Friday, November 2, 2012

Beware The Alternative Mainstream

A growing number of people no longer trust the MSM (mainstream media). Those of us with sufficient functioning brain cells, can no longer ignore their constant, shameless lying about practically everything. Lots of people still believe them though. They think: "If they all talk about the same thing, it must be important. If they all tell the same story, it must be true." They find it hard to accept that a small group of players, with a shared interest in controlling information in order to steer public perception to benefit themselves, could actually achieve that aim. They'll tell you there are far too many people employed in mass-media for a small group to censor effectively.

But we know differently. We know it doesn't work that way. There is rarely a need for outright censorship. All you have to do is hire and promote the right key people: those who already agree with your message, and those who are unscrupulous, clever and ambitious enough to play along. Those key people do likewise, and so on down the line. It's extremely rare for media people to step out of bounds. If they do, it doesn't matter how much popularity or industry clout they might seem to have. Who would have believed that personalities with the fan-base and exposure of Rosie O'Donnell, or Martin Sheen, could see their media careers destroyed overnight? If they can't afford to break ranks, who can? What I found especially disturbing, was the way their former colleagues turned on them, ripping them to pieces, with such gusto. Examples like theirs serve as a warning to the rest. There's no need to spell it out; message received. The MSM controls information by promoting those who are "on message" and ignoring or destroying those who are not.

The MSM is so obviously corrupt, that so-called "alternative media" is attracting a growing audience. The plutocratic control-freaks, who own the MSM, are aware of this trend. It would be wise to assume that they have taken steps to deal with the threat. The simplest solution (for them) would be to create an alternative mainstream media (AMSM). They could then continue to control information by promoting those who are "on message" and ignoring or destroying those who are not. Guess what?

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but signs abound that this is the case:
Alternative carefully crafted narratives that benefit TPTB.
Alternative bullshit stories being promoted by key personalities, then taken up and repeated uncritically by all.
A pack mentality that discourages dissent.

A whole bunch of people think they've woken up, but they're just dreaming a different dream. Oh, you didn't buy that lie? How about this one? Sold! Have you noticed what happens to anyone who tries to expose a false AMSM narrative, or criticizes a member of the AMSM clique? Did you notice the treatment of Judy Wood? It was almost like she had committed some crime. Did you see what happened to Henry Makow? I never liked him. I think he's ignorant, paranoid and delusional; the AMSM should have ousted him for those things. But they didn't. He was ostracised by the clique for criticising Rense. I thought it ironic, since Makow's complaints, in this case, seemed justified. What's even more ironic is way the AMSM openly congratulates itself for doing this. In a reversal of truth worthy of the original MSM, they claim that those who challenge any member of the clique are the probable enemy agents. "We should be united," they say; "We can't afford to argue amongst ourselves." They behave as though there were no possibility of cointelpro agents within their group. What breath-taking arrogance! (If not: stupidity, and if not: a lie.)

Just as in the MSM, this sort of careless toe-crushing is rare. Most AMSM clique members know better. "If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all," is the rule. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the fate of humanity at stake here? Should suppressing legitimate criticism, to spare people's feelings, really be a top priority?

I don't mean to suggest that every member of the AMSM clique is a conscious agent of the control system. I sincerely hope not, and I don't believe it. On the other hand, enough of them are, that they can render harmless, or eliminate, any serious threat to the system. In other words: many are sincere, but misinformed, and thus considered harmless to the agenda of the real PTB. If I had to guess, I'd put David Icke in that group. I think he's sincere, and has many fine qualities, but I also think he's a manipulator's dream because, he's a bad judge of character. Surely, even he has to admit that. How many times has he been betrayed by those he trusted? The answer: more times than he suspects.

(Update, Oct. 23, 2013-
I can no longer give Icke the benefit of the doubt. Too much time has passed, during which, he has failed to correct any of the glaring errors in his work, although he must have been alerted to them. He continues to promote people who deserve to be exposed for the money-grubbing, self-promoting frauds that they are. Birds of a feather, I guess.)

By contrast, Jordan Maxwell is one of those Icke shouldn't have trusted, but did. Maxwell's "research" is a mixture of cherry-picked anomalies and out-right fabrication. He has spawned a veritable army of replicant minions. The only research they've ever done is listening to Maxwell. None of them bothered to check his information, and all of them owe Maxwell for their otherwise inexplicable fame. They're counting on you not knowing the difference between repetition and corroboration. Maxwell is the primary source for some of Icke's weakest assertions. Yet Icke is freely ridiculed, while Maxwell is pretty much untouchable. Why is that?

It seems to me that some areas of inquiry are more heavily controlled and infiltrated than others: religion/astrotheology, 2012, ufology, alternative history, etc. Heavy infiltration and control reliably indicate important secrets that must be kept. Therefore, I think we need to focus more attention on those subjects, but starting from the assumption that the dominant narratives are false.

If we really want to discover the truth of humanity's plight, we're going to have to resist the efforts of the controllers to foist their alternative lies upon us. Some things I'd suggest are:
1. We could stop being so tragically naive. Acknowledge the fact that the AMSM is being controlled in the same way as the MSM, and treat it accordingly. Admit that the field has been infiltrated. Start attending to the who, where and why.
2. We could be more suspicious of any story that's being over-sold. Everybody saying something doesn't make it true, in the AMSM any more than in the MSM. In either case it's more likely to be a diversion or a psy-op. Furthermore, oversold stories usually indicate the particular areas of heaviest infiltration.
3. We could stop discouraging debate. Sincere seekers of truth don't fear a challenge. They welcome it. The people pressuring everyone to play nicely and get along are the ones we should be wary of. We need less politics and more honesty.

8 comments:

  1. This is a really important subject and thank you for drawing attention to it.
    The AMSM is most certainly infiltrated. It is ridiculous to even consider that it wouldn't be.
    You need only look at the interplay between the establishment and the peace movements of the 1960s. For all the best of intentions, both sides were steered by many of the same individuals.
    9/11 is a classic example.
    There is a wealth of research and movements that are (as Andrew Johnson calls them) "limited hangouts".
    The promoters of these specific hangouts are very clever because they give the novice just enough information to recognise that something is wrong with the official story, but far from enough to recognise the larger implications of those events.
    I know many well intentioned folk who have taken an interest in hidden aspects of the world, but have never ventured much beyond the limited perspective - simply because they consider such notion as too far "out there"!
    It takes a fair amount of time to recognise the inconsistancies and some people can't be bothered to dig beneath the initial layers.
    Thank you also for mentioning Dr Judy Wood as I think tireless researchers like her get us just that bit closer to perhaps understanding the "bigger picture".
    The sad truth is (I believe) that the only honest way to get people to wake up is by doing it one person at a time. Each individual with there own perspective, unbiased by any other. The chorus builds from those voices, rather than one repetitive and monotonous chant!
    All the best!
    Carl (The 'Guide)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Carl.
      I'd definitely put secret technology in the category of "secrets that must be kept." I think that one is behind a lot of the Ufology disinformation as well. Aside from that aspect though, 911 doesn't seem that heavily controlled. Or is it? I expect you'd know better than me.
      I've spent more time investigating the class of big secrets relating to consciousness and how it's manipulated. Believe me, that is some heavily controlled information. Astrotheology is one of those repeating narratives of conspiracy research. It's practically become an established fact. Only problem is: it's bogus, almost entirely made up. It would be a lot easier to correct, if it's creators were merely mistaken. I've tried to think of some plausible way they could have been, and failed. It's really hard to just come out and accuse people, so well protected, of lying. I suppose that's why no one has, or if they have, I've never heard it.
      You're so right; natural consensus is the only kind worth having. Imposed consensus practically defines the control system, the thing we're meant to be resisting. I think, wherever it appears, that system is at work.
      All the best to you too!

      Delete
  2. Hello Amanda Once again you have provided us with a great post.I am constantly amazed by the number of "good" people who tend to believe everything they hear or see from the media. For the most part, to me at least, the mass media scares the hell outta me! Sure hope you and yours have amost wonderful weekend!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Ron.
      I'm with you. I abandoned the MSM years ago, so I only have a vague idea what goes on there. When I do get involuntarily exposed to TV, it actually makes me feel like I'm being assaulted. I think, "Who could possibly mistake that insane asylum for reality?" It genuinely worries me that no one seems to notice how twisted and demeaning it is.
      Best to and yours as well!

      Delete
  3. Good post. Some of what you say is borne out in relation to my own research into 9/11 - the AMSM as you call it has indeed created several false narratives and promoted most or all of them. See here: http://tinyurl.com/911ftb

    The techniques employed in the 911 alternative cover up are almost certainly in use elsewhere - to reading the above might help you to recognise them more easily.

    I disagree with your final point, debate is encouraged in the AMSM more than in the MSM and this is a more effective tool for covering up known truths in many circumstances. This is illustrated most clearly in the example that we now know how the WTC was destroyed, yet the cover up crew still want to debate it. If you read this article, you can hopefully see what I mean.

    http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=350&Itemid=60

    The whole conference was focused around "debate" rather than presenting the truth.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Andrew.
      Thanks. I'll check those links.
      I didn't have 911 in mind as a heavily controlled area, with the exception of the secret technology aspect. I see a different primary tactic played there. Namely: create confusion by mixing unrelated issues. Then debate flies off in too many directions and nothing get's resolved. (They used that one with Occupy also.) It seems they mostly want to keep it out of the mainstream. So long as most people won't look at it, I don't think it matters to TPTB what you or I know (with limited exceptions).
      In some other areas of research, debate just doesn't happen at all.
      Best wishes.

      Delete
  4. Pip pip, here here, and all that. Very well stated.

    In Lak' Ech, prosper in love or be an ass.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Chris.
      Thanks very much.
      I'll take door #1.
      In Lak'ech.

      Delete