Thread: Were the Manson Killings a Government Black Op?

Results 1 to 10 of 34

Hybrid View

  1. #1 Were the Manson Killings a Government Black Op? 
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    I'd never thought about this until I listened to this radio program.

    http://www.kpfa.org/archives/index.php?arch=25600

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_op
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter...counterculture

    It doesn't sound like such a far-fetched theory when we consider all the other stuff the US government has pulled off.
    http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...33221213939183
    video (dot) google (dot) com/videoplay?docid=-8136133221213939183

    People were figuring out that the govenment was lying to them about why they were in Vietnam. The counter-culture was thinking independently. The government was losing it's ability to form the people's political thinking. Whether it was a black op or not, the government used it to discredit the movement.

    A lot of people were basing their opinions of the Vietnam war on info like this; that was a big problem for the government.
    http://www.chss.montclair.edu/englis...skyin1282.html
    (excerpt)
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Q: When the Indochina war ended in 1975 you wrote that our nation's "official" opinion makers would engage in distortion of the lessons to be drawn from the war so that the same basic foreign policy goals could be pursued after the war. You felt then that in order to keep the real meaning of the war from penetrating the general public they faced two major tasks: First, they would have to disguise the fact that the war "was basically an American attack on South Vietnam -- a war of annihilation that spilled over to the rest of Indochina". And secondly, they would have to obscure the fact that the military effort in Vietnam "was restrained by a mass movement of protest and resistance here at home which engaged in effective direct action outside the bounds of propriety long before established spokesmen proclaimed themselves to be its leaders". Where do we stand now on these two issues--seven years later?
    Chomsky: As far as the opinion makers are concerned, they have been doing exactly what it was obvious they would do. Every book that comes out, every article that comes out, talks about how -- while it may have been a "mistake" or an "unwise effort" -- the United States was defending South Vietnam from North Vietnamese aggression. And they portray those who opposed the war as apologists for North Vietnam. That's standard to say.
    The purpose is obvious: to obscure the fact that the United States did attack South Vietnam and the major war was fought against South Vietnam. The real invasion of South Vietnam which was directed largely against the rural society began directly in 1962 after many years of working through mercenaries and client groups. And that fact simply does not exist in official American history. There Is no such event in American history as the attack on South Vietnam. That's gone. Of course, It Is a part of real history. But it's not a part of official history.
    And most of us who were opposed to the war, especially in the early 60's -- the war we were opposed to was the war on South Vietnam which destroyed South Vietnam's rural society. The South was devastated. But now anyone who opposed this atrocity is regarded as having defended North Vietnam. And that's part of the effort to present the war as if it were a war between South Vietnam and North Vietnam with the United States helping the South. Of course it's fabrication. But it's "official truth" now.
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    http://michaelparenti.org/Imperialism101.html
    (exerpt)
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    By "imperialism" I mean the process whereby the dominant politico-economic interests of one nation expropriate for their own enrichment the land, labor, raw materials, and markets of another people.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    North American and European corporations have acquired control of more than three-fourths of the known mineral resources of Asia, Africa, and Latin America.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Of the various notions about imperialism circulating today in the United States, the dominant view is that it does not exist. Imperialism is not recognized as a legitimate concept, certainly not in regard to the United States. One may speak of "Soviet imperialism" or "nineteenth-century British imperialism" but not of U.S. imperialism. A graduate student in political science at most universities in this country would not be granted the opportunity to research U.S. imperialism, on the grounds that such an undertaking would not be scholarly. While many people throughout the world charge the United States with being an imperialist power, in this country persons who talk of U.S. imperialism are usually judged to be mouthing ideological blather.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Here's some stuff about how the CIA allegedly programs people to do things they normally wouldn't do and then erases their memories.
    http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=dOARWX3OjFc
    es (dot) youtube (dot) com/watch?v=dOARWX3OjFc

    http://es.youtube.com/results?search...a+mind+control

    Of course, I can't be sure whether this theory is true or not. I just think it's worth some serious consideration as it fits the big picture. I certainly don't rule it out.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    Senior Member ironhorsedriver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Coal Fields of WV
    Posts
    503
    Where's the ignore button?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmored View Post
    I'd never thought about this until I listened to this radio program.

    http://www.kpfa.org/archives/index.php?arch=25600

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_op
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter...counterculture

    It doesn't sound like such a far-fetched theory when we consider all the other stuff the US government has pulled off.
    http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...33221213939183
    video (dot) google (dot) com/videoplay?docid=-8136133221213939183

    People were figuring out that the govenment was lying to them about why they were in Vietnam. The counter-culture was thinking independently. The government was losing it's ability to form the people's political thinking. Whether it was a black op or not, the government used it to discredit the movement.

    A lot of people were basing their opinions of the Vietnam war on info like this; that was a big problem for the government.
    http://www.chss.montclair.edu/englis...skyin1282.html
    (excerpt)
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Q: When the Indochina war ended in 1975 you wrote that our nation's "official" opinion makers would engage in distortion of the lessons to be drawn from the war so that the same basic foreign policy goals could be pursued after the war. You felt then that in order to keep the real meaning of the war from penetrating the general public they faced two major tasks: First, they would have to disguise the fact that the war "was basically an American attack on South Vietnam -- a war of annihilation that spilled over to the rest of Indochina". And secondly, they would have to obscure the fact that the military effort in Vietnam "was restrained by a mass movement of protest and resistance here at home which engaged in effective direct action outside the bounds of propriety long before established spokesmen proclaimed themselves to be its leaders". Where do we stand now on these two issues--seven years later?
    Chomsky: As far as the opinion makers are concerned, they have been doing exactly what it was obvious they would do. Every book that comes out, every article that comes out, talks about how -- while it may have been a "mistake" or an "unwise effort" -- the United States was defending South Vietnam from North Vietnamese aggression. And they portray those who opposed the war as apologists for North Vietnam. That's standard to say.
    The purpose is obvious: to obscure the fact that the United States did attack South Vietnam and the major war was fought against South Vietnam. The real invasion of South Vietnam which was directed largely against the rural society began directly in 1962 after many years of working through mercenaries and client groups. And that fact simply does not exist in official American history. There Is no such event in American history as the attack on South Vietnam. That's gone. Of course, It Is a part of real history. But it's not a part of official history.
    And most of us who were opposed to the war, especially in the early 60's -- the war we were opposed to was the war on South Vietnam which destroyed South Vietnam's rural society. The South was devastated. But now anyone who opposed this atrocity is regarded as having defended North Vietnam. And that's part of the effort to present the war as if it were a war between South Vietnam and North Vietnam with the United States helping the South. Of course it's fabrication. But it's "official truth" now.
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    http://michaelparenti.org/Imperialism101.html
    (exerpt)
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    By "imperialism" I mean the process whereby the dominant politico-economic interests of one nation expropriate for their own enrichment the land, labor, raw materials, and markets of another people.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    North American and European corporations have acquired control of more than three-fourths of the known mineral resources of Asia, Africa, and Latin America.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Of the various notions about imperialism circulating today in the United States, the dominant view is that it does not exist. Imperialism is not recognized as a legitimate concept, certainly not in regard to the United States. One may speak of "Soviet imperialism" or "nineteenth-century British imperialism" but not of U.S. imperialism. A graduate student in political science at most universities in this country would not be granted the opportunity to research U.S. imperialism, on the grounds that such an undertaking would not be scholarly. While many people throughout the world charge the United States with being an imperialist power, in this country persons who talk of U.S. imperialism are usually judged to be mouthing ideological blather.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Here's some stuff about how the CIA allegedly programs people to do things they normally wouldn't do and then erases their memories.
    http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=dOARWX3OjFc
    es (dot) youtube (dot) com/watch?v=dOARWX3OjFc

    http://es.youtube.com/results?search...a+mind+control

    Of course, I can't be sure whether this theory is true or not. I just think it's worth some serious consideration as it fits the big picture. I certainly don't rule it out.
    Dude. Really?

    TAKE YOUR HANDS OFF THE KEYBOARD AND SLOWLY BACK AWAY!!!

    Comso,what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent post were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone on this message board is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

    Have a nice day!

    :)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    Comso,what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent post were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone on this message board is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
    I usually don't respond to empty rhetoric but did you even listen to the radio program?

    http://www.kpfa.org/archives/index.php?arch=25600

    Do you believe the official American version of why we were in Vietnam?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Brandon, FL
    Posts
    314
    Dude you must be the most gullible person alive...... and your also dumber than a box of rocks.
    Onward Thru the Fog
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Power CUer
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    11,243
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmored View Post
    I usually don't respond to empty rhetoric
    Neither do we. That's why your posts get the response they do.
    "Today, [the American voter] chooses his rulers as he buys bootleg whiskey, never knowing precisely what he is getting, only certain that it is not what it pretends to be." - H.L. Mencken
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmored View Post
    I usually don't respond to empty rhetoric but did you even listen to the radio program?

    http://www.kpfa.org/archives/index.php?arch=25600

    Do you believe the official American version of why we were in Vietnam?
    Cosmo (sorry about the typo):

    1. NO.

    2. Don't care to hear your version.

    I find it to be bad luck to humor crazy people.

    :D
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    I usually don't respond to empty rhetoric but did you even listen to the radio program?
    NO.
    The evidence is in the radio program. How can you form an opinion without first having examined the evidence? Do you realize you'd get laughed out of the debating hall for this response?

    People like you are usually suffering from cognitive dissonance....

    http://www.learningandteaching.info/...dissonance.htm
    (excerpt)
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Cognitive dissonance is a psychological phenomenon which refers to the discomfort felt at a discrepancy between what you already know or believe, and new information or interpretation. It therefore occurs when there is a need to accommodate new ideas, and it may be necessary for it to develop so that we become "open" to them. Neighbour (1992) makes the generation of appropriate dissonance into a major feature of tutorial (and other) teaching: he shows how to drive this kind of intellectual wedge between learners' current beliefs and "reality".


    Beyond this benign if uncomfortable aspect, however, dissonance can go "over the top", leading to two interesting side-effects for learning:

    if someone is called upon to learn something which contradicts what they already think they know — particularly if they are committed to that prior knowledge — they are likely to resist the new learning. Even Carl Rogers recognised this. Accommodation is more difficult than Assimilation, in Piaget's terms.
    and—counter-intuitively, perhaps—if learning something has been difficult, uncomfortable, or even humiliating enough, people are less likely to concede that the content of what has been learned is useless, pointless or valueless. To do so would be to admit that one has been "had", or "conned".
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ....or invincible ignorance.

    http://www.philosophicalsociety.com/...0Fallacies.htm
    (excerpt)
    ------------------------------------------------------------
    invincible ignorance -- the fallacy of insisting on the legitimacy of one's position in the face of contradictory facts. Statements like "I really don't care what the experts say; no one is going to convince me that I'm wrong"; "nothing you say is going to change my mind"; "yeah, okay, whatever!" are examples of this fallacy.
    ------------------------------------------------------------

    Forums on the internet are infested with government disinfo agents but even they don't "Usually" say such lame things.
    http://www.opposingdigits.com/forums...pic.php?t=1222
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    BSR
    Guest
    How did you manage to stay alive this long? I mean you have the jump on every major conspiracy in the existence of man. You must have pissed off a lot of government officials. They are probably going to move in on you quickly. You need to destroy the evidence , so burn your computer immediately. act fast before it's too late.



    Farewell brother. thank you for educating me...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmored View Post
    The evidence is in the radio program. How can you form an opinion without first having examined the evidence? Do you realize you'd get laughed out of the debating hall for this response?

    People like you are usually suffering from cognitive dissonance....

    http://www.learningandteaching.info/...dissonance.htm
    (excerpt)
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Cognitive dissonance is a psychological phenomenon which refers to the discomfort felt at a discrepancy between what you already know or believe, and new information or interpretation. It therefore occurs when there is a need to accommodate new ideas, and it may be necessary for it to develop so that we become "open" to them. Neighbour (1992) makes the generation of appropriate dissonance into a major feature of tutorial (and other) teaching: he shows how to drive this kind of intellectual wedge between learners' current beliefs and "reality".


    Beyond this benign if uncomfortable aspect, however, dissonance can go "over the top", leading to two interesting side-effects for learning:

    if someone is called upon to learn something which contradicts what they already think they know — particularly if they are committed to that prior knowledge — they are likely to resist the new learning. Even Carl Rogers recognised this. Accommodation is more difficult than Assimilation, in Piaget's terms.
    and—counter-intuitively, perhaps—if learning something has been difficult, uncomfortable, or even humiliating enough, people are less likely to concede that the content of what has been learned is useless, pointless or valueless. To do so would be to admit that one has been "had", or "conned".
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ....or invincible ignorance.

    http://www.philosophicalsociety.com/...0Fallacies.htm
    (excerpt)
    ------------------------------------------------------------
    invincible ignorance -- the fallacy of insisting on the legitimacy of one's position in the face of contradictory facts. Statements like "I really don't care what the experts say; no one is going to convince me that I'm wrong"; "nothing you say is going to change my mind"; "yeah, okay, whatever!" are examples of this fallacy.
    ------------------------------------------------------------

    Forums on the internet are infested with government disinfo agents but even they don't "Usually" say such lame things.
    http://www.opposingdigits.com/forums...pic.php?t=1222
    So Cosmo are you a psychiatrist or a behavioral health specialist? Or perhaps a Psychic hotline operator?

    No?

    Then you are just as out there with this reply as any of your other posts.

    HINT: Maybe if you didn't present yourself as an arrogant prick with the all the answers and were more willing to discuss things instead of just telling us how wrong we are...

    Oh wait, then you wouldn't be a loon and we would get along fine.

    Never mind, my bad.

    :)
    Last edited by signalsgt; 01-02-2009 at 02:48 PM. Reason: Revealed the word prick, prick.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •