comment vs no comment spy vs spy the brain wars

[Joseph Tracy]

Where the hell is the guilt by association?  He simply quotes from Nato materials. and the quotes  are full sentences, not “scare quotes” ( I am actually quoting you here not trying to scare anyone). Scare quotes, a frequently misleading term, generally refer to a short phrase or word in quotes, not to sentences or paragraphs quoted to reveal the ideas expressed.. If you think these many quotes are taken out of context, show how restoring context changes their meaning.

Show me an “unattributed quote”. You are grasping for straws there. He is clear where the quotes are from and there are links.

I understood without the aid of your lame comments that the writers of this material were talking about what they call adversaries.But it is the Nato sponsored writers who fail to truly clarify what that means, not Norton. He doesn’t even comment very much on how weird this shit is. Unusual for him. But the materials he cites are so creepy that why bother. Who after reading this material will be inviting NATO to put a brain control chip in all their devices? 

As to it being old news, sure. Old news freshly revived from the worst paranoia of the cold war and McCarthyism.

What the fuck right  does NATO have to try to shape or limit what I read, think about, who I talk to etc.  There is plenty of that already( Colin Powell lied us into war because he was one of the few in power that people trusted, though many of us knew he was lying his ass off) but putting  the goal of sophisticated warfare to conrol people’s brains in the stark military terms being used is fucking weird, police state, sci-fi nuts.  And Nato writers' idea that some adversary is responsible for social divisions is paranoid nonsense that is comical in its ignorance.  

As to moron commentators I would like to give up, you are near the top of that list. But you keep at it after promising to stop. Keep your ad hominem shit to yourself and I will do the same. If you don’t, I won’t. My interest in this  and my posting of it has little to do with who said it but the source materials quoted. 



> 
> The other article I reject wholesale, however. All those guilt by association quotes you find so telling and I find in their scare quotes way to be a failed high school paper level presentation--I still sting at a college-level course I took in high school where, basically, the teacher said "wtf?" about some unanchored, even unattributed quotes. ; that McCarthyism that starts with ignoring that this report begins in being about 'adversaries", which needs understood, deconstructed first to see IF there are and what they are doing and what this response might therefore mean if it is true. "In a chilling disclosure, the report said explicitly that “the objective of Cognitive Warfare is to harm societies and not only the military."--and is this about--also about?-- what those 'adversaries' are trying to do to NATO countries? ...And is this whole "hacking into one's brain" just another way of speaking about propaganda, controlling what enters our consciousness as we can? Old news, new dog tricks if so. On both sides. 
> 
> Besides all the Right Wing conspiracy sites repeating this vapid shit--and there are Google pages full of them, of course, including one called Communist News, I found the left-leaning, but knowing how to read and think, London Review of Economics piece a decent place to start with something I had not heard about before. It is below but:
> 
> This comes from RT, Russian Times, no lover of NATO, of course: "For example, a 33-page meditation <https://www.innovationhub-act.org/sites/default/files/docs/WoNS.pdf> on the “weaponization of neurosciences,” authored by Herve Le Guyader, professor of evolutionary biology at Bordeaux’s Institut de Cognitique <https://ensc.bordeaux-inp.fr/fr>, avowedly “uses fiction and mixes actual facts and events, fairly logical foresights and some fictitious extrapolations,” and “a few dramatization tricks, at the cost of being a bit provocative to try and keep the reader’s interest,” to weave an extensive, sensational fable about the steps NATO could take to launch a cognitive war."    Solid fact-based stuff, eh Joseph? Give up your moron commentators. 
> 
> "like the plague", Joseph? Again, still so wrong, seeing "the mainstream" akin to the way those pre-emptive condemners of Rooney see her. "I fully expect to see "the mainstream" miss this because I know the mainstream and it always does and has never changed" even though, of course, using your own words and judgments, you do not seem to be aware that 'fascism' and "authoritarianism" and what's causing the Havana Syndrome mind "attacks" and so much more is almost all "the mainstream" IS consumed with these days. If this had reality enough to have legs, it would be all over "the mainstream", I suggest. 
> 
> Pull quote: "At this stage, the discourse about future warfare within NATO is rather abstract". 
> 
> https://www.lse.ac.uk/ideas/Assets/Documents/updates/LSE-IDEAS-NATO-and-the-Future-Character-of-Warfare.pdf <https://www.lse.ac.uk/ideas/Assets/Documents/updates/LSE-IDEAS-NATO-and-the-Future-Character-of-Warfare.pdf>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Sat, Oct 16, 2021 at 8:20 PM Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net <mailto:brook7 at sover.net>> wrote:
>  https://theintercept.com/2021/10/16/lies-told-sally-rooney-refuses-ignore-israeli-apartheid/ <https://theintercept.com/2021/10/16/lies-told-sally-rooney-refuses-ignore-israeli-apartheid/> <https://theintercept.com/2021/10/16/lies-told-sally-rooney-refuses-ignore-israeli-apartheid/ <https://theintercept.com/2021/10/16/lies-told-sally-rooney-refuses-ignore-israeli-apartheid/>>
> Lies Are Being Told About Sally Rooney Because She Refuses to Ignore Israeli Apartheid
> Robert Mackey makes some astute observations concerning the Sally Rooney vortex.  The Irish have many historical reasons to recognize and oppose colonial theft, oppression, apartheid. 
> 
>  mad magazine would have loved this:   https://thegrayzone.com/2021/10/08/nato-cognitive-warfare-brain/ <https://thegrayzone.com/2021/10/08/nato-cognitive-warfare-brain/> <https://thegrayzone.com/2021/10/08/nato-cognitive-warfare-brain/ <https://thegrayzone.com/2021/10/08/nato-cognitive-warfare-brain/>>
> Western governments in the NATO military alliance are developing tactics of “cognitive warfare,” using the supposed threats of China and Russia to justify waging a “battle for your brain” in the “human domain,” to “make everyone a weapon.”
> 
> Some would discount Ben Norton but he does his homework and just the quotes from the NATO  materials is so off-the-wall fascist it deserves a certain awareness since the mainstream avoids this kind of thing like the plague.  This really is some weird shit. 
> 
> 
> --
> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l <https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l>