Captain May Interview Schedule
The Portland nuclear exercises have begun today, Monday, October 15, and they will last all week. I will be giving regular updates via broadcast and Internet radio on the scenario and any updates. I have two scheduled interviews for today, and one on Thursday, October 18. I give all times in Pacific Standard Time, as the exercises are of most interest to people in that zone:
October 15, 11 a.m. - 1 p.m. (PST): interview with Barbara Jean, host, Born on the Fourth of July (KTKK, AM 630):  http://www.k-talk.com/default.asp
October 15, 7 p.m. - 9 p.m. (PST): interview with Carol Brouilet, host, Questioning War -- Organizing Resistance (We the People Radio Network): http://questioningwar-organizingresistance.blogspot.com/
October 18, 2 p.m. - 4 p.m. (PST): interview with Jim Fetzer, host, The Dynamic Duo (Genesis Communications Network): http://www.gcnlive.com/listenlive.htm -- on Network 4
TOPOFF / Vigilant Shield: Urgent Update
Alarming news about the just-begun TOPOFF and Vigilant Shield emerged yesterday in the local lapdog newspaper, The Oregonian:
"Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff will be in town to personally oversee the exercise..." [Terror exercise is all set to blast Portland, by Joseph Rose]
Saturday, the day before Rose's article appeared, my satirical article, A Nuclear Nightmare -- The Portland Plan, was widely published. In it I placed archvillain Dick Cheney in Portland to personally oversee the exercises that were to go live. The appearance of archvillain Michael Chertoff on the scene is an uncomfortable parallel to my worst-case scenario. If you haven't seen the article, and would like to, there is a fine version at The Price of Liberty: http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/07/10/15/may.htm
Many thanks for all the help I have received from so many in my mission of conscience, which has assumed the form of a public affairs effort to make the American people aware of these dangerous terror exercises.
Best regards,
Captain Eric H. May
Portland Nuclear Inquest
|
There seem to be interests who want to enable and encourage an "End Times" meme in 9/11 Activism. Captain May's Portland Nuclear Inquest--and, to a lesser extent, Ginny Ross' OTA-- has some of the hallmarks of cult manipulation:
Selected from How Cults Work
-cult leaders will tell you can only be "saved" (or can only be successful) in their organization alone.
-Character Assassination
-In a mind control cult any information from outside the cult is considered evil, especially if it is opposing the cult. Members are told not to read it or believe it. Only information supplied by the cult is true.
-End of world pressure.
-Secret knowledge.
I'm not saying the "Nukes are falling!" warnings are the product of a cult--there are many more factors before you can earn that label. But I am saying that the Nuke hysteria contains enough highlights of cultish behavior, that, at the least, we have a highly disfunctional manipulative dynamic.
1: All our sources are confidential--trust us anyway
The leaders, or those close to leadership, in warning all and sundry about a new false flag, are the only ones who determine what evidence is real:
Captain May, when confronted about the Kennebunkport Hoax, wants you to take it on his (and Tarpley and Barrett) say so that it is real:
Somewhere in this exchange in the next link, the OTA is supposed to have gotten another "anonymous tip"( it's confusing because Patty is posting it and you assume she's the one who found it, but then Ginny pipes up in a responding post calling this an anonymous tip to the OTA-- but there's no indication that that post was sent to the OTA. Something happening off list there)
Russ Halberg's allusions to his contacts in organized crime during Noble Resolve:
An excessive reliance on "confidential" sources, that no one can refute, have the effect of "infallible' leadership.
2: Our leader is always right--don't prove otherwise
Captain May's intolerance of any dissenting view:
And, indeed, his inability or unwillingness to engage anyone in a conversation--it's his way, or the highway--even if you agree with him:
To which your correct response is, "Sieg Heil !"
3: Character Assasination
We're all familier with Captain May's helping Tarpley smear us:
But he can initiate his own smear campaign against groups and former members he doesn't like. Observe:
READ MORE AT:
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
From later in article:
"End of the World" pressure:
So how many more "warnings" will we get of an "imminent false flag" or a "drill that will go live" after TOPOFF is over--after NOTHING has gone live?
What was that? None? You think they'll stop?
Time to read the following from "When Prophecy Fails":
Quote:
The increase of proselyting following unequivocal disconfirmation of a belief occurs when the following five conditions are met. If any one of the conditions is not met then it is believed (see chapter VIII of When Prophecy Fails) that the increase will not occur. These conditions are:
1. A belief must be held with deep conviction and it must have some relevance to action, that is, to what the believer does or how he behaves.
2. The person holding the belief must have committed himself to it; that is, for the sake of his belief, he must have taken some important action that is difficult to undo. In general, the more important such actions are, and the more difficult they are to undo, the greater is the individual's commitment to the belief.
3. The belief must be sufficiently specific and sufficiently concerned with the real world so that events may unequivocally refute the belief.
4. Such undeniable disconfirmatory evidence must occur and must be recognized by the individual holding the belief.
The first two of these conditions specify the circumstances that will make the belief resistant to change. The third and fourth conditions together, on the other hand, point to factors that would exert powerful pressure on a believer to discard his belief. It is, of course, possible that an individual, even though deeply convinced of a belief, may discard it in the face of unequivocal disconfirmation. We must therefore, state a fifth condition specifying the circumstances under which the belief will be discarded and those under which it will be maintained with new fervor.
5. The individual believer must have social support. It is unlikely that one isolated believer could withstand the kind of disconfirming evidence we have specified. If, however, the believer is a member of a group of convinced persons who can support one another, we would expect the belief to be maintained and the believers to attempt to proselyte or to persuade nonmembers that the belief is correct.