Hey Jessica. Would love a private chat if you are up for it. You are the only person questioning the way that the no-virus-evidence awareness is being spread that I really trust.
Feel free to email me but I am very much an advocate of public conversations and can't imagine there is anything you or I could/would say to one another that shouldn't be public and couldn't benefit evaluation of the issues and questions. :)
The one thing that we could all agree on, I believe, is that no matter what position you take, there will be a psyop aspect to it. That is, if you look at all the members of that group or club, you will find some enigmatic people in that group. The difference with the "no virus" folks that I believe I am a part of is that this group is substantially smaller than the other groups, and thus the nuts stick out a bit more the smaller the group is.
"The specific purpose of psychological operations (PSYOP) is to influence foreign audience perceptions and subsequent behavior as part of approved programs in support of USG policy and military objectives. PSYOP professionals follow a deliberate process that aligns commander’s objectives with an analysis of the Executive Summary. PSYOP requires sustained application across all phases of an operation. environment; select relevant target audiences (TAs);develop focused, culturally, and environmentally attuned messages and actions; employ sophisticated media delivery means and produce observable, measurable behavioral responses."
I am making a distinction between having a No Virus position and (what I believe is) one component of a years-long, highly strategic, multi-phrase, coordinated campaign involving military and intelligence agencies in many countries that are attached to certain positions and intentionally misdirect, confused, distract, etc. Serious 'dissident' analysts writing under their own names should be able to relate to exactly what I'm talking about when it comes to "There are no viruses!!" as a rhetorical technique.
The PSYOP flank aside, the two terms I find most problematic -- and nonscientific -- in the virus discussions are "exist" and "belief/believe." Whether those terms with respect to the COVID event were planted by PSYOPs in early 2020 or have long been what No Virus/No Contagion proponents have said, I don't know and would need to investigate further.
*which has been changed to “Military Information Support Operations (MISO)” but it doesn't matter much.
I agree with you, but how does one discriminate between the two? A voice or presence that appears to be an "unreliable narrator" will have the opposite effect of what they communicate.
Not necessarily. Look at the definition again (and read the whole document, perhaps)
PSYOPS rely, in part, on repetition -- and they excel at identifying targets with focused messaging through sophisticated (and I would add "varied") media.
When they say "observable, measurable behavioral responses," they mean "we know what works and have spent tons of time and money on testing this stuff."
I think there are more than "two" to discriminate but the most basic pattern that I've seen and experienced (which I think other analysts could corroborate) goes something like this:
I say, "There are multiple signs that the New York City all cause death curve is fraudulent."
PSYOP (No Virus variant): "VIRUSES DON'T EXIST!"
:)
You're saying this has an opposite effect. I'm saying it has the effect(s) it intends.
I also get what you are getting at here. The "no virus" used as a response to your argument disinclines people to look at the evidence of fraud, or more broadly, poisons the well in thinking that if this is the "unserious" conversation going on here, then why should I be associated with it at all?
I get what a psyop is. It was employed against us in spades in 2020. And the "media" of it was telephraphed everywhere. In fact, you could argue that masks, social distancing, canceling large scale events was all part of the coordinated psyop along with the various staged events in New York and Elsewhere.
There were provisions made in the tabletop exercises performed for the different segments of society that would have arguments against the psyop, and all of them had answers already built in to address these different segments. One of the brilliant maneuvers was that dealing with the hurricane of fear and panic propaganda was that any reasonable dissident voice was drowned out by the psyop.
Part of the psyop was the creation of noise to drown out the dissident voices. So, for even those that question "do viruses exist?" there was a noise aspect to that answer as well. As much as those of us who started initially with "the virus was never as dangerous as they claimed it was" were considered "minimalists" well the whole "there is no evidence of a virus at all...and here is the century of literature and science to show that this isn't a mere flash in the pan assertion" there is the noise of "there was no virus" without explanation or any depth of conversation beyond that.
Again, I ask, how do you distinguish between the two? I don't deny that there is a psyop for any position taken concerning Covid. I also agree that getting people to only say or act in certain ways is the same type of absolutist attitudes we pushed against to begin with.
I am only using one thing I say and an example response to illustrate the technique.
One branch of the PSYOP wing of No Virus - which could literally be operatives or simply people who have been influenced by techniques employed by others - is very personally disparaging, insanely aggressive, and essentially exists for the sole purpose of saying you are an idiot unless you say viruses don't exist/there is no evidence for the existence of viruses. Sample phrases below
Best way of dealing with those who wonder if stating a scientific fact that would save millions of lives and disabilities if widely understood - is a psyop!
Hey Jessica. Would love a private chat if you are up for it. You are the only person questioning the way that the no-virus-evidence awareness is being spread that I really trust.
Feel free to email me but I am very much an advocate of public conversations and can't imagine there is anything you or I could/would say to one another that shouldn't be public and couldn't benefit evaluation of the issues and questions. :)
FTR, there was no email from or private chat w/Mr West
(Public convos preferred)
That’s cool
The one thing that we could all agree on, I believe, is that no matter what position you take, there will be a psyop aspect to it. That is, if you look at all the members of that group or club, you will find some enigmatic people in that group. The difference with the "no virus" folks that I believe I am a part of is that this group is substantially smaller than the other groups, and thus the nuts stick out a bit more the smaller the group is.
What you're describing is not, in my view, a psyop per se but what happens more organically as a natural function of human behavior.
For purposes of this conversation, I'll invoke this USDOD publication, because PSYOP is a formal military term* https://irp.fas.org/doddir/dod/jp3-13-2.pdf
"The specific purpose of psychological operations (PSYOP) is to influence foreign audience perceptions and subsequent behavior as part of approved programs in support of USG policy and military objectives. PSYOP professionals follow a deliberate process that aligns commander’s objectives with an analysis of the Executive Summary. PSYOP requires sustained application across all phases of an operation. environment; select relevant target audiences (TAs);develop focused, culturally, and environmentally attuned messages and actions; employ sophisticated media delivery means and produce observable, measurable behavioral responses."
I am making a distinction between having a No Virus position and (what I believe is) one component of a years-long, highly strategic, multi-phrase, coordinated campaign involving military and intelligence agencies in many countries that are attached to certain positions and intentionally misdirect, confused, distract, etc. Serious 'dissident' analysts writing under their own names should be able to relate to exactly what I'm talking about when it comes to "There are no viruses!!" as a rhetorical technique.
The PSYOP flank aside, the two terms I find most problematic -- and nonscientific -- in the virus discussions are "exist" and "belief/believe." Whether those terms with respect to the COVID event were planted by PSYOPs in early 2020 or have long been what No Virus/No Contagion proponents have said, I don't know and would need to investigate further.
*which has been changed to “Military Information Support Operations (MISO)” but it doesn't matter much.
I agree with you, but how does one discriminate between the two? A voice or presence that appears to be an "unreliable narrator" will have the opposite effect of what they communicate.
Not necessarily. Look at the definition again (and read the whole document, perhaps)
PSYOPS rely, in part, on repetition -- and they excel at identifying targets with focused messaging through sophisticated (and I would add "varied") media.
When they say "observable, measurable behavioral responses," they mean "we know what works and have spent tons of time and money on testing this stuff."
I think there are more than "two" to discriminate but the most basic pattern that I've seen and experienced (which I think other analysts could corroborate) goes something like this:
I say, "There are multiple signs that the New York City all cause death curve is fraudulent."
PSYOP (No Virus variant): "VIRUSES DON'T EXIST!"
:)
You're saying this has an opposite effect. I'm saying it has the effect(s) it intends.
No doubt it has the effect it intends.
I also get what you are getting at here. The "no virus" used as a response to your argument disinclines people to look at the evidence of fraud, or more broadly, poisons the well in thinking that if this is the "unserious" conversation going on here, then why should I be associated with it at all?
I get what a psyop is. It was employed against us in spades in 2020. And the "media" of it was telephraphed everywhere. In fact, you could argue that masks, social distancing, canceling large scale events was all part of the coordinated psyop along with the various staged events in New York and Elsewhere.
There were provisions made in the tabletop exercises performed for the different segments of society that would have arguments against the psyop, and all of them had answers already built in to address these different segments. One of the brilliant maneuvers was that dealing with the hurricane of fear and panic propaganda was that any reasonable dissident voice was drowned out by the psyop.
Part of the psyop was the creation of noise to drown out the dissident voices. So, for even those that question "do viruses exist?" there was a noise aspect to that answer as well. As much as those of us who started initially with "the virus was never as dangerous as they claimed it was" were considered "minimalists" well the whole "there is no evidence of a virus at all...and here is the century of literature and science to show that this isn't a mere flash in the pan assertion" there is the noise of "there was no virus" without explanation or any depth of conversation beyond that.
Again, I ask, how do you distinguish between the two? I don't deny that there is a psyop for any position taken concerning Covid. I also agree that getting people to only say or act in certain ways is the same type of absolutist attitudes we pushed against to begin with.
I am only using one thing I say and an example response to illustrate the technique.
One branch of the PSYOP wing of No Virus - which could literally be operatives or simply people who have been influenced by techniques employed by others - is very personally disparaging, insanely aggressive, and essentially exists for the sole purpose of saying you are an idiot unless you say viruses don't exist/there is no evidence for the existence of viruses. Sample phrases below
"Why are you still pushing the virus lie?"
"Stop pretending viruses are real."
"You know there's no such thing as viruses."
"You keep ignoring the truth about viruses."
And here's a fun one. I have "Stockholm syndrome." https://open.substack.com/pub/turfseer/p/can-the-cell-culture-critique-satisfy?r=jjay2&utm_campaign=comment-list-share-cta&utm_medium=web&comments=true&commentId=135200250
https://open.substack.com/pub/beyondcertainty/p/claiming-that-my-calling-viruses
Best way of dealing with those who wonder if stating a scientific fact that would save millions of lives and disabilities if widely understood - is a psyop!
😀👆