Forum Post: Occupy The Sheep!-Keep them busy discussing endless problems, away from solution.
Posted 12 years ago on March 14, 2012, 1:17 a.m. EST by TruthRightsFreedom
(259)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
The only threads that are not buried here are those chained to the deck by the infiltrating forces of confusion that keep the useless information floating.
If you can't get the sheep watching football, then get them complaining, but only complaining.
Sure, I've found some nice tidbits here, but I've lost many more. Discussion amongst the minority of sincere posters is all but impossible when there are hundreds of bots with timers reposting bumpertext and keeping low priority issues at the top of the thread cue.
The infiltrating bot handlers cannot talk solution, and if that is Article V and using it to defend the constitution, their nonsense will stand out. They are exposed as supporting treason if they activily oppose.
To discuss Article V meaningfully, a forum dedicated to it is the place to begin. This deals with the layers of priority and preparation for an Article V convention.
If we agree upon solution that empowers lawful and peaceful revolution then return here to OWS to show our agreement, the lurkers will realize that part of America finally figured out what works and will get involved more meaningfully.
This forum has once again been mostly cleansed of those who would try to render it mute.
Does that mean the censorship shown, you approve of?
Oh, cut the crap. You know the difference between constructive disagreement, and obstructionism. I'm tired of neo-con trolls crying because they can't post terroristic threatening, hate speech, and lies here to slime this forum. Get your own damned forum and spew that slime at each other, so it will be directed where it is deserved.
I'm very surprised at your response GypsyKing. Censorship of reasonable information is not good.
In reading that 9-11 thread I find nothing "terroristic". The single comment there links to a site authored by a physicist.
In reading the thread about the legal concept using the soldiers oath and the principles of the constitution to defend the constitution, I find nothing "terroristic".
After some research, I find the author of that is a major Advocate of Article V, which I'm just beginning to understand.
So how would you term your comment, "constructive disagreement" or "obstructionism". Either, when shown censorship is not appropriate. And, I don't see either thread as something "neo-con trolls" would post.
My neighbor, a republican, calls me a "flaming liberal". You need to explain yourself in order to show you are reasonable, please.
I don't think reasonable discussions by people of opposing views have been censored here at all. Quite the opposite! I've seen posts, not to mention comments posted here that I would not want children to even look at. That argument doesn't hold water for me, unless I misinterpreted the meaning of what you were saying, I stand firmly by that view.
Maybe you don't get it. These threads never appear in the forum.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/farrakhan-and-richard-gage/ http://occupywallst.org/forum/how-does-a-soldier-defend-the-constitution-from-a-/
And, after investigating this I've found that the author of one of them has made a page about the secret "techno censorship".
http://algoxy.com/ows/owsinfiltratingforum.html
What you've said is these views are opposing. That is cognitively the reverse of what they are. The views support the public perceptions of what OWS states it stands for. They are conjunct and compatible views with the movement.
Then you've said that posts you would not want children to read are not censored. This performance you describe is opposite to what the movement stands for.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/how-do-a-soldier-defend-the-constitution-from-a-do/
justice has been served
What do you mean?
i made a new thread
So where's the link?
http://occupywallst.org/forum/how-do-a-soldier-defend-the-constitution-from-a-do/
Hey, right on! That one is good for Article V and the future. You got that post where it can be seen, it will make a difference. I posted in it and it came up. Can you see my post okay?
yes i can thank you
I agree with you that if these posts have been censored then that is a very serious problem. Wasn't it Trashy that was always on about censoring "conspiracy theory? I made a post about that, in which I argued that "conspiracy theory" is a term that really has no meaning, and is simply a way of controling free thought.
I posted on your forum link, and indeed it didn't come to the top. Furthermore, I agree with its premice.
I was not aware of any situation going on like that, and the fact that somebody is trying to censor posts about 911 should in itself be be enough to make anyone extremely suspicious. They have tried, and largely succeded in puting that subject "beyond the bounds of thinkable thought. But in the future people will be able to see the obvious - for what that's worth - which ain't much.
There have, I believe, been a number of times that the moderation here has taken over ny this movements detractors. That situation seems to have changed hands several times in the months I've been posting here.
But you are right, I wasn't aware of THIS problem.
Very good! THX for accountability in recognition:) Very important here.
There is techno censorship being surrepticiously used to prevent not just what might be called conspiracy theory, but also direct defense of the constitution is being blocked. Read that other thread closely.
Citizens are trying to organize and unify to expose treason causing perhaps hundreds of thousands of deaths abroad (some here) and seriously compromising Americas constitution and perhaps the very lives of Americans tomorrow.
You are right. I find the censoring of that thread very disturbing. I posted on the thread and it didn't come to the top of the forum. and I knew the first time I saw the footage of the towers going down that they had been "pulled."
Good comeback GK. Constructive criticism and different political ideology is one thing.....but "terroristic threatening, hate speech, and lies..." is quite another thing. It only exposes a person's personal depravity....which undoubtedly does not turn itself off.... after the vile comments they leave behind here on this forum....and it makes the legitimate followers of his shared political philosophy look far worse than actually are. Where we may differ GK is my feeling is, let them SPEW....as it only hurts their cause..and hence helps ours.
You are perhaps right about letting them spew their venom. I really never saw it in quite that light. Thanks.
I know how difficult it is not to get down in the gutter with these trolls...but by staying on the high road...our message becomes more credible amongst the the thoughtful people that we are trying to bring on board. We are never going to change the minds of some...no matter what. You can call me on it though...if I don't follow my own advice, and end up blasting someone here...OK?!
Good attitude there, and you are correct.
The word trolls only applies to a few however, the rest are agents or fitting in with the "agenda" society. They want to be called trolls because it is less destructive to the agenda than being seen as those that purposefully work to destroy witnesses cognitive, or real appreciation of a meaningful agreement.
Thanks
LOL! When I don't have better things to do, I just like to expose their disinformation, because a surprizing number of people acually buy it. But your point is well taken . . . on to better things!
Once again, you've crystalized my thoughts, Gypsy. :-) , tho I have to say that you show far more tolerance of them than I in engaging them.
Well, what I have tried to do here is bring the truth regarding the various issues to light. I think Shadz66 is a lot better at drawing up links to prove his points than I am. The computer age came a little after my time, and so I am reduced to simply useing dialogue to try to get at the truth. That's why I engage them, because a lie repeated often enough and not rebutted eventually comes to be accepted as true, and that more than anything is an issue of national security.
A nation that comes to accept lies as truth is a nation doomed.
Our nation has accepted lies as truth for far, far too long, Gypsy. You're fighting spirit is inspirational. Perhaps we can turn this thing around yet, hey?
Truth, truth, truth . . . no matter how beautiful, painful, or uncomfortable, is our weapon - the weapon that will eventually turn the tide.
Truth is a tool to build a future of freedom. If I might I suggest a slight change of terminology creating love instead of war. For those living in deceit, its painful enough just having the world truth know of the suffering they have caused. An eternal mark, Dharma.
You understand nothing. What an amazing liar you are. Who fed you those lines?
Technically, the First Amendment doesn't limit the ability of non-government entities or individuals from restricting speech on their property (to whatever extent they wish). As a conservative, you agree with this in every other context don't you?
A label such as "conservative" distorts my appreciation for the constitution.
Clearly, when examining principles, and I detect an effort to place the value of private property over all others, appreciation for the rights we share is justified because we always know what property is, but certainly not the nature of speech which might take place within or upon it.
Or, that such speech might even protect the life of the owner of the property.
If such an owner refused anothers speech while on their property that is an actual warning to the owner that their life is endangered, they could be committed for being insane. Consider that such speech might protect life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and the constitution which guarantees such rights.
Now you are placing the rights of private property over life, not just the owners life, but perhaps that of the entire nation.
Just how important is the constitution to you?
Its interpretation is more important than the document itself.
Nothing in it is useful, without a useful interpretation.
Well said, and the intentions of those interpreting can be seen in any distortions found. Which is why Lincoln states the people are the masters of the congress and courts.
We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution. Abraham Lincoln
I'm still here - and OWS is still lost & totally misguided
Of course we should have an article V convention
Daddies so afraid, wants everyone else to be afraid.
I'm only for Article V IF all delegates are required by voters; AND this will be a maximum democratic convention to propose amendments; required to propose and ratify amendment that fully counters the abridgement of freespeech, reforms campaign finance and secureds voting/election systems.
Then it doesn't matter what those a'holes want.
I DO NOT UNDERSTAND
1>"I'm only for Article V IF all delegates are required by voters;"
AND
2>"this will be a maximum democratic convention to propose amendments; required to propose and ratify amendment"
no convention can propose an ratify
please explain
1>ANS.All delegates are required to propose and ratify amendment that fully counters the abridgment of freespeech, reforms campaign finance and secured voting/election systems.
2>ANS.Due to the fact that America has been deprived of its constitutional rights by congress for 100 years. There is a complaint to the US attorney general right now because of this.
http://www.watchblog.com/thirdparty/archives/007894.html
Due to the deprival, there has been an embedding of unconstitutional interests in state legislation will impede an Article V, accordingly the delegates, in order to maximum constitutional intent, MU ST be democratically elected AND voters need to have opportunity to propose amendments democratically to delegates, as well as vote upon amendment ratification in state elections.
Conventions in the several states can propose to the state legislation amendments. Conventions in the several states can ratify proposed amendments of other states.
When 3/4 of the states legislations ratify, the constitution is amended.
No, congress does not have any say IF 3/4 of the states are ratifying. Which is WHY, *the abridgment of free speech must be countered, campaign finance reform is needed, and voting/election systems must be secured.
Ah yes, discussion devoid of spin, slant, and propoganda. That certainly is a negative thing if you fear learning, and the power of truth dissseminated. You know very well that citizen diologue is the greatest thing to be feared. Why do you think the 1% have tried to close off the commons, close off anyplace where people can congregate and speak freely?
We must ressert our right to public commons, and to venues like this foum, and keep reasserting them until we once again have a democracy.
GypsyKing, you are mixing opposite meanings that cause cognitive confusion.
GypsyKing wrote: "Ah yes, discussion devoid of spin, slant, and propoganda. That certainly is a negative thing if you fear learning, and the power of truth dissseminated."
Those who fear learning and truth would want spin, slant and propaganda.
GypsyKing wrote: "We must ressert our right to public commons, and to venues like this foum,"
Meaning you should be open to recognizing censorship, but you are not.
What I have seen in the past is a lack of censorship of those posting terroristic threatening, anti-semitism, and a lot of weird psych-ops stuff. But I looked at the post you cited, and if that was censored, and apparently it was, I agree with you that's very disturbing. I as not aware of that situation and thank you for bringing it to my attention.
It may be more than this, but I think part of your frustrations are in the limitations of the Forum software we are using. If it had just a few more functionality capabilities, I think a lot of the clarity you are seeking could/would emerge.
I share your frustrations.
Okay, share these frustrations then. Threads in the hidden directory. Post in them and they never appear in the forum. This helps the sheep herders alot.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/farrakhan-and-richard-gage/ http://occupywallst.org/forum/how-does-a-soldier-defend-the-constitution-from-a-/
What's an infiltrating bot handler?
Are you talking about trolls?
Article V has been discussed on the forum on and off for months now.
What else you want us to do?
"Trolls" is what the nwo wants us to call'em. They are nwo agents,or agents of others of that ilk, infiltrating secretly, with bots invisibly augmenting their singularity with false multitudes. Meaning they can outnumber the legit users, will only discuss problems whereupon the users can hardly think of solution as something worthy to discuss.
The term troll, was coined into the nomenclature during the "flame wars" in the old BBS system. Are you saying that the BBS was infiltrated by a user named nwo?
Now wait. Is the nwo a troll, or are the trolls nwo?
Is the bot then an nwo?
This is getting confusing.
Who, or what should we be looking out for?
[Removed]
nwo stands for New World Order, or global conspiracy.
New World Order?
Shit...They're just shufflin' the cards.
They've been doing it for 500 years or so..............................;)
What's your take on how they're shufflin'. What game are they playin'. Hell, at this point I think they're even introducing new suits. The evil bastards!
They're getting ready to shuffle.
They're still playing 52 card pick up after they dropped the deck.......:)
Lol.....What a vision!!! Hahahaha...I can see them now. Kissinger and the Queen and Brzezinski all running around tripping over each other in their aged hunched over stupors picking up cards, with Evelyn pulling at his hair yelling "the power....how will we keep the power". Hahahahah!
Geesh! Why can't those old buggers just croak?!?!
It would make a pretty cool video!..........:)
Yeah... people say the rich are in control now more than ever, but I think it's just more obvious now than ever. They used to control 100% of the media, but thanks to the internet, people get more of their information and commentary from their fellow man just as they did during the founding era. It could be real good for the spirit of liberty, that's why the 1% controlled congress tried to shove multiple internet regulation bills through congress recently. I think someone is scared about this whole "freedom" thing taking root :)
July 12th is the ultimatum for the download pirates, here in the US.
It's gonna get interesting.
A sample of the forum 3/24/12- A manipulated environment that is dominated by insubsantial issues. What happened to campaign finance reform, or solutions for it? How about corporate personhood? WTF, are Americans really this distractable?
The strategy of doing the unthinkable Exactly how is this going to see that the people demand/needs are met? An exercise in sensationalist, activist thinking.
15 trillion in debt ? Why should we pay it back, we earned it !
An inflammatory question with no bearing in any solution. Begging for an argument
OWS: Not Yesterday's Hippies
Social slander seeking frivolous argument.
Expect gasoline prices to continue to rise - 3 oil refineries now off line on the East Coast
Fear mongering and immersion in the hoplessness of corporate dependence.
Today at 6pm, Union Square: Demand Justice for Trayvon Martin!
A good thing, but certainly tragedy set up to create controversy that solves no problem. I've heard that people who submit for concealed carry permits get a call from a federal entity asking them if they would like to become "Neighborhood watch" members.
Is this a good job app question? With whom and how often do you have sex?
A controversy intended to get attention and stimulate non productive discussion far from solving any problem.
NYPD Says OWS Dumped Feces & Urine In ATM Vestibule And Down Stairs
An inflammatory controversy intended to create opposition from OWS that simply brings the derision into view. Basis or no basis in fact means nothing.
Now that birth control is absolutely free, in 10months abortions will be extinct.
Playing on the religious divisions to stimulate useless discussion.
In Union Square, Occupy Is Blooming
False hopefulness and empty zeal of a movement completely lacking strategy. No solution proposed and, it is not a solution.
We need legislation to separate wallstreet from residential property
Focusing on the tools of the elite rather than the government that should be controlling them.
What happenned to the people who were posting about Article V here? They left, because those here are either part of a false social group, an infiltration, or so caught up in politics as usual, that they cannot even think of solution let alone discuss it. Or, censorship convinced them that this is an unfriendly place for those working to defend the constitution.
""NATO is staging "Massacre of Christians in Syria by Muslims", by bringing Al Qaida and other radical Islamists to Syria, in order to initiate a war, where they can nuke Iran, give a lesson to rising China, control Middle East oil resources, and allow some people to print as much money as they wish by using petrodollars, so they can control the society and the world through their wealth and power. This will also allow capitalism to continue by breaking the Eastern and the Socialist spirituality which is growing around the world and which is the biggest threat to capitalist ruling elite. ""
I'm sure we would prefer solutions rather than predictions of problems that do not exist yet.
I suggest you start a thread on sustainability,
http://www.sustainability.com
and non violent communication,
http://www.cnvc.org/about/what-is-nvc.html
to atone for your breach of common sense related to the topic of this thread.
I'm serious :) -
[Removed]
Okay. You figured it out.
Group think effort on brainfart mission.
Yep, I've seen the cointelpro psyops easily for awhile now. Misleading by example is the technique. With bots it's very efficient.
It's more than the sheep can understand, but good post!
I mean after all, if the nation were shipwrecked, these sheep would rather assemble and write a petition to redress grievances than swim.
this protest is achieving it's goals - redressing grievances keeps the bots busy and let's us know where the enemy plans to attack us. The first year was a bit sticky - it takes time for millions of people to coagulate into one movement - but faster than a corporation can put together an ad campaign - we have done it...noone questions the movement's purpose anymore - they only want to know how we can fix it That's a huge step right there. - First there was denial, then there was anger, then there was well you get the idea we're coming for the one percent - pretty soon they will have to accept it there is no going back now... the awareness has already spread
Yes, I believe it intended to make a lot of noise and complain, yes it was successful there. Does redressing mean "posturing in apologetic gesture"? If I remember correctly, the enemy most often will attack where you gather.
Now it seems any gathering is quickly quelled.
Correct, I feel that most people have been able to discern that the movement has no purpose, but instead, a great deal of complaint about many very real problems. To evidence this I can say that I've not seen one viable suggestion for solution that actually defines a legal process to compel any meangful redress. I've actually noticed at the NYCGA that solution invoking legal process as solution is ignored.
Somehow, perhaps, within the groups thinking, that became, "politics" and the movement plans no political action. So nothing is done.
elf3 wrote: "they only want to know how we can fix it That's a huge step right there."
Can you point me at that group that wants to know? I ask that because there are few here that discuss what is the only real solution and political process, Article V of the constitution. If I could find them, would it be too bold to suggest that the people are going to see their needs are met by compelling an Article V convention, and the 1% would be advised to stand aside?
They is the corporate media - the one crucial ingredient in freedom is free press. That is gone now... but slowly they have to shift their rhetoric as the climate and audience shifts their views about us - or their intentions begin to get too obvious. They have to at least pretend to be objective - if you watch the news enough the agenda becomes clear but you can clearly see when they have to shift their talking points around as the populous wakes up. The system will change as well by default when the corruption of the political process becomes so obvious the public begins to turn on it and slowly it will have to adhere to the will of the people.
Hmmm, you've anwered a question not asked. I quoted the last part of this,
elf3 wrote: "we have done it...noone questions the movement's purpose anymore - they only want to know how we can fix it That's a huge step right there. -"
You have answered that the media wants to fix the movement because you did not understand the question.
Again, who is they in this phrase.
elf3 wrote: "they only want to know how we can fix it That's a huge step right there."
Methodology is vital. When a movement engages legal processes then the average person, not enamored with the movement, but completely supportive of having all of their rights under the historical social contract we have, the constitution, becomes a part of something with immense lawful power.
Check out the strategy for realizing a democracy like we've never seen but always dreamed of throught your first and last constitutional right, Article V. I'm reading a thread at a forum dedicated to that and it's the goods. WTF couldn't OWS figure this out and seek to meet demand and forget the puny 1%'ers.
http://articlevconvention.org/showthread.php?33-Amendment-By-Layers-Of-Priority-constitutionAmendment-Package-Making-CONST.-Intent