comment vs no comment spy vs spy the brain wars

[Mark Kohut]

You see, I praised YOU for sending that good intercept article. And I
criticized the bad article, not you, not calling you a moron.

That simple meaning of ad hominem has never registered with you, of course.

Although I am a leading person on your never-read-again list, I liked your
observations on *Bleeding Edge* today.

On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 11:37 PM Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:

> 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>
>
> --
> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
>