Anybody follow the Unabomber Manifesto?

Post Reply New Topic

They monitor it by making some anti government claims to look so preposterous that only a fool would believe it. This is how they influence people. Nobody wants to look like a fool. Sure, the individual has the choice to read whatever they want but if you really think about it, humans are social beings who don't want to stray to far from the norm. This is how the media is used to "control" the masses in the US. As soon as some group of reformists begin to get some power they call it a cult or something to make it seem like wackos at work.

Fuzzy wrote:

He didn't seem like the type to follow rules anyways.
I guess he had a genius IQ but he made up his own words and mixed metaphors.

That level of social engineering is far too elaborate to be worthwhile. More likely the stigma against reading such material is a purely natural cultural phenomenon that occurs all on its own.

Freud and Bernays were employed by the US government to learn how to manipulate the masses through the media.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YV4Jz3OPTio[/youtube]

He should have sought psychiatric help and maybe spiritual counselling. Never mind Strunk & White. Just another individual whom God was unable to reach before it was too late.

Yeah, you can't hate people and love God. Everyone has their moments where they get fed up with stupid people, but to send out bombs is pretty horrific and there is no excuse for that kind of violence.

I watched the video you embedded and got nothing of substance out of it, only some vague innuendos. Bring something more concrete next time you want me to waste 10 minutes.

I know. It was my aspie attempt at humour!

freedom of the press is limited to those who own one

at the time...it was thought that actually letting people read it would only help the Unibomber's case, so except for the New York Times (it's been awhile, but I think that was the one), no one actually had a copy. It's probably on the Internet, somewhere...

Orwell wrote:

This level of social engineering is not too elaborate to be worthwhile. It's easy to brainwash people through the media and it's not just a purely natural cultural phenomenon that occurs all on its own. To believe that is naive.

To summarize the video:


Here is a link about the history of US propaganda.

http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/bernprop.html

If I chose to go to the library and read mein campf, nobody would ever know. If I was concerned about leaving an electronic or paper trail of my book loan, i could easily sit and read it there.

We have freedom of speech, and the level of effort to effect social engineering to prevent it is beyond the scale of man-kind reaching mars.

And its the same in the states.

No law against it nope, but it could make you look suspect in certain circumstances (they do have access to your library record, I kid you not).

So buy a cheap used copy of Mein Kampf for cash. And books can be read -in- the library without identifying one's self.

ruveyn

Oh look, here's a copy on the Internet. If you're paranoid that they're watching that, use crypto and no one will ever know.

Best hope you don't accidentally let a few lines slip out in conversation...

The infrastructure to so completely control all major media outlets is actually quite staggering, and to believe that so many people are controlled in the process of simply producing the media is naive.


Yes, I know that is what it said. I'm not an idiot. My gripe was that they gave no evidence (or examples!) of the ways in which government allegedly tried to control their civilian populations. What "ways to control the hidden enemy within the human mind" did they employ? Examples please? Evidence please? All the video really demonstrated was that some really crappy psychiatrists holding to grossly incorrect theories fell prey to confirmation bias while interviewing WWII veterans.


tl;dr

Seriously, you wasted enough of my time with that video. Give me something hard here, not a spewing forth of verbal diarrhea from an obviously biased website. Summarize and cite sources outside the conspiracy theorist movement. Primary sources would be best. Your credibility is not enhanced by sources that consider it wise to quote Chomsky.

Again, simply from a logistical point of view, *that kind of monitoring is not going on.* Who in the world is keeping track of what *I* say and do? NOONE! Because no one really gives a s**t what some random college kid thinks! And--news flash--no one cares what you think either! Certainly no one cares enough to spend all the time, effort, and money to stalk you during your every waking moment.

Get over the paranoia, folks. IngSoc is not real, the ubiquitous telescreen is not a plausible scenario, and there is no MiniLuv.