Monday, June 6, 2016

Playing Disinfo Games

Show All Parts / Hide All Parts

Show All / Hide All


x2 Maxwell Bridges : Case study in a 9/11 disinformation operative

2016-06-13

My debate opponents in the discussion below unravel as disinformation operatives. Although they call themselves a committee, it is clearly a team of members with different roles and rules of engagement in maintaining their agenda


Part 1: Quinazagga Disinfo


Part 2: Rising up to the challenge


Part 3: Attack Blogs and Cyberbullying


Show All Parts / Hide All Parts

Show All / Hide All

7 comments:

Maxwell C. Bridges said...

phantasypublishing wrote on April 30, 2018 at 12:41 AM:

http://maxwellbridges.blogspot.com/2016/06/playing-disinfo-games.html
this entire page is a work of fiction by MCB it is nothing less than a disinformation campaign by him to distract from Factual reality that Truth and Shadows is a fake news entertainment site that holds zero reality factors. Also his false claims of plagiarism were exposed years ago as the case with chilling effects he holds no physical copyright or patent registration numbers. But still plagiarized reports turn up on the Truth and Shadows on Facebook as if the changing of authors via syndication that it still is fiction that is public domain.

+++ end quote

// mcb

Maxwell C. Bridges said...

phantasypublishing
May 7, 2018 at 4:50 PM


Posted by Maxwell C. Bridges at 11:11 AM
Labels: 9-11 Who, Disinfo Example, Herr der Elf
1 comment:
Maxwell C. Bridges said...
phantasypublishing wrote on April 30, 2018 at 12:41 AM:

http://maxwellbridges.blogspot.com/2016/06/playing-disinfo-games.html
this entire page is a work of fiction by MCB it is nothing less than a disinformation campaign by him to distract from Factual reality that Truth and Shadows is a fake news entertainment site that holds zero reality factors. Also his false claims of plagiarism were exposed years ago as the case with chilling effects he holds no physical copyright or patent registration numbers. But still plagiarized reports turn up on the Truth and Shadows on Facebook as if the changing of authors via syndication that it still is fiction that is public domain.
MCB
How Noble of you
Thanks for verification by reposting the exact quote for a change. You might even look at James Feltzer's responses about Dr woods and his supporting the development of Alternative Fictional Causes for the 91101 and the Collapses of the towers due to the Terrorist Hijacking jetliners and kamakizing them into targets. From the 911truth agenda was to create social enterpenuership from the event.
in reviewing your site we find the Disinfo is when you edit the emails and bend them to the above agenda then make it seem if the data is plagiarized to discredit it. The whole issue is simple I am not the one building assumptions upon someone whom was
booted out of court because of assumptions and falsified evidence.
The Cars recovered from underground garages do not prove space beam weapons. Your lack of understanding of High energy particles, Beta, Theta, alpha, gamma wave propagation from a nuclear blast is astonishing.
What is even more interesting that you would try to confuse Kinetic damage with a nuclear blast.

It is as preposterous for nonscientists to carry on scientific debates based on facts and fiction they pick up from other non-scientists, scientists rendering opinion outside of their areas of expertise, the Alex Joneses and MCB of this world as it is for small-time amateur chess players to carry on discussions of the grand strategies of chess grand masters based on the input from other small time chess amateurs.

Maxwell C. Bridges said...

2018-05-11 MCB

Dear Mr. \\][//,

I just discovered (2018-05-11) this latest work from you that is undoubtedly at the height of your precious wisdom and talents. I thank you for this new homage to me that reveal itself in some of the 80 comments that are re-plays of snippets of our past discussions on Truth & Shadows from 2012.

I won't belabor the obvious point that re-attacking my views from 2012 is a straw-man cheat. I have a new position statement that reflects my maturing and evolving thought: 9/11 FGNW Prima Facie Case (2018-02-11).

I don't need to respond to any of your individual re-purposed extracts nor to your comments from recently. Except for one thing. You are being plagiarized. You might want to look into it and have them stop. Pay attention to the date stamps in order to get context.

You (hybridrogue1) wrote in July 9, 2014 at 1:44 pm "Maxwell Bridges can’t stop lying, for if he does he will have to stop his commentary entirely."

I suspect your comment was vacuumed up (along with plagiarized words from others) into a disinfo bot's database and was sent at me 2016-06-09 in an email. At the time I didn't make the connection they were plagiarizing from you.

Once your comment got into its databases, it was re-used again (2018-04-09) in a comment to my blog [now re-formatted to be within the blog article Part 3.]

I know that you like to copy your passages from one blog to another. But it was still quite the surprise to see the exact same quote again (2018-04-24) on your blog.

There are trends to be extrapolated.

Your \\][// blogging efforts: [1] "Carnival d'Maxifuckanus", [2] "Maxwell Briges: Agitprop Disinformant", and [3] "ELECTRONIC MEDIA".

PhantasyPublishing blogging efforts (that survive): [3] "9/11 FGNW: the natural evolutionary path and most reasonable explanation a fictional work" (2018-04-09) and [4] "more fictional delusional response by Maxwell C. Bridges" (2018-04-09)

// mcb Part 1/2

Maxwell C. Bridges said...

Part 2/2
The selection of "turf" is fascinating, not so much from the perspective of dueling blogs, but in the subject matter. My most current work on FGNW (2016-03-11 & 2018-02-11) do not get taken apart, section-by-section. They don't get addressed at all.

Whereas you have a link to "The physical principles of thermonuclear explosives, inertial confinement fusion, and the quest for fourth generation nuclear weapons" by Andre Gsponer and Jean-Pierre Hurni, you get hung up on future-tense. You don't perform a deep-dive into the work to find out what was present-tense in 2000 (like late-3rd generation) nor if that could be applicable to 9/11. Exhibits both an inability to perform fundamental research and is just another a cheat.

That inability to perform fundamental research is why you hold to the line: "conclusive proof of controlled demolition using chemical explosives." Not true, and you have no proof. Not documented in the USGS Survey of the dust in the tables or explanatory text, nor by the RJLee Group, nor by Paul Lioy et al, nor by Dr. Steven Jones. The latter has never tested his samples for chemical explosives and A&E9/11Truth refused to test when brought to their attention. The true findings from the dust samples were (a) a significant percentage of tiny iron spheres, and (b) the radioactive and decay elements in proportional quantities as signature to fission/fusion devices (appeared in tables but never addressed in text of the USGS Report.)

They say, if you aren't getting any flak, you aren't over the target.

// mcb Part 2/2

Maxwell C. Bridges said...

Part 1/2

{mcb: Another example of plagiarizing from someone else. Coincidence that it comes from Mr. \\][// ?

+++ begin phantasypublishing
May 22, 2018 at 9:53 PM


Oh and the contradictory statements about Dr woods by MCB is so classic good salseman

Judy Wood’s “Text Book”? What makes it a ‘text book’? The fact that it has text in it? That it has illustrations and photo’s? That would make it a ‘picture book’. Perhaps that it has charts and diagrams?

NO! The fact is that the term ‘text book’ is meant to lend it an air of authority – it is a rhetorical trick of PR, nothing more. The actual situation is, when one reads the assertions of Wood’s supporters, it seems they view her book as a holy book, a ‘Bible’, the divine word of Truth. They exhibit all the characteristics of a cult. And few of them that I have encountered could explain any of it in such a way as to show they had any grasp of what it meant. Just that the buildings “went poof” and “dustified”. Just the fucking woowoo language of ‘true believers’.

SEE: http://truthandshadows.wordpress.com/2012/06/02/the-judy-wood-enigma-a-discussion-of-the-most-controversial-figure-in-911-research/

+++ end phantasypublishing

// Part 1/2

Maxwell C. Bridges said...

Part 2/2

Except for the poorly written and punctuated first sentence, the other paragraphs including the URL in the phantasypublishing quotation were plariarized from: hybridrogue1 aka Mr. \\][//, or Mr. Rogue April 24, 2014 at 11:20 am.

Yes, "plagiarized." The copy-&-paste purposely:
- did not differentiate between Mr. phantasypublishing's (few) original words and those stolen from Mr. \\][// and gives a false impression of authorship.
- omitted the hybridrogue1 name for the creator of the stolen comment.
- omitted the \\][// signature of the creator of the stolen comment.
- omitted the URL to the source location of the stolen text.
- promoted the wrong impression with the URL in the stolen text. The stolen text was after-commentary about the T&S discussion, whose link was provided.

Of course, plagiarizing would ~not~ apply:
- if Mr. phantasypublishing is Mr. \\][//; or
- if Mr. \\][//'s efforts were work-for-hire and its copyright owner was the same for Mr. phantasypublishing's work-for-hire efforts; or
- if Mr. \\][// gives Mr. phantasypublishing permission to use Mr. \\][//'s words as Mr. phantasypublishing's own, and without attributing or acrediting the true author.

I would wager that Mr. \\][// would give his immediate and retro-active permission to have any of his penned attacks on me {MCB} re-purposed, re-loaded, and re-shot at me {MCB} by others in a ghost-writing sense. Woo-hoo!

Mr. phantasypublishing is half-bot, so does not yet register and has no algorithm to correct these flaws that flag a lack of (human) morals, or at least the learned (human) fear in modern society of legal action for plagiarism. The human half of Mr. phantasypublishing could reach out to Mr. \\][// and obtain that permission, if Mr. \\][// didn't personally come out to Mr. phantasypublishing's blog and post a comment of appreciation and permission.

// Part 2/2 mcb

Maxwell C. Bridges said...


++++

AlienScientist
August 22, 2012

One more thing... all my debunking is based on science NOT Character Assassination!

If you see anyone attempting to "debunk" someone using character assassination methods, you should automatically see this as a direct signal that they have absolutely no valid argument whatsoever. If they had one, they would present it front and center (like I do) and not even need to use character assassination methods to kill the messenger and ignore the message. This is not called debunking, this is called character assassination. Recognize it and learn to call people out on it!


++++

hybridrogue1
September 5, 2013 at 3:38 pm

“I called Mr. Rogue repeatedly a liar, a cheat, and agent”
~Señor El Once – MARCH 4, 2013 – 1:13 PM

"If you see anyone attempting to "debunk" someone using character assassination methods, you should automatically see this as a direct signal that they have absolutely no valid argument whatsoever."~Jeremy Rys

\\][//

++++

phantasypublishing
May 23, 2018 at 9:09 PM

MCB continues with his fictional statements about plagiarism because his whole alternative 91101 no terrorist no plane argument is invalid as have been all his speculative fiction about Phantasypublishing and hybridrogue1 tackling any specifics from MCB FGNW work he continues his routine through which is predictably fictional in nature

"If you see anyone attempting to "debunk" someone using character assassination methods, you should automatically see this as a direct signal that they have absolutely no valid argument whatsoever."

++++++++++++++++

MCB
2018-05-18

Google can be quite informative when quotation marks are used.

AlienScientist wrote (in ~2012) a sentence worthy of being quoted, which it was (in 2013). Sad that in doing so, HybridRogue1 seems to publicly out AlienScientist.

phantasypublishing uses the same quote again (in 2018) with enough knowledge about its origins to put quotation marks around it, but not enough to credit the true author. A task too complicated for phantasypublishing's algorithms to find who wrote the quote. Owing to other quotes plagiarized from HybridRogue1 and the fact that the AlienScientist reference isn't easy to get to if you didn't know it existed, then it can be logically deduced that HybridRogue1's blog was phantasypublishing's source for the quote.

Ironic that phantasypublishing's poorly written defense against plagiarism charges contains another plagiarized passage, contradicting the assertion "... {MCB's} fictional statements about plagiarism..." Even in being a contradiction, it is also a validation that a bot monitors my blog.

Curious this fragment: "... invalid as have been all {MCB's} speculative fiction about Phantasypublishing and hybridrogue1 tackling any specifics from MCB FGNW work..." Seems as if Phantasypublishing is trying to muscle in on Mr. hybridrogue1's hypnotic suggestions and snag credit for that mistaken belief.

//