov dogs was, to prove that they could let something potentially disruptive just pass by to avoid the very outcome they claim to not want.

It was not out of the blue in the framework of how they want to shutdown tambourine man and the detours that he spawns. First Volley exchange might be justified. Thereafter they'll have to stfu and let it pass. Nookiedoo was just the big test of their restraint that was like a big steak.

As you said yourself, it isn't the topic that is the issue but the overblown unsportsmanlike conduct that it generates.

On my part, I ought to be able to advertise or mention a word or phrase without spawning their calculated overblown negative behavior.

Sure, I have been part of the tango. But I've faced many months of unhinged reactions and attempted brush offs coupled with tons of documented instances of lying, cheating, and weaseling. The message to improve demeanor was not heeded. When I finally had enough, I fed it back to them. Their words discredited themselves.

Lilaleo, ruff, and rogue are conspiring. The latter 2 are such hypocritical blow hards.

The reaction off list to the very short lived comment shows it to be more.

//

---

x148 T&S Regulars & Lilaleo : Do you write/post anywhere else besides this blog?

2014-08-17

Lilaleo (@Lilaleo)
August 15, 2014 at 6:06 pm

Señor… Do you write/post anywhere else besides this blog? I'd be very interested to read. Thanks.


Craig McKee
August 15, 2014 at 6:23 pm

Señor, your last comment has been removed. It mentions a topic that I clearly stated was off limits. More, it was mentioned to "test" whether others would react to it. Not allowed. I hope I don't have to ban all future use of the letter "N" from your posts. But I will if I have to.

Tamborine man
August 15, 2014 at 9:59 pm

"Señor… Do you write/post anywhere else besides this blog? I'd be very interested to read. Thanks."

Cheers

hybridrogue1
August 16, 2014 at 5:18 am

Hmm… well I am at a total loss as to what is going on here now.
[??????]
\\][//

Lilaleo (@Lilaleo)
August 16, 2014 at 9:55 am

Hey tamborine….

Is your "cheers" like a thank you for my comment? Or, are we havin' a drink?


hybridrogue1
August 16, 2014 at 10:48 am

I would suggest Lilaleo, that we dispense with the off topic chit chat. I would suggest anyone seeking the further ruminations of Señor el Once, to take advantage of their handy mouse and search engine combo.
\\][//

hybridrogue1
August 16, 2014 at 1:18 pm

Well the agenda to dismantle Gaza called for by the Israel Institute for Strategic Studies has made a lot of progress the last month and a half.

As with 9/11 and the destruction of the WTC, this "dismantling" takes place while people are in the place being dismantled, and the dismantling is explosive, ending up with mostly small rubble.

So we have ongoing cyclic war-crimes being committed by the so-called "Indispensable Nation" and it's client state run by "God's Chosen"…
And anyone with a smidgen of decency and sanity can only look on in horror.

It seems that this topic would inflame anyone with a sense of empathy. Apparently personal concerns trump all other considerations for some.
\\][//


ruffadam
August 16, 2014 at 7:32 pm

HR1 says "Apparently personal concerns trump all other considerations for some."

I agree 100% with this in fact I would like to point out at this time the fact that "personal concerns" were the ONLY thing talked about by two particular individuals, Gaza and Craigs article were completely ignored throughout the entire thread. That stinks of agitprop to me and now these comments popping up meant to make us all believe SEO is some kind of Icon that is very popular but here he/she/it is unfairly censored. This is highly suspect to me. A simple google search for SEO would produce plenty of results so why come in here specifically to drop these not so subtle hints that SEO is being oppressed and censored here? It is agitprop and it is BS. Anyone could have found his/her/its postings elsewhere so why come in here to make those comments? Agitprop.

SEO was posting totally off topic comments and has been doing so for a long time, very disruptive, very disingenuous. I am thoroughly convinced that SEO is genuine agitprop. He/she/its comments are engineered (carefully crafted) to produce anger, confusion, and dissension. I noticed it particularly with responses to my comments where SEO's comments are specifically designed to make me angry (I recognized it as crafted provocation so it didn't work). This comment in particular caught my attention and convinced me that SEO is genuine agitprop:

August 6th 430PM SEO writes in response to my saying I was not interested in his/her/its vendetta against HR1 or myself:

"Is that so? Where's the beef? You've even made repeated promises the last couple of years (a) that you don't read my comments and (b) that you ignore my comments. Was this because you're too clueless to make a decent argument to counter rationally my position? Me thinks so. You've been a hypocritical blowhard from the onset. Where's your big fat IGNORE and not rising to the occasion?"

Now from a psychological standpoint what SEO is doing with this comment is actually very revealing. Can you see what is going on in just that short paragraph? It is actually a powerful psychological attack crafted just for me. (BTW: I take it as a compliment that I get the attention of provocateurs and that they expend some of their time on me.)

SEO may work alone or is actually a group of provocateurs with dozens or more sock puppet persona's but in either case the evidence is plentiful that this entity is NOT here to discuss Craigs articles. Scan back over this thread and see for yourself where SEO made an (on topic) post prior to this date and time. I bet you can't locate one and that should speak volumes to everyone. In scanning through past threads you will see the same pattern emerge with only a token post or two vaguely on topic followed by a plethora of off topic "psychological warfare" (in my opinion) posts.

I would ask anyone reading this to actually look back at this and other threads and see the method of provocation in action. You will learn how this "infowar" for lack of a better term is actually being fought.

hybridrogue1
August 16, 2014 at 9:37 pm

I concur with Mr Ruff's analysis. As such, perhaps the comments section can be opened to a "post topical" discussion on our take on what just occurred here on Truth and Shadows. Again, under the stated rules of engagement set by our host.

I think it is apparent that Truth and Shadows is a prime candidate for targeting by what we call "Sunsteinian Agitprop". This is certainly not a new idea here, and the "paranoia" of the probability of surveillance and intervention here is not without some rational bases.

Personally, I would rather that Craig gives an official go-ahead before we proceed to such discussion.
\\][//

Tamborine man
August 16, 2014 at 10:13 pm

Hi Lilaleo,

i simply repeated your comment as also being my own, so yes, the "cheers" was in this case both a ‘thank you' and a ‘toast'!

Cheers

---

x149 Señor El Once : greater purpose of the test

2014-08-20

Mr. McKee wrote:

Pretty much out of nowhere you brought up a subject that had been nixed and you dared others to comment on it.

The context made it clear that I was not bringing up an atomic SUBJECT for a discussion, certainly not one that I cared to participate in any time soon. To be sure, the true context of the discussion had to do with how to stop detouring ping-pong volleys on an individual participant level: by letting the ball go by even when a participant has the opportunity to smash it back over the net.

What happened in context was merely the dropping of an atomic PHRASE in a simple test to see if we could get the K9 pack to de-program its Pavlonian bell-rings to let a comment flitter on by without it resulting in bad over-reactions on their part. [It was also a pretty funny joke.]

Mr. McKee wrote:

I can't imagine what purpose this could possibly have served other than to "test" me to see if I would allow it.

The greater purpose of the test was to train better harmony on your blog, as well as permit a larger diversity of ideas, by teaching its participants what is acceptable behavior, such as how long to maintain a volley when the "diversity of ideas" brings something, say, gut-puking bat-shit crazy that rings the Pavlonian bells of the Sunstein campers to behave poorly... on purpose.

For example, assume participant A made such a dispicable comment that we'll call "-A1-". Participant B replies with "-B2-", which could be short, long, or even unhinged. Regardless of the content of the "-B2-to-A1-" reply, the door opens for participant A to come back yet again and respond, "-A3-to-B2-". The crux of this teachable moment is that this is the precise point in the discussion when Participant B should take control of their resolve, take control of the discussion, allow participant A the last word ("-A3-to-B2-"), drop the ball, and drop no other comments (-B4-to-A3-) to continue the volley. With time and practice, they'll learn that maybe their "-B2-to-A1-" comment, if not published on T&S, might stop an unproductive volley from even ~being~. This certainly becomes truer for tag teaming participants.

The analogy is mountain bike riding on a single-track. You do not look to where you do ~not~ want your front wheel to go (e.g., off a cliff, into a tree, over the side). You look for the line on the path where you ~want~ your front wheel to go. [Similar concepts apply to skiing moguls: look for your line through the moguls where your skis should go, and don't look at all the bad places where you don't want to go.]

In like manner, participants should reply to conversations that they want to foster and its themes grow, and not to ones that they don't.

Mr. McKee wrote:

The purpose of my (some would say not frequent enough) interventions is not to censor people or subjects if that can be avoided, but it is to try and keep the discussion productive. Had I allowed your challenge (essentially it was a taunt), then there would have been no further productive discussion.

The true "taunt" was to illicit some retrospection before, or instead of, posting activity that takes the front wheels out of the grove, off of the path, through the weeds, down the side of the mountain, recklessly.

Mr. McKee wrote:

It's one thing to react to someone else (that can be done inappropriately, of course), but it's quite another to provoke for no reason.

Mr. McKee focused on the wrong part of my message, namely the joke involving name-dropping of an atomic phrase, which coincidently he tried to edit out before sending the comment back to moderation.

The reason for the provocation was the hypocritical actions of the two participants who commanded at the time 70% of the total (134) comments. Here they were, stomping their jump boots all over Mr. Tamborine Man to tamp down his spiritual discussion proclaiming it off-topic: -A1-, -B2-to-A1-, -C3-to-A1-, -A4-to-B2-, -A5-to-C3-, -B6-, -C7-, -A8-to-B6-, -A9-to-C7-.

As I pointed out in the deleted comment, Mr. Rogue regularly uses T&S as if ~he~ were its exclusive RSS feed and as if T&S were appropriate to re-publish everything -- relevant or not -- ~he~ might have penned for other purposes elsewhere. [Repeating this charge is appropriate because such off-topic activity from Mr. Rogue has always been and continues.] For all of Mr. Ruff's berating of Mr. Tamorine Man for being off-topic, has he ever called Mr. Rogue for his off-topic comments? For Mr. Rogue's comment-padding copying-and-pasting from other sources, innocuous but off-topic? No, Mr. Ruff hasn't. In fact, Mr. Ruff spammed many comments in this very forum with "off-topic" labels, any of which could have led to ugly knee-jerk volleys. Yet, Mr. Rogue's comments of this nature were sparred the same treatment.

I'm sorry, but owing to me being a religious fanatic -- religiously fanatical about Truth --, blatant hypocrisy is another mouth-watering bell-ringer to the Pavlonian underdog in me.

"I disagreed with what you said, but will defend to the death your right to say it."

Agreement or disagreement with Mr. Tamborine Man's "religious" comments is separate from the precedence set by Mr. Rogue to regularly post irrelevant (but innocuous) things. If Mr. Rogue can do it and others can largely ignore them, so can anyone else and their postings should largely be ignored, particularly if the front wheel of the knee-jerk response is aimed to go off trail.

Mr. Rogue wrote:

For if those who visit read and pay attention to the arguments there in [on Mr. Rogue's blog], I think any lucid person would come to the same conclusion that I have, that the entity is in fact an agent of agitprop.

Ah ha! I've highlighted Mr. Rogue's defect above: he thought wrong.

//

---

x150 ruffadam : what we could expect from a real agitprop agent

2014-08-20

ruffadam
August 20, 2014 at 6:24 am

SEO,

It is nice of you to re-frame for us what we could expect from a real agitprop agent. I will stick with my own definition though. My definition fits you to a tee.

1. You constantly try to derail good discussion by bringing up discredited theories such as mini-nukes and Judy Woods DEW.

2. You use any excuse to introduce bogus material or to create conflict on the blog because in either case the discussion itself gets lost.

3. You use passive aggressive attacks masked only by a very thin facade of politeness along with other disinformation techniques such as Alice in Wonderland logic in order to derail the topical discussions.

4. You post intentionally confusing or conflicting information which require significant time commitments to unravel and debunk.

5. You offer only token lip service to the topic but post long diatribes attacking others.

6. You try to make us rehash past debunks of your theories over and over by claiming falsely that your theories have never been addressed or debunked.

The bottom line is that your MO is to waste our time and derail productive discussions. In my opinion you are agitprop SEO.

hybridrogue1
August 20, 2014 at 11:45 am

‘Agitprop': the rupture of language and cognition in social engineering.
\\][//

---

x151 Señor El Once : Chop-chop, Mr. Ruff

2014-08-20

Dear Mr. Ruff,

Thank you so much for your comment that allows me to respond and for being on the vanguard of this dastardly detour into alleged "agitprop" characteristics. Clearly you and Mr. Rogue are conspiring off-list in this endeavor, so he can teach you the vocabulary.

It is rather funny that you are writing anything at all addressed to me about something I wrote, because you have repeatedly claimed to ignore my comments, to skip right over them, and to not read them. I always attributed this blatant demonstration of your (low) level of open-mindedness and objectivity as the reason why you get so many things WRONG when acting as Mr. Rogue's Gilligan.

Case in point, you write:

You [SEO] constantly try to derail good discussion by bringing up discredited theories such as mini-nukes and Judy Woods DEW.

Haven't been brought up by me in this forum in any serious way that could be construed as me wanting to discuss them. Go check your T&S emails for the comment that Mr. McKee removed. I didn't bring them up in the last forum either. Ergo, the adverb "constantly" does not apply. This over-generalization alone -- something taught in high school to avoid -- is sufficient to trash the validity of your first complaint. But I'll continue trashing it more...

As for the verb "derail", lovely how you ignore your Skipper's hand in all of those "derailments." Isn't Mr. Rogue's blog just a wonderful thing?

As for "discredited theories" that you dangle in front of me as bait to get me fouled out? Must be Mr. Rogue's strategy but one that he couldn't implement himself. The theories aren't mine, aren't what I champion, and aren't affected by your hypnotic suggestion. Clearly, you understand neither the base theories nor the applicable elements of each that are merged into my deviant premise.

Thus we see your #1 item -- supposedly your strongest argument -- into my alleged MO fall into the dustbin.

As for #2-#5? Ho-hum. Why didn't you provide links to substantiate your words?

I won't belabor this, because I've addressed your concerns and your dubious nature months ago in a special message "sick of SEO claiming we have not done so" (2014-04-13). Make sure you read the whole message, particularly those referencing your statements from November 17, 2012.

You think you know where I err in my bat-shit crazy deviant premises? Take it off-list. Make a comment to the blog entry linked above.

Chop-chop, Mr. Ruff.

//

---

x152 T&S Tag-Team : conspiring off-list

2014-08-20

hybridrogue1
August 20, 2014 at 7:22 pm

Again we have a full frontal blast of argumentum verbosium from the covert entity calling itself "Señor"__and the only thing the entity seems to produce by such filibuster is to send the hits on HR1blog through the roof.

His denials put in beancounter language of "A1-, -B2-to-A1-, -C3-to-A1-, -A4-to-B2-, -A5-to-C3-, -B6-, -C7-, -A8-to-B6-, -A9-to-C7- blablabla" are simply incomprehensible bullshit that would be better translated into simple English if he wishes to convince a jury of his peers of his innocence as far as the charge of being an agent of agitprop.

His claims to an "atomic joke" are laughably jejune, making the entirety of the rest of his comment the real joke.

I think that the entity has the right to protest his innocence if he is indeed innocent — but this fast-talking jabberwacky is entirely unconvincing. One can visualize the beads of sweat on the entity's forehead as he wrings his hands while sitting in the witness chair.

Again I thank the entity for the PR for my blog. As I said the last few days, and particularly today the hits are off the charts. One wonders whether "lucidity" is part of the entity's tool kit.
\\][//

hybridrogue1
August 20, 2014 at 8:10 pm

"Clearly you and Mr. Rogue are conspiring off-list in this endeavor, so he can teach you the vocabulary."~Señor

I can say truthfully that the only "conspiring off-list" I have done with Mr Ruff is to have emailed him that the covert entity ‘Señor' had made another comment [AUGUST 18, 2014 AT 1:23 PM], just to alert him. I gave no advice whatsoever to Mr Ruff. He did not reply, although I think it did let him know to look in on the current thread here again; as he did make comments to that post by the entity.

I have indeed had much to say about the covert entity on my blog, but I don't get the impression that Mr Ruff reads there very often – certainly he doesn't shadow the place every day as the agent Señor does.

And as it is, if the Señor entity is paying attention to what is written on my blog he knows all I wanted from him was to ‘Cease and Desist' in his personal attacks on myself here on T&S, and until that time and for long as he continues the harassment I will continue my entries to the HR1blog pages dealing with the disinformant.

I do NOT mention him EVER, until he comes on slashing at me. It has been a very long time since I have started anything with Señor. But as I have told him, if he keeps this shit up, I will finish it.
\\][//



ruffadam
August 20, 2014 at 9:18 pm

The one fact that discredits virtually everything you just said is that in each and every case it is in fact you who starts the trouble not HR1 or myself. There was no mention of you at all on this thread until you came in and started derailing it. Sure you choose to come to the defense of Tamborine Man who was himself attempting to derail this discussion. You saw us telling TM to stay on topic as your perfect opportunity to come in here and increase the disruption. You are the aggressor SEO and the time stamps on the posts prove it.

Now as to your other blather about HR1 and I working together against you I can assure you that you have earned my critiques through your own actions and if HR1 were not here at all I would still make them. Because HR1 and I happen to agree on quite a few things I can understand your mistake of thinking we coordinate all this. We don't need to coordinate anything really SEO because your pattern of abuse and your MO are obvious to both of us. I agree with HR1 most of the time for one simple reason SEO, because he is right most of the time and I know he is right from my own research. You on the other hand are often wrong and therefore I often disagree with you.

In truth SEO I really believe you are "agitprop" or an "agent provocateur" who is attacking this blog and some of it's members intentionally and for nefarious reasons. Looking at your most recent post for example I find numerous reasons to reach the conclusion that you are an "agent" of disruption and disinformation.

Some other time perhaps I will go through one of your posts step by step and explain in detail what is happening with them. Suffice it to say for now that I will not be responding to your "Chop-chop, Mr. Ruff" remark in any sort of timely fashion, if at all, simply because I don't bite on such obvious bait. At this point SEO you may want to have your handlers assign someone else from the Q-Group to me because your routine is played out and not working.

hybridrogue1
August 20, 2014 at 9:38 pm

Yes Señor, and to the link to your blog at the end of your latest rant here, wherein you misframe the whole affair on COTO, it is bullshit. Anyone who wants the real scoop on that trip can go to the "Milgram" thread on HR1blog.

You schmoozed that twit JG, and she went on a rampage like Nurse Rat-shit in One Flew Over the Cukoo's Nest. You pulled your agitprop game there like a pro, because those people are so jejune. The only regular there with any sense at all is Boomer, and he's about a B- on the intel scale.

I know you have the same plan for T&S, to derail it into oblivion like you did to COTO. They have gone from 70 to 80 hits pr hr down to around an average of 25 to 28 since that bamboozle you pulled there.
And it wasn't long after I left of my own accord, that you abandoned COTO.

It is too too obvious what a vile and despicable game you play.

\\][//

hybridrogue1
August 20, 2014 at 10:29 pm

Indeed, Mr Ruff has said it quite well, the proof of who the trouble maker is can be seen by the time/date stamps. The disinformant Bridges always starts the shit.

And the Señor STILL hasn't made a single comment on the actual topic of the Israeli Palestinian conflict. He has no further an agenda than slashing, with the agenda to drive T&S into the ditch, just like he did at COTO.
\\][//


hybridrogue1
August 21, 2014 at 4:44 am

–"If Mr. Ruff were referring to the actual record, he'd be proven wrong, which is why he provides no links. If my muclear theories had been debunked in a convincing fashion, I wouldn't be still peddling them. I have the ability to change my mind when proven wrong."
~Entity Coverticus

http://maxwellbridges.blogspot.com/2014/04/prelude-to-nookiedoo.html#x29

[This URL is hidden under ambiguous text in his comment]
________
Señor is an in your face fullblown fucking liar – he has been proven wrong decisively on this muclear bullshit and hasn't changed his mind but – as you see from the above, doubles down on the anal hurland…the singing asshole of Señor Bridges.
\\][//

ruffadam
August 21, 2014 at 5:51 am

Wow SEO that is some fast tap dancing you did there in that comment. I have no idea what the hell most of it meant but it was lengthy I will give you that. Curious why YOU have not choosen to ignore our comments since you seem to want to scold us for not ignoring yours? I will go even one better why not ignore our comments and actually post something relevant to the topic?

---

x153 Señor El Once : pushed the buttons of my religious fanaticism

2014-08-21

Some participants have just pushed the buttons of my religious fanaticism regarding truth by writing things that are ~not~, with the first indication being no substantiating links.

So that readers understand the stats, two comments of mine made respectively to two different topics already-in-progress netted two replies from Mr. Ruff, five replies from Mr. Rogue on-list, and five back-stabbings off-list on his blog. Woo-hoo!

Let's give Kudos where they are warranted, such as Mr. Ruff's one-for-one restraint. Bravo!

Two-to-seven, though! Clearly, I am losing and will continue to lose, because those seven will only eck out one, lowly, measely reply from of me, this very message that you read.

For my loyal fans requesting it, let's begin more "fast-talking jabberwacky", more "fast tap dancing", and more "simply incomprehensible bullshit". Woo-hoo!

Without further delay, here's the first gem credited to Mr. Ruff (and those following unless otherwise noted):

The one fact that discredits virtually everything you just said is that in each and every case it is in fact you who starts the trouble not HR1 or myself.

El-oh-el! Such purposeful memory loss and humor Mr. Ruff exhibits in defending Mr. Rogue, T&S's resident WalMart greeter. The phrase "in each and every case" falls into the category of "over-generalization" and only takes one case to the contrary to disprove.

The list of participants is pretty long who have experienced first hand Mr. Rogue "starting trouble." I'd wager that out of the last 3000 comments made to T&S, Mr. Rogue's contribution was greater than one third.

Now if Mr. Ruff is referring exclusively to interactions Rogue-SEO or Ruff-SEO, in probably each and every case an assertion or action was made at some point by a member of the tag-team that inspired me to respond, quite possibly with a referenced rebuttal using their own words to prove hypocrisy, dishonesty, and/or hypnosis in the assertion.

There was no mention of you at all on this thread until you came in...

I agree, this is so true! And just as true, there was no mention of Mr. Ruff at all on this thread until he came came in. Funny how that works.

... and started derailing it.

Was my comment the exact point of the derailment? Or was the over-blown over-reaction the exact point?

Astute readers might notice that the over-blown over-reaction to Mr. Tamborine Man's innocuous comments were the exact point of derailment. My comments would have been at the caboose to that train wreck had not -- surprise! surprise! -- there been further over-blown over-reactions. Mine was the served ping-pong ball that they should have just let flutter right on by.

You saw us telling TM to stay on topic as your perfect opportunity to come in here and increase the disruption.

I told Mr. TM to stay on topic, too. I have two comments from that period in the moderation queue due to their link count and Mr. McKee deciding not to publish them, ergo they added nothing to the disruption. My exchanges with Mr. TM to get him to provide a relevant link weren't a disruption; they were on-topic.

You are the aggressor SEO and the time stamps on the posts prove it.

What time stamps exactly? If Mr. Ruff doesn't list and show the correlation, then his statements aren't fact but opinion without substantiation.

The record shows that at 168 total comments, I made a total of 12 comments (6.5%), but four of them are in the moderation queue due to link counts and Mr. McKee not approving them. Let's ignore their publication status and consider hypothetically all 12 of them as being stick-in-your-eye provocation on T&S.

How many of Mr. Ruff's ~43 commens (25.5%) or of Mr. Rogue's ~72 comments (42.8%) or of their combined ~115 comments (68.4% of the total conversation) were devoted to my [*cough*] "disruption" consisting of just 12 comments?

In a perfect ping-pong volley, the number ought to be between 12 (1 reply from either) and 24 (1 reply each), or between 10% and 20% of their combined comments. Of course, the 7 reactions to the last 2 of my 12 comments hypothetically suggests a trend that could be extrapolated to mean that 42 of their ~115 comments -- 36% of their effort -- were devoted to me! Woo-hoo, again!

Except that even a real-world number shy of 36% -- a total output >9.5 times that of mine -- paints a different picture of who is the aggressor.

BTW, time stamps reflect when a participant attempted to publish the comment, but not necessarily when it saw the light of day, as would be the case for comments in the moderation queue until approval.

Now as to your other blather about HR1 and I working together against you I can assure you that you have earned my critiques through your own actions and if HR1 were not here at all I would still make them.

And Mr. Ruff and Mr. Rogue have earned my critiques of their integrity through their own actions that I'm not shy of quoting back to them and offering links to substantiate.

Because HR1 and I happen to agree on quite a few things I can understand your mistake of thinking we coordinate all this.

... Or the mistake of thinking that one of you is the sockpuppet of the other.

I agree with HR1 most of the time for one simple reason SEO, because he is right most of the time...

Guess what? I agree with HR1 most of the time, too, in part because how can you disagree with someone else's innocuous work that Mr. Rogue has copy-and-pasted into the discussion? In part also for the instances when he is right, and you don't find me quibbling over it.

But "most of the time" isn't "all of the time." I'll stand up and point out the "part of the time" when Mr. Rogue is mistaken. And that's where the truth hurts.

... and I know he is right from my own research.

Stellar research that includes purposely not reading certain books or websites germaine to the discussion, not reading my comments, and by extention not reading what substantiates my comments.

You on the other hand are often wrong and therefore I often disagree with you.

Me? WRONG! Oh for heaven's sake, do forgive me! I promise to mend my ways if you would only be so kind as to point out exactly where I am in such grave error!

Some other time perhaps I will go through one of your posts step by step and explain in detail what is happening with them. Suffice it to say for now that I will not be responding to your "Chop-chop, Mr. Ruff" remark in any sort of timely fashion, if at all, simply because I don't bite on such obvious bait.

... Ooops! [*Sniff* *sniff*] Smells like a mustelid was here.

On the one hand, I'd like to give Mr. Ruff some slack here, because my blog is a rabbit hole. But on the other hand, Mr. Ruff has been steadfastly avoiding an objective, reasoned, rational discussion with me -- on T&S, on COTO, on my blog -- for more than a year now. He has a track record of making such promises and then failing to make good on it, such as on November 17, 2012 at 5:15 am.

BTW, what makes my request "such obvious bait" when it avoids disruptions here on T&S by having the objective, reasoned, rational discussion with me off-list? Could it be because I propose my blog as the playground, where I have home-court advantage? I promise to be fair and publish replies (that aren't ad hominem snake-piss). If Mr. Ruff had a blog, it could be discussed there (or both our blogs in parallel), and I'd let Mr. Ruff be as underhanded as Mr. Rogue is with his blog.

Or is my request "such obvious bait" when he knows he'll get his ass handed to him.

Damn. [*Sniff* *sniff*] There's that mustelid smell again.

Curious why YOU have not choosen to ignore our comments since you seem to want to scold us for not ignoring yours?

First of all, this individual, lowly reply comes closer to zero(=ignore) than the seven comments made by your team recently.

Secondly, your tag-team has charged me with "being an agent of agitprop." The two of you sound like Larry and Curly with your "Moe! Moe! Moe!" nonsense. (Or was it "M.O."?)

I will go even one better why not ignore our comments and actually post something relevant to the topic?

Done. What's the topic? Oh, that's right...

In truth SEO I really believe you are "agitprop" or an "agent provocateur" who is attacking this blog and some of it's members intentionally and for nefarious reasons. Looking at your most recent post for example I find numerous reasons to reach the conclusion that you are an "agent" of disruption and disinformation.

If Mr. Ruff found "numerous reasons", he couldn't be bothered to list a single one of them. Cheater.

At least when I call Mr. Ruff or Mr. Rogue a hypocrite, a liar, a cheat, or a weasel, I substantiate the instances one by one with direct quotes and links that brought me to such conclusions.

"Attacking this blog?" My 6.5% compared to their 68.4%? El-oh-el. Someone is doing some projecting here.

"Attacking ... some of its members intentionally?" Here, "some" is being re-defined from "four or more" to being equal to "two". If we were to tally all of the participants who have had border-line-nasty rows with Mr. Rogue [giving all the sock-puppets the benefit of the doubt], we'd be able to say "many" with no dishonest re-definitions.

"For nefarious reasons?" Here, "nefarious" is being re-defined to be anything that holds participants to truthful statements, to practicing what they preach, to demonstrating integrity in all their interactions.

++++

Now let's look at some of Mr. Rogue's recent work. Remember, it wasn't necessarily the link that is the disruption, but what someone chooses to drag back from that link to make an issue of that could be the disruption.

I wrote on my blog (2014-04-13) which Mr. Rogue chose to drag back:

If Mr. Ruff were referring to the actual record, he'd be proven wrong, which is why he provides no links. If my nuclear theories had been debunked in a convincing fashion, I wouldn't be still peddling them. I have the ability to change my mind when proven wrong.

Mr. Rogue goes on to say with much eloquence and overwhelming amounts of substantiation (not):

Señor is an in your face fullblown fucking liar – he has been proven wrong decisively on this muclear bullshit and hasn't changed his mind but – as you see from the above, doubles down on the anal hurland... the singing asshole of Señor Bridges.

Moi? "Proven wrong"? And "decisively" so?

How ironic that Mr. Rogue chose a quote wherein Mr. Ruff was reprimanded for not providing links to substantiate his over-blown statements at the time, yet when Mr. Rogue comes to Mr. Ruff's defense, it is precisely those substantiating links that are also missing from his over-blown statements. (Pattern?)

Perhaps Mr. Rogue is referring to the exact same debunking efforts who genesis was November 17, 2012 at 5:15 am and is linked earlier in this message on which he was an invited conspirator (while I was purposely shunned from the party: boo-hoo)?

Perhaps Mr. Rogue is referring to lame, meandering, unsubstantiated articles penned by him on COTO and re-animated on his blog that can't make up their mind what they want to be and allow no commentary from others (e.g., moi) to improve the validity of statements or to correct statements of error?

At any rate, no substantiation when a charge of lying is made is an automatic FAIL and falls neatly into the camp of "attack."

Mr. Rogue drags back to this forum references to "the whole affair on COTO."

You schmoozed that twit JG, and she went on a rampage like Nurse Rat-shit in One Flew Over the Cukoo's Nest. You pulled your agitprop game there like a pro, because those people are so jejune.

Ah, the online romancing of JerseyGirl! How could I ever forget? I wrote respectfully, was asked to become a contributor, wrote two articles, defended those articles respectfully (against heaping amounts of disrespect from Mr. Rogue), made references to the COTO rules of engagement, and decisively proved that Mr. Rogue's comments under his COTO articles (and elsewhere) were in flagrent violation.

"That twit JG" was also an admin who did not appreciate being called "Nurse Rat-shit" and other things more nasty and misogynistic by Mr. Rogue, with whom there was already a long-established love-hate relationship. Stamped his own exit papers, Mr. Rogue did.

I know you have the same plan for T&S, to derail it into oblivion like you did to COTO. They have gone from 70 to 80 hits pr hr down to around an average of 25 to 28 since that bamboozle you pulled there.

Let's flag this as a lie and a cheat from the onset, and I'll explain why.

"Hits per hour" isn't even a metric that web analytics measures. "Pageviews" and "Unique Visitors" for a given period of time are the two most useful web statistics. The IP address among other things is used to determine the number of unique visitors from their activity on the site. [Generally] every time a bot visits the page, every time the page is refreshed, and every time a visitor makes a comment, the pageview count for that page increments. Tally these for all of the web pages on the site and maybe this is the "hits/hour" to which Mr. Rogue refers.

Here are data points in Mr. Rogue's historic trend line.

- Mr. Rogue made >1/3 of the last 3,000 comments to T&S (which may actually be low).
- Mr. Rogue made >4,000 comments to Op-Ed News during his tenure there of a year or so.
- Mr. Rogue averaged 4 comments a day to this very thread (72 comments made between August 4 and August 20).
- Mr. Rogue averaged 13.5 commetns a day to a thread on his blog (108 comments made between August 12 and August 20). [The comments that weren't his are balanced by comments he made to other blog entries at the same time that aren't being considered and therefore actually makes this average low.]

Between just this T&S thread and one on his blog, Mr. Rogue is already at 17.5 comments a day, a number already artifically low in representing his total daily internet activity.

For the sake of discussion, let's assume some validity and meaningfulness from his statement: "70 to 80 hits pr hr down to around an average of 25 to 28." Based on Mr. Rogue's posting frequency, the difference of 45 to 52 hits/hour could very well be attributed to (a) Mr. Rogue's posting activities and (b) Mr. Rogue's and other's "refresh" activities as they appease their internet addiction every 5 minutes to see who has commented what and where, and to respond really fast.

In other words, Mr. Rogue is directly responsible for inflating or deflating COTO's hits/hour, according to the level of his participation.

Thus, Mr. Rogue's lie and cheat is to suggest that ~my~ participation on COTO dramatically reduced its hourly hit count, when in fact it was Mr. Rogue's withholding voluntarily his high-frequency participation that drove it low.

And it wasn't long after I left of my own accord, that you abandoned COTO.

"Of [his] own accord" as in "one step ahead of being banned." Were Mr. Rogue not so vile in his assessment of his COTO colleagues on his "Milgram" blog entry, he could probably go back and single-handedly ramp up the hourly hit rate.

Mr. Rogue was actively tainting the perceptions of his COTO colleagues AGAINST me before I made comment #1. As can be expected from a sock-puppet, Veritable1 was lock-step with Mr. Rogue's "ban SEO" rhetoric from day 1 of my entrance, and left exactly when Mr. Rogue did to join him immediately on his blog as sock-puppet VerityTwo, where he continues his remarkable mind-meld with Mr. Rogue today.

Against such PR on COTO, I didn't expect to survive. Before I drafted my own articles, each published comment was ripe in my mind to be my last. I stated up front that I wasn't going to stay. My purpose was to correct the record. That Mr. Rogue got PWNed so badly on his home court was just desserts. El-oh-el!

It is too too obvious what a vile and despicable game you play.

... Says the man with 458 comments to "Carnival d'Maxifuckanus" and 113 comments to "Maxwell Bridges: Disinformant", whose titles accurately reflect the quality of the comments. El-oh-el!

And now we come back to the topic as given by Mr. Rogue and Mr. Ruff:

[C]onvince a jury of [SEO's] peers of his innocence as far as the charge of being an agent of agitprop.

Ho-hum, already done in the above "fast-talking jabberwacky", and no sweaty armpits, let alone beads of sweat on my forehead.

If I didn't already think that Mr. Rogue was sociopathic and probably assigned to play on the internet by his mental health professions (and their pharmacy subscriptions) as a "healthy" outlet for his frustrations, as opposed to engaging with real people face-to-face, why I'd say that Mr. Rogue was projecting agenthood onto me.

//

---

x154 T&S Tag-Team : OCD to the extreme and will NEVER stop

2014-08-22

ruffadam
August 21, 2014 at 9:23 pm

As I said before SEO has OCD to the extreme and will NEVER stop. Still to this very moment SEO has not addressed the topic of Gaza at all! Not one post about the topic but we have this war and peace length diatribe above. As far as I am concerned that says it all.

hybridrogue1
August 21, 2014 at 10:45 pm

"So that readers understand the stats…"~Señor El Once

Yes, let's make that a little clearer – how many words are in this most recent entry by the anonymous entity? It's the beancounter's job to give this disclosure as well. Yes?

Why yes it is.
\\][//

hybridrogue1
August 21, 2014 at 11:20 pm

"If I didn't already think that Mr. Rogue was sociopathic and probably assigned to play on the internet by his mental health professions (and their pharmacy subscriptions) as a "healthy" outlet for his frustrations, as opposed to engaging with real people face-to-face, why I'd say that Mr. Rogue was projecting agenthood onto me."~Señor Blablabla

I have already warned the covert entity that this ‘I know you are but what am I game' is as juvenile as the taunts one gets on elementary schoolyards. The pretense of ‘sophistication' is only sophistry unmasked here.

It is the technique of ‘argumentum verbosium' that is the analog to what forensic science calls "Fast Talk" – this happens when a suspect uses double and triple the amount of words in a sentence when under pressure during interrogation.

So just to use the techniques of the strategy of tension of such interrogation I will make sure to piss of the suspect here, by making several comments to his one encyclopedic post, and see how much more rattled the snake gets.
Meanwhile noting that the entity digs himself in deeper with each comment posted here.

Put bluntly Señor Blablabla, you are already outed. Now is just the time for more and more hysterical testimony for the official record.
Thank you so much for your cooperation.
\\][//

hybridrogue1
August 21, 2014 at 11:51 pm

So to add to the statistical body blows that so upset the anonymous entity, I am posting this down at the bottom of this thread for the convenience of feedback – that is, not needing to go further up the thread to find the proper Reply button to use if anyone wants to make an answer to this post.

Any comers? Come One come all, keep those statistic jabs in thrall.
Who is here to pick up this ball?
Who thinks it worth the squall?

So, how much time and effort went into the entity's last post above at AUGUST 21, 2014 AT 7:38 PM? Only the Shadow knows. It certainly didn't just pop off the top of his head, a certain amount of planning and care in the construction is necessary – such time and effort. And for what purpose? To write a tome, a screed, a fabulous bleed of rubric red that only one bent on self torture could read.

In the famous initials of digitalis con webulation I ask; WTF??????
\\][//

---

x155 Señor El Once : less than reaction it addresses

2014-08-22

[ON-TOPIC COMMENT]
I ain't no god-damn expert on Gaza, Israel, Palistine, and shit, but like most participants, I have a high school diploma (plus or minus). Israel is fucked up and is fucking up, despite the PR spin. As an empathetic person, Israel's over-blown over-reaction disgusts me and has me siding with the underdog. Israel fucks everyone else up, too.

If the American government were to conspire to stage event(s) to move its nation in radical directions ala PNAC "Rebuilding America's Defenses" and wanted to plausibly deny its finger-prints in the false-flag actions, Israel's Mossad would top the outsourcing list to help.
[/ON-TOPIC COMMENT]

I was asked:

how many words are in this most recent entry (August 21, 2014 at 7:38 pm) by the anonymous entity?

572 words of that entry, which responded to seven on-list postings (1,300 words) from two participants, were quotations and comprised 19.5% of the total word count. Yep, the only difference about my more than doubled word count was that my words were written and arranged more truthfully.

Kudos to Mr. Adam Ruff for managing one-for-one comment ratio!

"OCD to the extreme"? We all have it. Some worse than others. I'm not the one with a dirt collection that gets hawked on eBay.

As part of the 521 word response, it was asked:

So, how much time and effort went into the entity's last post above at AUGUST 21, 2014 AT 7:38 PM? ... It certainly didn't just pop off the top of his head, a certain amount of planning and care in the construction is necessary – such time and effort. And for what purpose?

It was an embarrassingly large time suck that was fun to write that, together with work, gives me an alibi for ~not~ being Bob Sims a thread-over. Where was Mr. Rogue when all of that was happening?


P.S. I'm being considerate to the readers by nesting this comment where it belongs. And its only 344 words, which makes both the posting count ~and~ the word count less than reaction it addresses.

//

---

x156 Señor El Once : customer list the most valuable thing

2014-08-22

Dear Mr. Ruff,

I enjoyed your OFF-TOPIC stories involving your motorcycle and your rare earth company. Can't say that either event displayed sound judgment, though. The motor cycle chase alone had many downward spiraling decision points.

I'm shaking my head and rolling my eyes about the business model for your "rare earth company where [you] sell novelty items (soil samples from unusual places)". And to think I've been called a "carnival hawker!" Your customer list was probably the most valuable thing about your business venture, because if they're willing to buy dirt, the sky's the limit what else they could be duped into buying.

I'm reminded of the movie, "The Long, Long Trailer" starring Lucille Ball and Desi Arnaz. In particular, Lucy's collection of rocks and can food that weigh down the trailer on a narrow road in the mountains at the films climax.

Oh the things that we collect and horde!

As for behavior of the authorities, the constant procedural delays would have pushed my buttons.

//

---

x157 Señor El Once : militarization of the US police force

2014-08-25

The militarization of the US police force was part of the plan of the 9/11 inspired wars.

Here's what it is on a local level. "Gear built for war rests with Greeley lawmen by Nick Coltrain." I love how the MRAV is so heavy, they had to get a big steel plate for it to rest on so that it wouldn't destroy concrete/asphault parking.

//

P.S. Mr. Rogue and Mr. Lite, how about learning how to reply to each others postings so that nest threads can be created. Carrying on a conversation using top-level comments is rude.
//

---

x158 hybridrogue1 : COTO information is skewed

2014-08-22

{mcb: Some of this was cross-posted and thus gets repeated here.}

hybridrogue1
August 22, 2014 at 7:40 pm

And again, as my question to "word count" is in great part rhetorical, the charge of 'derailment' of a thread has nothing to do with "word count", it has to do with taking the thread off topic.
Now, this latest comment by the covert entity is split in two, one section is the very first on topic commentary the entity has made in the pristine since of dealing directly to the Palestinian/Israeli Conflict.

The second portion of the entity's commentary is then, self-admittedly Off-Topic. But more disturbing is the revelation as to the stalking activities of the entity shown in great detail and organization of data. In other words it is the revealing of the operational MO of 'Spy-craft' – exactly the profile that I have been claiming is the entity's job description.

Now the COTO information is skewed, as COTO was at one time what could be characterized as an 'international powerhouse' with hits coming in from all over the planet. I have the same access to the stats there that I do to my own blog. My posting frequency simply could not have accounted for the high number of hits pr hr-every 48 hr period; which is the manner inwhich the stats are presented on both C1 and HR1blog. The case is clear, the popularity of C1 plummeted in the period after the big blow up there arranged by the psychological operation conducted by the covert entity.
The case is equally clear that having achieved success in this op the entity abandoned the site, having no more interest in it then he ever had…which was zero, other than an agenda to destroy that site.

The entity uses 'statistics' in the same disengenuous manner that the mainstream press does. They are juked toward the context as framed by the one presenting the statistics. This is a well known technique of the Public Relations Regime.

To be perfectly clear, I am not asserting that my presence on C1 was in any way the cause of its former popularity. What I am saying is the despoiling of the site caused many of the former advocates to sour on it and to leave because of the extreme nonsense that developed with the assistant manager of the site – who became pathologically vengeful and despotic with an iron fisted rule of the site. [See; 'Variation on Milgram' on HR1blog for a detailed report]

It is my well considered opinion that the covert entity is indeed an agent provocateur. I have studied intelligence operation for many years, I understand the craft, and I attempt to inform others of how such things work.
The covert entity has a MO and profile that is a perfect match.
\\][//

hybridrogue1
August 22, 2014 at 8:13 pm

BTW, the covert entity asked where I was when the shit hit the fan when the Hasbara agent Sims made a sudden flood of pro-Zionist postings on the 'Lie Becomes Truth' thread on August 21.

That thread had seemingly ended sometime around August 8, with practically no more activity until it bloomed into action with Agent Sims' propaganda campaign. I don't receive email notifications for any of these blogs; so I remained unaware of the situation until Mr McKee gave me a heads up by email.

I returned to that page to discover an astonishing mess on a thread that was already badly fucked up thanks to the combined efforts of the covert entity itself and Tamborin man, with the addition to the egotistical rantings of Mr Hufferd.

This particular thread has to be the worst victim of a clearly staged cognitive dissonant attack on T&S to date.

To say that T&S is a prime target of Sunsteinian provocation is an understatement.
\\][//

---

x159 Señor El Once : {unedited} Ludite Mr. Rogue

2014-08-26

As the accused government agent, I only work 9-5 and not on weekends. Hence, no comments from me since last Friday. Yesterday, had to confer with my supervisor for an appropriate course of action at work, leaving this project dangling.

I love how this delay makes Mr. Rogue nervous (2014-08-25):

I find it interesting there is still no 'Statistics Report' from the beancounter...

Ludite Mr. Rogue wrote:

I don't receive email notifications for any of these blogs; ...

How does Mr. Rogue keep abreast of discussions on the blog of which he is an active participant?!!!

One could guess that he directs his browser manually (from bookmarks or T&S website navigation) to load articles and their discussions of interest. If the articles are already displayed in his browser, at some frequency he must refresh his instance in order to see potential new comments. Of course, when he makes a comment, he gets a browser refresh for free.

The point is: each fresh loading of an article, each browser refresh on an article, and each comment made to an article contribute to the statistics on those articles, such as their hit count per hour (over some period).

Mr. Rogue also wrote:

Now the COTO information is skewed... My posting frequency simply could not have accounted for the high number of hits pr hr-every 48 hr period.

Mr. Rogue confuses "posting frequency" with "browser refresh frequency." [Purposely?] Both will add counts to the hits/hour metric.

Given the historical record of how active a participant Mr. Rogue has been across many different forums, is readily observable by his posting count, and could be called "obsessive," -- logically in the light of Mr. Rogue not utilizing email notification --, Mr. Rogue would have had to exhibit a browser refresh frequency several times greater than his posting frequency just to keep up with "suspected" new comments to any discussion.

[Imagine how often OCD Mr. Rogue was disappointed, having wasted the time and internet bandwidth to re-load a page with all of its comments and video baggage only to learn by searching and scrolling that nothing had changed! Oh, the horror! This alone would contribute to a surly attitude in the responses of someone so addicted to the forum. Mr. Rogue should go to Facebook, because it'll appease his addition with automatic refreshes while allowing the quick onset of memory-hole burial to facilitate revision-history efforts.]

I stand by my earlier statements (2014-08-21).

For the sake of discussion, let's assume some validity and meaningfulness from [Mr. Rogue's] statement: "70 to 80 hits pr hr down to around an average of 25 to 28." Based on Mr. Rogue's posting frequency, the difference of 45 to 52 hits/hour could very well be attributed to (a) Mr. Rogue's posting activities and (b) Mr. Rogue's and other's "refresh" activities as they appease their internet addiction every 5 minutes to see who has commented what and where, and to respond really fast.

In other words, Mr. Rogue is directly responsible for inflating or deflating COTO's hits/hour, according to the level of his participation.

Thus, Mr. Rogue's lie and cheat is to suggest that ~my~ participation on COTO dramatically reduced its hourly hit count, when in fact it was Mr. Rogue's withholding voluntarily his high-frequency participation that drove it low.

Mr. Rogue wrote:

The case is clear, the popularity of C1 plummeted in the period after the big blow up there arranged by the psychological operation conducted by the covert entity.

No, the case is cloudy or even dark! COTO's numbers sank because ludite Mr. Rogue voluntarily deprived COTO of his comments as well as his OCD-driven brower-refresh activities. [Let's ignore the number of participants (particularly female) that misogynistic Mr. Rogue ran off of COTO.]

The case is equally clear that having achieved success in this op the entity abandoned the site, having no more interest in it then he ever had... which was zero, other than an agenda to destroy that site.

The agenda was to hunt down a rabid, lying mustelid right into the burrow's of its home and utter truth. My life expectancy on COTO was always tenacious, touch-and-go, comment-to-comment, expecting to be off'ed by a COTO crew-cut companion of Mr. Rogue's at any browser refresh (November 12, 2012
at 6:24 pm and November 13, 2012
at 10:33 am). El-oh-el, did the mustelid oink & squeal (November 13, 2012 at 5:30 pm):

I don't want Señor around me Puddy. I hope that is clear to you. He is bad business. I don't want to see this stranger in our house.

El-oh-el, buh-buh-buh-b-b-b-bad beh-beh-b-b-business.

Mr. Rogue's COTO companion and buddy-admin (a) dared me into becoming a contributor [November 13, 2012 at 2:19 am] and (b) allowed my contribution to be published eventually, exceeding any initial expectations I might have had for COTO by miles.

Bonus points today are rewarded for Mr. Rogue coming |<--This Close-->| by his own actions to getting himself banned while at the same time getting his prized "Prologue" article and its comments flushed due to its flagrant violations of COTO rules of engagement. [Good thing I saw it coming and gave Mr. Rogue timely warning to CYA.]

When it imploded, it looked like a slow-motion agency action to clean Mr. Rogue's record of his bad behavior. Mr. Rogue attempted the psychological operation of luring me to COTO, imploding purposely his reputation there, and maybe hoping that in purposely fouling out and giving me victory, I would make COTO my new home-court so he could camp unmolested on T&S.

Mr. Rogue continued with his disturbing revelations:

But more disturbing is the revelation as to the stalking activities of the entity shown in great detail and organization of data. In other words it is the revealing of the operational MO of 'Spy-craft' – exactly the profile that I have been claiming is the entity's job description.

In Mr. Rogue's technical ignorance of the checkbox for "notify [about] follow-up comments via email", he conflates "stalking" [without as much as a "cyber-" qualifier -- CHEAT! CHEAT! CHEAT!] with "the results of subscribing", something even lukewarm fans or the idle-curious might do at the very same moment they post literally anything, as little as the HTML code for a space.

Undoubtedly, ludite Mr. Rogue is not aware that a comment with this checkbox marked does not have to be approved or published for the subscription to get established, thereby allowing the discussion to be monitored via email without any more incriminating and inflating "refresh" hits to the blog. [*Cue the music to "The Twilight Zone".*]

As for "detail and organization of data," Mr. Rogue tries to frame this as a negative trait and only valued by one in the "spy-craft". Here's some fine detail that Mr. Rogue's shoddy analysis misses, took him through the ringer more than few times, and would be smoking his ass today yet some more, had I not been badgering him about his blog and self-preservation.

- No one can or should rely on the forums & databases owned by others to maintain their words, be they worthy or not of preservation. Doesn't take much admin effort to remove individual comments, or all comments from an individual.

- Forums & database owned by others should not be relied upon to preserve anything. A database "enhancement" or other behind-the-scenes technical updates could necessitate it going off-line, and there goes all the greatness that it once contained. [Internet way-back machines are not good at snap-shots of old content that was served up and maintained by databases.]

- An agent certainly benefits from collecting (whether or not published) the incriminating words of their targets, but their agenda doesn't benefit from having the agent's own words so collected, organized, and published, because over time this can highlight inconsistencies that ultimately "hang them up by their own petards."

Too much legacy can be a bitch for an agent.

Mr. Rogue writes:

It is my well considered opinion that the covert entity is indeed an agent provocateur.

... Yet all that I profess to be is the "duped useful idiot" with a very narrow scope. Unlike Mr. Rogue, I do not provocatate against all on all subjects.

Mr. Rogue brags:

I have studied intelligence operation for many years, I understand the craft, and I attempt to inform others of how such things work.

To be sure of his self-professed education:

">35 years of studying the arts of espionage and his doctorates equivalent in studies several times over in the field of intelligence analysis, and forensic history, the techniques of propaganda and perception manipulation, mass psychology, and epistemology." (2009-03-23)

Mr. Rogue concludes:

The covert entity has a MO and profile that is a perfect match.

Shouldn't Mr. Rogue be yelling Bingo or something?

Damn if my internet activities don't frag my sorry "agent" ass!!! How could I so obsessively collect, organize, publish my own words with URLs and context? With a legacy website almost a decade old and maintained! WTF?

My humble search for Truth and feeding of the sheep.

//

Hide All / Expand All