TruthMove Forum

Register or log in:

Username:

Password:

TruthMove Forum » TruthMove Main Forum

KPFK pushing "chemtrails" + CheckTheEvidence.com (11 posts)

1. truthmover
   Administrator

   So KPFK is having a fund drive. And it appears that their main promo item is a set of DVD's about "chemtrails," which the mcs said is very "KPFKesque." They went on to state that Sofia gave a packed lecture on the subject at the same location that bogus 911truthLA have their meetings. And evidently there will be a table on the subject at the Venice Beach Carnival tomorrow.

   Their totally undereducated commentary on the subject was pretty embarrassing. They kept on saying that people were "seeing the spraying" all over and "getting sick." Sure, the standard disclaimer about how the speculation is motivated by valid examples of the government poisoning or infecting the public. But by any journalistic, historical, or even logical standards, that is no kind of evidence that airplane contrails contain chemicals or biochemical agents, as the mcs, and "chemtrail" followers most often claim.

   Posted 14 years ago #
2. truthmover
   Administrator

   So I was in the car and heard them playing an excerpt from one of the DVDs they're offering as a promo. And listening to the main dude in the DVD talk to people on the street I could very simply tell from the sound of his voice that he wasn't being honest. He was saying some really leading and really stupid crap.

   Here's one of the guys they are promoting. Clifford Carnicom.

   http://www.carnicom.com/

   And one step away from that is the kind of site I expect to find when looking for info about chemtrails. Very typical.

   http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php

   Have a look at the 9/11 articles listed on the site to realize like I did that the site is most likely intentional disinfo crap.

   http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?op...

   This is exactly how our movement gets associated with crap.

   And there are some real dupes over at KPFK. Pacifica radio has most certainly been infiltrated. I can only dream about confirmation of that likelihood.

   Posted 14 years ago #
3. truthmod
   Administrator

   Pacifica is an obvious target for infiltration. It's been around forever and it's the only somewhat "mainstream" media outlet that regularly carries truly radical programming. I'm sure there are plenty of whackos and "dupes" there as well, who can be convinced to run "9/11 In Plane Site" or some chemtrail crap as one of their fund drive premiums. Someone/people fairly high placed are probably encouraging this and/or letting it slip through the cracks.

   Posted 14 years ago #
4. adjohnson
   Member

   HI,

   Can you be more specific about the disinfo? What specifically do you think is disinfo? What sites or articles do you recommend instead that are "info"? Do you have any explanations for the evidence?

   Thanks!

   Posted 14 years ago #
5. Victronix
   Member

   Yes, Pacifica is either infiltrated or non-functional in terms of any kind of filter for hosts who promote nonsense or anti-democratic behaviors. In the past I've noticed that SoCal Green Party disruptors are in KPFK too, on the boards, focused apparently on rewriting bylaws and tinkering with finances.

   Posted 14 years ago #
6. truthmover
   Administrator

   I only specifically characterized the 9/11 page as containing disinfo. I also suggested that I thought that Pacifica Radio had been infiltrated and implied that KPFK might be pushing crap as a result.

   I'll add that I think it likely that the whole "chemtrail" issue started and is maintained largely by people trying to create distraction. Of course it's supported by a much larger group of people who have been honestly if naively misinformed.

   Assuming that's what you are asking about, I'll share a bit more of my thinking on this.

   The main reason I think "chemtrails" is crap is a bit abstract but honestly the most convincing to me. No one person, organization, or website promoting this issue is remotely reputable. Period. Please go ahead and find me one. None of the site devoted to the issue handle it an a scientific manner. None of the people talking about it seem to have a healthy level of skepticism.

   Just look at KPFK's promo materials on the subject.

   You get 4 items in all! You'll get the 4 hr DVD Don't Talk About the Weather + The California Chemtrail Convergence DVD with Clifford Carnicom and Dr Gwen Scott + Aerosol Crimes: Chemtrails in Our Skies by Clifford Carnicom - all you can make copies of to hand out freely to friends and family!

   Crap. Go ahead and have a look at "Don't Talk About The Weather," KPFK's main promo item on the subject.

   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HxNeoXkL0mM&fea...

   Freakin awful. If you happen to be tuned into some of the more subtle element present you can see that the video uses propaganda tactics and that the host of the movie is not being honest. Of course not everyone is going to be good at speech analysis.

   Another reason is that the mundane explanation for what people think they are seeing is totally acceptable. NASA put up a page called "Contrail Education." It suggest that the government is concerned about the extent to which contrails can affect the weather. It also totally debunks "chemtrail" claims by simply stating a couple of facts about our atmosphere.

   http://asd-www.larc.nasa.gov/GLOBE/faq.html

   I'm not going to break down every claim here. I'll save it for my blog post in the next few weeks.

   But ultimately, the whole issue is missing any strong evidence or any reputable advocates. AND...being viewed by the general public as wonky with good reason it is used to undermine other more important issues with death by association.

   Posted 14 years ago #
7. adjohnson
   Member

   Hmmm - not the reply I was hoping for. Can you give a specific example of the disinfo and why it is disinfo please?

   i.e. "Take a look at paragraph 3 of this article - xxxxs"

   this is clearly false - then provide a reference to something which shows it is false.

   That would be good. No, I don't expect you to go through everything and I don't have the time to follow and ask your responses either - but can you post one or 2 specifics points please.

   Thanks.

   Posted 14 years ago #
8. cosmos
   Member

   I would imagine that adjohnson is Andrew Johnson, proprietor of http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk

   Also responsible for hosting Judy Wood's website

   and author of classics such as The New 9/11 Highjackers

   FYI

   Posted 14 years ago #
9. truthmover
   Administrator

   Thanks. He lists the site on his profile.

   Pitiful.

   This is one of the most transparent disinfo sites I've ever seen. To be clear that signifies either that this guy is an agent of distraction or that he's a misguided conspiracy hobbyiest, obsessed with the fringe. However, if the latter were the case, why would his 9/11 section be so clearly and exclusively devoted only the worst we have to offer. That's a dead giveaway that something isn't kosher here. And either way, we should try to prevent people from wasting any time there.

   And AJ, if you don't know why I might find your site upsetting, it's because I think that you are dishonoring the victims and everyone who fights for the truth.

   Posted 14 years ago #
10. newcomer
    Member

    ""Check the Evidence " site = either juvenile credulity or deliberate dosh. A spoof of itself.

    Posted 14 years ago #
11. truthmover
    Administrator

    I went in a bit aggressively above. It's so easy for people to take advantage of every word you say in frustration. But I refuse to live my life as if I'm sitting on the witness stand.

    And I'm tired to not calling out crap because I might be wrong on occasion. That's some leadership in a way. Being bold enough to put your foot in your mouth from time to time in order to break the paralysis of candor.

    You made the same distinction as I. And I think that it's really important for us to be clear that there really aren't any more options outside of a the usual few outliers. It's either disruption or distraction. Either is problematic.

    But I don't want to use this distinction to hide from what I think is really going on either. A tool to allow me to be frustrated without really calling out the turkeys.

    Once again, have a look at the list of 9/11 related articles on the site. I ask you. How likely is it that someone would come to an understanding of the movement that lead them to promote all the worst we have and little if any of the best?

    Personally I don't buy it. Now, my dodge is not suggesting what that might mean. The fact that I think the site isn't kosher doesn't mean I have enough info to say why. But raising the red flag need not require motive but only action.

    And on the off chance that this site is the labor of love of some nerdy conspiracy, pseudoscience, new age, fan who really can't tell the difference between fact and fiction, then I think he should have some idea of the damage his ignorance might cause.

    http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?op...

    Posted 14 years ago #

Reply

You must log in to post.