Claims being made: Operation Matthew 4:19
-
AFTER the start of New Year 2014, AFTER the November 2013 meetings and December 2013 trolling operation announcement: to wage war against Ukraine
-
The Matthew 4:19 trolling operation planned in 2013 would not end, as was published in 2014 “The underlying aim, Surkov says, is not to win the war, but to use the conflict to create a constant state of destabilized perception, in order to manage and control.”
Operation Matthew 4:19 was initiated in March 2013 even before November 2013 meeting.
-
The World Wide social media trolling operation was launched on the Web in early 2013 but not reported in Western news sources until middle of year 2014
“One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We’re no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It’s simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we’ve been taken. Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back.” ― Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark, 1995
You tell me when you’re through the basics of gender theory and sexual orientation. Then maybe we can move onto your book.
We can’t you clearly have a massive media ecology literacy failure and problem. You clearly can’t read Lemmy messages and The Atlantic content correctly. “The Tower of Babel” metaphor crisis. James Joyce’s work is the cure to that.
You respond so quickly, you don’t actually think. It’s an incredibly common problem on electric social media systems.
This is how Donald Trump and Elon Musk became leaders of the free world, a population who lost literacy since year 2013.
“In America, everyone is entitled to an opinion, and it is certainly useful to have a few when a pollster shows up. But these are opinions of a quite different roder from eighteenth- or nineteenth-century opinions. It is probably more accurate to call them emotions rather than opinions, which would account for the fact that they change from week to week, as the pollsters tell us. What is happening here is that television is altering the meaning of ‘being informed’ by creating a species of information that might properly be called disinformation. I am using this world almost in the precise sense in which it is used by spies in the CIA or KGB. Disinformation does not mean false information. It means misleading information–misplace, irrelevant, fragmented or superficial information–information that creates the illusion of knowing something but which in fact leads one away from knowing. In saying this, I do not mean to imply that television news deliberately aims to deprive Americans of a coherent, contextual understanding of their world. I mean to say that when news is packaged as entertainment, that is the inevitable result. And in saying that the television news show entertains but does not inform, I am saying something far more serious than that we are being deprived of authentic information. I am saying we are losing our sense of what it means to be well informed. Ignorance is always correctable. But what shall we do if we take ignorance to be knowledge?” ― Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business, 1985 !BackTo1985@lemm.ee
Is this your standard reply for everyone you disagree with? You just pretend you’re superior because you got some specialized degree? Do I start looking down at you now because you probably don’t know shit about organic synthesis (or queer theory)?
I got a pair of very quick hands that can keep with my thinking in my second language. Maybe you need to speed up your own thinking or get yourself a copy of Mavis Beacon. We need to add “can’t fathom individual differences” to the list of things you seem incapable of doing here.
Nope. The topic here is the “mass mind”, the entire group. But you have ego problems and think I’m talking about one person and this is a pissing contenst. I have a Lemmy community for you on that: !MasturbatoryEgoism@lemm.ee
me me me / i i i / Stephen Gutknecht vs. others in comment section.
I suggest you read from dead authors: Carl Sagan, Neil Postman, Joseph Campbell, James Joyce, and Marshall McLuhan. All died. So you don’t think I’m here to talk about my own self for any purpose other than addressing the crisis in the world / crisis in United States of America of April 2025.
lot of computer users today get very ego-centered and self-centered.
I would not be on any social media platform except that they are the very outlet and cause of so many problems in the world in April 2025. I am not entertained by the garbage junk all over social media, I don’t find it LOL funny.
Damn, the projection is strong. Don’t forget I was very polite with you and yet here we are because of you trying to pull some shit.
The topic was me trying to find the gender in the articles. Guess you must’ve forgotten about that little detail.
I suggest you stop pretending you’re better educated for name-dropping some authors. You’re literally asking an atheist to read Carl Sagan ffs. In case you don’t get it, it’s like me asking you to read the Bible as a religious fanatic. xD
I haven’t forgotten.
What you have is a “target fixation” on me, Stephen Alfred Gutknecht. You think this is about two people.
More of your egomania, induced by Lemmy media enviornment.
And what you have is caught red handed lying and being avoidant while shielding yourself behind a thin veil of eruditism.
Your petty squabbles have turned into such. Instead of answering my initial question and moving on you’ve decided to do everything but. Sus af.
Pot calling the kettle black much. You’re like a frog that specializes in feeling temperature and yet you’re here in the boiling water with us it seems. Tons of ego, just as much projection all because you got caught lying.
Lemmy did. Electric media systems and English language did. Not me. I’m not being petty.
You do not understand media ecology. And every reply demonstrates this.
I recommend you go to another source of information, stop your comment section fixation on my personal language and comments: “Context Blindness: Digital Technology and the Next Stage of Human Evolution (Understanding Media Ecology, 10)” is recommended.
YOU did LOL. I asked you nicely. Look at you here and now. What are you doing. How is this not petty and how are you not perpetrating this?
Of course I don’t, I just learned about it today and yet that has nothing to do with me asking about where the gender is in your articles. Where is the gender? Nowhere to be found. So much for media ecology huh. Seems a bit irrelevant in the midst of things.
I can’t, I’m too fixated on you not giving me a reasonable answer and playing around instead. Seems like there is no answer and you lied in your title.