Happy BC Day

On this public holiday I thought I would share a post I read over at The Real Story that shows how bad the press in BC is and the fact that the role of the many political and social bloggers in BC is so needed. To read the full post go to http://therealstory.ca/2011-07-25/bc-politics/two-sides-good-one-side-bad#comments
Here are a few highghts to get you to read the entire article
A few years ago I sat down in the offices of a reporter covering the BC Rail corruption trial. I handed him a stack of information contained in affidavits sworn by BC Liberal government lawyers and employees and released by the court, affidavits the reporter hadn’t reviewed and wasn’t going to review,


...
When I first reviewed the affidavits revealing the breach together with Dohm’s original order and the documents laying out the case for the order it became clear to me that Dobell’s ‘error’ was serious and could even be a criminal code violation.
The issue was this: In order to vet government documents required by the investigation but perhaps containing privileged government information five people were given the right to see the documents

...
The reporter, over the course of a couple of hours and then days considered the story. It was shared with editors, who shared it with their bosses. And the bosses killed it. Or that’s what the reporter told me.
They killed it because they called Dobell and Dobell told them something along the lines of “I was entitled to see those documents, so there is no story.” They took Dobell’s word over the hard and fixed legalities of Judge Dohm’s order, which completely and directly shredded Dobell’s statement.
By and large, that’s the media in BC. And why do I care?
Because the truth suffers.

That little anecdote, which is just one of many, serves to illustrate how badly British Columbians are served by those who hold the power of deciding what’s news in BC.

In England, Parliamentary committee members were shocked to hear how often Murdoch and his chief aides met or spoke with the Prime Minister. Bill Good, Rick Cluff and others share personal relationships with BC Liberal premiers, Cabinet members and MLAs. They hang out. They golf together. They are personal friends.
There are many buddy/buddy relationships that get in the way of real reporting.

As we celebrate BC on this special day, ask yourself, why are we as a society putting up with the shameful actions of the main stream media in reporting in BC?

Stories you may never see in the Vancouver sun

Secret deals link Liberals, B.C. HST 2  by  STEPHANIE IP, QMI Agency from the Toronto Sun. For the full story go here

First posted: Thursday, July 28, 2011 12:13:30 EDT AM | Updated: Thursday, July 28, 2011 4:16:20 EDT AM

Interesting information from the Story

A freedom-of-information request by the Globe and Mail revealed the province had, as of June 1, doled out more than $250,000 in private bid contracts to work on the pro-HST campaign. One contract went to Marc Andrew, one-time aide to former finance minister Colin Hansen.

“What I’m particularly concerned about is that they would have a former aide to the former minister of finance who started all this ... working for the so-called independent panel to report on the HST,” said Vander Zalm. “That puts the whole report in question.”

Internal government guidelines state contracts of more than $25,000 must go through a public bidding process, but this step can be waived if it is believed information relating to the contracts could “compromise government confidentiality” if released publicly.

Is BC about to drop a new carbon bomb?

I enjoy reading the Post from the Progressive Economic Forum and found this post by  Marc Lee  July 11th, 2011 very interesting.

Any day now the BC government should be releasing the latest greenhouse gas data for the province, and we will see if any progress is being made towards a legislated 33% reduction in emissions by 2020 (relative to 2007 levels; data will be for 2009 and we know that emissions rose in 2008).

Below the radar, however, and not counted in the inventory are all of the emissions from coal and natural gas that come from BC but are exported. I did the math on what this means last year and found that BC exports about 52 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent from natural gas, all to the US and Alberta (and about the same amount from coal). This was in 2008, and together coal and natural gas exports have emissions about double what BC generates internally from combusting fossil fuels. As I say, we are not just an addict, we are a dealer. And a big one at that.
Along comes the prospect of liquid natural gas (LNG) terminals on the north coast, with dreams of shipping to power hungry China. According to this piece in the Sun, quoting Scotia Economics:

“Altogether, four proposed terminal projects could see up to four billion cubic feet of gas exported a day, the lion’s share of the region’s expected daily production of 5.5 billion cubic feet — though production could ultimately be much higher.”

In typical fashion for our mainstream media to deliberately fail to connect the dots, the article contains not a word about greenhouse gases. So I went and did the math, and 4 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day converts to 81.5 Mt per year. That is equivalent to 1.5 times existing BC’s gas footprint associated with exports.

If we take the 5.5 billion cubic feet per day production number that “could ultimately be much higher”, that adds up to 112 Mt, almost double all of the emissions in BC’s total inventory of GHGs (burning fossil fuels in province and all other sources).

This project is therefore a carbon bomb of mammoth proportions, but if it proceeds it will be counted in China’s GHG inventory not BC’s, due to accounting convention. So it is completely plausible that BC would meet its 2020 legislated targets for GHG reductions, and still have massively increased global climate change. Expanding this industry, when it needs to be decommissioned, is deeply wrong — that gas must stay in the ground.

But destroying the future is just so massively profitable that development goes ahead unabated, even as climate change impacts in 2011 are more evident worldwide than ever. Jim Stanford recently estimated that in 2010 Canadian resource industries made $27 billion in after-tax profits. Externalizing costs on other people around the world now and in the future is extremely lucrative.
Note: I have just calculated the emissions associated with the resource itself. There will also be large domestic emissions associated with getting the stuff out of the ground — “fracked” shale gas is equivalent to coal or worse when it comes to lifecycle emissions — which pretty much kills any likelihood that BC would meet its 2020 GHG target.

This project’s massive expansion of the oil and gas industry is a crime against humanity and must be stopped. Obviously the BC government supports it (and former oil and gas exec Gwyn Morgan is one of Premier Clark’s top advisors). NDP energy critic John Horgan has endorsed the project, though it is not entirely clear that Leader Adrian Dix has signed on. Yet.

So like a good action movie, there may still be time to defuse this carbon bomb. But the clock is ticking …

The HST Debate heats up

A friend of mine is going to vote in favour of keeping the HST and although the rest of his friends have tried to point out the error of his thinking, he has refused so far to change his mind. He is one of the many out there who only listen to Bill Good for his views on this tax.  He also is of the belief that the government will not lie to its people and that if it is in the paper the information has to be true. He will not listen to reason, however I did get him to admit that he should open mind and look at some alternative views on the tax. He did agree to do this,  so I just sent him a list of alternative views that he says he will read.

Hopefully he will read the information and change his mind. Here are the links I just sent him. If anyone has more links please let me know so I can give him the information he needs to see some sense.  Thanks

http://www.strategicthoughts.com/

http://harveyoberfeld.ca/blog/

http://lailayuile.com/2011/06/23/kevin-falcon-admits-with-hst-not-everyone-is-coming-out-on-top/

http://billtieleman.blogspot.com/

http://therealstory.ca/2011-06-16/bc-liberals/the-liars-club

http://www.jlsreport.com/?p=1405

Bad is The Record: More Liberal Spin On The HST

The fight for change

"I can`t help but feel lost and confused, surely the public hasn`t fallen for this foolishness, here we are in a brand new session of the BC Legislature, Christy Clark made her public debut in the house, the media applauded and declared Crusty the winner over Adrian Dix with her non-answer on funding legal services for downtown eastside residents who want their voices heard in the Picton inquiry.....' http://powellriverpersuader.blogspot.com/2011/05/bc-legislature-house-of-horrors.html

The following is based on a book by Professor Robert Cialdini of Arizona State University entitled, Influence: Science and Practice, and I forgot to give him credit for the ideas expressed below.

When I read the above from Grant at the Powell River Persuader, I thought the public has not fallen for the foolishness put out by the MSM and the government flunkies but he has good reason to think that the opposite is happening. My thoughts on the politic changes are as follows:

Human behaviour developed over time based on our need for survival. As humans departed from Africa on the journey around the world, survival has depended on our ability to co-exist in a group, and depend on each other for mutual support and to support leaders who are strong.  As a result, many of our behaviours as a group (not as individuals as much) are deeply rooted in our psyche, rules, and rituals. Therefore, the Main Stream Media (MSM) and the ruling classes understand that they need to shape our rules and tap into our psyche and rituals to keep power. Here are five principles, that humans have developed that our current leadership in Victoria and Ottawa are trying to use against us to maintain power.

Reciprocity: The first principle is that people will try to repay, in kind, what another person has provided to us. Simply think about how you feel when going to dinner at a friends’ home, feeling the need to both bring a gift and to return your host’s generosity. People also have a deep seeded desire to reciprocate when someone concedes something to us, either in a negotiation or by offering favours. The MSM has done a great job of keeping the public ignorant of the wrongdoings of the current government so it is, I believe, up to progressive bloggers like, Grant G, Laila Yuile, Bill Tieleman, NormFarrell, BC Mary, David Schreck, Paul Willcocks, Rafe Mair,  RossK  and others to continue to inform the public about the way they are being taken advantage of by the government. Once enough people understand they will want to act on the principle of reciprocity, but for that to happen we need a critical mass.

Social proof: One of the strongest principles is that the greater the number of people who find any idea correct, the more a given individual will perceive the idea to be correct. This force can be very problematic if the larger group accepts an incorrect answer or position, and the tidal wave of social pressure overcomes anyone pushing against the status quo. Social proof provides stability in times of uncertainty. Most human beings do not feel comfortable in uncertain or ambiguous situations. We seek similarity to show us what we perceive to be the correct course of action.

At this time, the larger group as accepted an incorrect answer and there is tremendous pressure to convince people that the government has been treating the people of BC wrongly. The tide, I believe is starting to turn against the government but unless the progressive blogging community stays strong and committed to giving people the truth, the government will win. One of the reasons is that as a society we believe in the chain of command.

Authority: There is a deeply held sense of obedience to authority. Research has proven that people have an extreme willingness to go to almost any lengths on the command of authority. After every corporate scandal or ethnic atrocity, the question is always asked, "How could they do that?" The answer lies in a deeply held human need to obey authority.  Because of this need of people the progressive blogging community has to continue to hold the moral high ground and speak out against the wrong acts of the government and perhaps by continuing to point out to the people what they will lose from the actions taken by the governements.

 Scarcity: What is really important to note from the research is that people are more motivated to avoid loss much more than for potential gains. We simply fear loss much more than we desire gain. People are most vulnerable to scarcity when we compete for an item. We get very emotional about possessing the scarce item, not in actually using it. We do not get any more joy from using a scarce item, but rather from the fact that we possess it and others do not. The progressive blogging community has to continue with relentless zeal to point out what the public has lost and will continue to lose if they allow the current governement to stay in power.

MSM also understands that if they make our leaders likable they will be more likely to be able to control the agenda and continue to act in a manner that is inconsistent with  the values of the majority of people.

Liking: We prefer to say yes to those we know and like. How many times do you say "yes" to someone that you do not like? As a result, people work very hard at getting other people to like us. At a base level, people will like someone who is physically attractive, and we find attractive people to be more persuasive. We also seek out other people who are similar to us. We feel more comfortable and trusting, and tend to group with others who have similar backgrounds, experiences, families, education, sports teams, hobbies, etc. We also begin to like one another more as we increase the level of contact and familiarity. Humans are very susceptible to compliments. Even though we may tell ourselves that we recognize when we are being complimented for someone else’s gain, it is still very difficult to avoid this attraction.  This principle is well known by the ruling elite and they use the MSM to paint the oppositions as not likeable while showing the Premier and the Liberals as likeable.

Research has also proven that people who are actually in conflict with one another, and have deeply oppositional positions can actually be induced to co-operate through the imposition of common goals. Working together on a common goal is so basic to human behaviour that we find it very hard to resist. The progressive blogging community that I support has a common goal and is following another strong principle that has helped our species survive, which is being consistent to their commitment and as they do they will get others to think and to act. The trap is that the government will use this principle to persuade people that they have the same goals as we do, but they may have a different method of achieving these goals. These lies will be front and center in the MSM.

 Commitment and consistency: A strong principle is that once we make a choice or take a stand, we will encounter personal and inter-personal pressures to behave consistently with that commitment. This is a very powerful human need. When people make a public statement, or put something in writing, we will go to great lengths to maintain a consistent image to others. This makes it very hard for people to change their opinions once they have been made public.

To bring about positive change, which is the goal of the progressive blogging community, communication, and experiences is vital to how we understand and build social human elements into our efforts. Without communication and adherence to the above principles, the result will not be what we want. So the next time you hear someone ask, "Why aren’t we resonating with the public?" simply look to basic human nature and understand that change takes time and time is on your side even thought it may not seem like it now.

For me and many of my generation, which will be a huge force in the next few years,  time is not on our side. The problem is that many of my generation grow more conservative as they age, which I find sad. I find it sad for a number of resons, one is  because they are losing the opportunity to bring about meaningful change in our society that will benefit their grandchildren. Another reason is that they have lost touch with their love of life and with the love of change that positive progress brings.

HST vote

In BC after the last election, the government imposed a new tax which combined a provincial and a federal tax, and gave away the right of the province to set some of its own tax policy. Voters were very angry and the Premier of the province was forced to resign and a vote was scheduled for Sept 2011to see if we wanted to retain the tax.  Taxes and Politicians are an issue all over the world so this issue is not unique to BC. However, having been away from the Province for six weeks I was surprised when I came back to find that the referendum on the HST had been moved up from September to June.  I am not sure how the law was changed, but the vote date has been set. I am against the HST as I think it is a regressive tax, that hurts the poorest amongst us, and one that has not brought about any new jobs and the changes the government had promised.

The idea of a mail in vote is interesting and I when I was talking with some supporters of this tax they are very excited about the way the vote is being conducted. As they said to me there is a silent group of about 35% of people out there that support the tax but these people would not get out and vote so the mail in ballot will allow them to vote. They also suggested that the anti-HST vote, would not be able to get out there people to vote, so they will win.

The other issue they talked about was that the system would come crashing down around us if we were forced to move back to the old system of taxation, and that this would hurt the all ready fragile recovery. I shook my head, and thought why are you using scare tactics to gain support.  The system will not fall apart, the consumer will be better off in the short and long run, if the HST is defeated and business will adjust if the government will allow time for that to happen.

I also want people to remember that the Liberals in BC brought in the tax, but the Federal Conservatives with the support of the Federal Liberals, voted for the imposition of this tax on the people of BC, and when you vote in the Federal election you need to bear this fact in mind.

The Right to Vote was hard fought for Women!!

A year ago I started writing this blog and at the time wondered if I could keep writing every day. I have found the experience fun, frustrating and enjoyable. I thought I might run out of topics to write about, but many people send me ideas or topics or great posts, such as the following.

My brother sent me this today and I would like to acknowledge the original author Vicki Grealy for an inspiring reminder of  what woman went through to get the right to vote. Voting should never be taken for granted by either sex, we have too much to lose if we become apathetic.

In Canada Women only got the vote in 1918, which excluded women in Quebec until 1940.  It's important to remember who suffered so we could be free and equal members of our society.

....ladies, it is worth remembering and reflecting as we are able to head to the polls in one week.


WE, THE WOMEN OF THIS COUNTRY NEED TO GET OUT AND VOTE!!!!!!!!!  

This is the story of our Grandmothers and Great-Grandmothers who lived only 90 years ago. And by the end of the night, they were barely alive. Forty prison guards wielding clubs and their warden's blessing went on a rampage against the 33 women wrongly convicted of 'obstructing sidewalk traffic.'                Remember, it was not until 1920 that women were granted the right to go to the polls and vote.  The women were innocent and defenseless, but they were jailed nonetheless for picketing the White House, carrying signs asking for the vote.        (Lucy Burns)  They beat Lucy Burns, chained her hands to the cell bars above her head and left her hanging for the night, bleeding and gasping for air.  (Dora Lewis)  They hurled Dora Lewis into a dark cell, smashed her head against an iron bed and knocked her out cold. Her cellmate, Alice Cosu, thought Lewis was dead and suffered a heart attack. Additional affidavits describe the guards grabbing, dragging, beating, choking, slamming, pinching, twisting and kicking the women.  Thus unfolded the 'Night of Terror' on Nov. 15, 1917, when the warden at the Occoquan Workhouse in Virginia ordered his guards to teach a lesson to the suffragists imprisoned there because they dared to picket Woodrow Wilson's White House for the right to vote. For weeks, the women's only water came from an open pail. Their food--all of it colorless slop--was infested with worms.        (Alice Paul)  When one of the leaders, Alice Paul, embarked on a hunger strike, they tied her to a chair, forced a tube down her throat and poured liquid into her until she vomited. She was tortured like this for weeks until word was smuggled out to the press.  So, refresh my memory. Some women won't vote this year because - why, exactly? We have carpool duties? We have to get to work? Our vote doesn't matter? It's raining?             (Mrs. Pauline Adams in the prison garb she wore while serving a sixty-day sentence.)  Last week, I went to a sparsely attended screening of HBO's new movie 'Iron Jawed Angels.' It is a graphic depiction of the battle these women waged so that I could pull the curtain at the polling booth and have my say. I am ashamed to say I needed the reminder.        (Miss Edith Ainge, of Jamestown , New York )  All these years later, voter registration is still my passion. But the actual act of voting had become less personal for me, more rote. Frankly, voting often felt more like an obligation than a privilege. Sometimes it was inconvenient.    (Berthe Arnold, CSU graduate)  My friend Wendy, who is my age and studied women's history, saw the HBO movie, too. When she stopped by my desk to talk about it, she looked angry. She was--with herself. 'One thought kept coming back to me as I watched that movie,' she said. 'What would those women think of the way I use, or don't use, my right to vote? All of us take it for granted now, not just younger women, but those of us who did seek to learn.' The right to vote, she said, had become valuable to her 'all over again.'  HBO released the movie on video and DVD . I wish all history,  social studies and government teachers would include the movie in their curriculum I want it shown on Bunco night, too, and anywhere else women gather. I realize this isn't our usual idea of socializing, but we are not voting in the numbers that we should be, and I think a little shock therapy is in order.  (Conferring over ratification [of the 19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution] at [National Woman's Party] headquarters, Jackson Pl [ace] [ Washington , D.C. ]. L-R Mrs. Lawrence Lewis, Mrs. Abby Scott Baker, Anita Pollitzer, Alice Paul, Florence Boeckel, Mabel Vernon (standing, right))  It is jarring to watch Woodrow Wilson and his cronies try to persuade a psychiatrist to declare Alice Paul insane so that she could be permanently institutionalized. And it is inspiring to watch the doctor refuse. Alice Paul was strong, he said, and brave. That didn't make her crazy.  The doctor admonished the men: 'Courage in women is often mistaken for insanity.'  Please, if you are so inclined, pass this on to all the women you know.  We need to get out and vote and use this right that was fought so hard for by these very courageous women. Whether you vote democratic, republican or independent party - remember to vote.  (Helena Hill Weed, Norwalk , Conn.)

Finally a clear difference

Congratulations to Adrain Dix, I hope he does well in his battle against the BC Liberals in the upcoming months. I and my family supported Mike in his campaign for the leadership, and we were disappointed with the results. However, the people of the party have spoken, so it is time to put aside disappointment and focus on the job at hand, which in my mind is to restore social programs that have been systematically destroyed under 10 years of Liberal rule in BC.  I agree with Harvey Oberfeld when he says in blog Keeping it Real:

Clark will represent the establishment, the big business corporate community, the investor side of the resource industries, real estate and yes, the owners/managers behind the big mainstream media. Her message will be not to rock the boat economically, not to scare off investment and not to turn over the province to the unions.
Dix, with his clearly stated goals of raising taxes on banks and big business to fund expanded social programs is as different from Clark as day is to night. His will be a message of social justice, more breaks for low-income, seniors and middle class families. with a shift of more of the tax burden from individuals back to big business.
It will be a great battle!

As the Battle has started already for the hearts and minds of the voters of BC (Provincially as well as Federally) I would urge people to read  BC Mary blog The Legislature Raids .  On April 18th, 2011 she posted a great article, entitled Liars, liars. How to disrupt and destroy Parliament. Contempt? Oh yes.

This is a a great post and a reminder of that speaks to the methods the establishment will use to try and win your hearts and minds. As Boomers, we need to remember we have seen this all before albeit in the US under Nixon, and Bush and remind ourselves that a just society is worth the fight.

The Green party debate

In Canada the TV stations decided that they would hold a televised debate with only four of the current registered parties taking part. The TV stations also decided that if a party did not have any members in our house of parliament, that party  would not take part in the debate. The Green Party of Canada has about 5% of the votes but because of our first past the post system did not elect any members to the house of Parliament.  The leader of the Green Party is a woman called Elizabeth May. She objected and has taken the issue to court to fight for her "right" to participate in the debates. The TV debates are important as they may make a difference as to which party wins in a close vote. The Bloc is a party that advocates the French Canada should leave Canada. Only Canadians would allow the leader of a party with this agenda to debate about how Canada should be led. :-)

The issue that appeared to be taking up time away from the other policy issues of the Canadian election is the issue of whether or not Elizabeth May should be allowed to take part in the leadership debates. The debate is interesting, Creative Revolution has some interesting ideas on this as do the readers of CBC news. I initially thought she should not be in the debates and I also believe that the Bloc should not be in the debates. My thinking on the Bloc, is that the Bloc only runs in one province and therefore should not be invited to debate at the national level.  I see nothing wrong with them taking part in a French Canadian debate amongst all leaders.

My initial thinking about Elizabeth May is that she and the Green Party were given the opportunity to take part in the last debate, but they failed to get a member elected. They may have gahered 5% of the vote in the last election, but they are, in my mind a party, that has not yet impressed enough Canadians to get any members elected. So even though they are running in every riding, they should not be given the right to debate at the National level, with the three other parties who have impressed Canadians enough to get members elected.

However, when I did listen to her position on why she should be in the debate, I realized that she had a legitimate arguement and that with  5% of the vote perhaps she should be given a chance to take part in the debate. The matter is moot as the courts have refused to hear her case, and unless there is a huge public outcry she will not be heard.

Having said the above, I do believe that the Green Party would have been better served if they focused their money, attention and time on finding key ridings where they had a chance to get elected. Once they show me and I suspect other Canadians,  that they have what it takes to get a member elected then I would be more willing to take them seriously. Until then, in my opinion, because of the size of their vote, they have a right to be at the table as they have shown they are not a minor party, but perhaps so do any of the other parties that have not elected members to the House but who represent legitimate (or not) concerns of many Canadians.

The following are a list of the 19 registered political parties in Canada from the Elections Canada Website. I have included the links to each party as well. Note only four have members in the House at this time, the Liberals, the Conservatives, the NDP and the Bloc.

         Animal Alliance Environment Voters Party of Canada

         Bloc Québécois

         Canadian Action Party

         Christian Heritage Party of Canada

         Communist Party of Canada

         Conservative Party of Canada

         First Peoples National Party of Canada

         Green Party of Canada

         Liberal Party of Canada

         Libertarian Party of Canada

    Marijuana Party

    Marxist-Leninist Party of Canada

    New Democratic Party

    People's Political Power Party of Canada

    Pirate Party of Canada

    Progressive Canadian Party

    Rhinoceros Party

    United Party of Canada

Western Block Party

Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist

Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist
HMS@proparanoid.com by  Michael Sweeney
copyright (c) 1997, 2000 All rights reserved

(Revised April 2000 - formerly SEVEN Traits)
 
1) Avoidance. They never actually discuss issues head-on or provide constructive input, generally avoiding citation of references or credentials. Rather, they merely imply this, that, and the other. Virtually everything about  their presentation implies their authority and  expert knowledge in the matter without any further justification for credibility.

2) Selectivity. They tend to pick and choose opponents carefully, either applying the hit-and-run approach against mere commentators supportive of opponents, or focusing heavier attacks on key opponents who are known to directly address issues. Should a commentatorbecome argumentative with any success, the focus will shift to include the commentator as well.

3) Coincidental. They tend to surface suddenly and somewhat coincidentally with a new controversial topic with no clear prior record of participation in general discussions in the particular public arena involved. They likewise tend to vanish once the topic is no longer of general concern. They were likely directed or elected to be there for a reason, and vanish with the reason.

4) Teamwork. They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams. Of course, this can happen naturally in any public forum, but there will likely be an ongoing pattern of frequent exchanges of this sort where professionals are involved. Sometimes one of the players will infiltrate the opponent camp to become a source for straw man or other tactics designed to dilute opponent presentation strength.

5) Anti-conspiratorial. They almost always have disdain for 'conspiracy theorists' and, usually, for those who in any way believe JFK was not killed by LHO. Ask yourself why, if they hold such disdain for conspiracy theorists, do they focus on defending a single topic discussed in a NG focusing on conspiracies? One might think they would either be trying to make fools of everyone on every topic, or simply ignore the group they hold in such disdain.Or, one might more rightly conclude they have  an ulterior motive for their actions in going out of their way to focus as they do.

6) Artificial Emotions. An odd kind of 'artificial' emotionalism and an unusually thick skin -- an ability to persevere and persist even in the face of overwhelming criticism and unacceptance. This likely stems from intelligence community training that, no matter how condemning the evidence, deny everything, and never become emotionally involved or reactive. The net result for a disinfo artist is that emotions can seem artificial. Most people, if responding in anger, for instance, will express their animosity throughout their rebuttal. But disinfo types usually have trouble maintaining the 'image' and are hot and cold with respect to pretended emotions and their usually more calm or unemotional communications style. It's just a job, and they often seem unable to 'act their role in character' as well in a communications medium as they might be able in a real face-to-face  conversation/confrontation. You might have outright rage and indignation one moment, ho-hum the next, and more anger later -- an emotional yo-yo. With respect to being thick-skinned, no amount of criticism will deter them from doing their job, and they will generally continue their old disinfo patterns without any adjustments to criticisms of how obvious it is that they play that game -- where a more rational individual who truly cares what others think might seek to improve their communications style, substance, and so forth, or simply give up.

7) Inconsistent. There is also a tendency to make mistakes which betray their true self/motives. This may stem from not really knowing their topic, or it may be somewhat 'freudian', so to speak, in that perhaps they  really root for the side of truth deep within.

I have noted that often, they will simply cite contradictory information which neutralizes  itself and the author. For instance, one such  player claimed to be a Navy pilot, but blamed his poor communicating skills (spelling, grammar, incoherent style) on having only a grade-school education. I'm not aware of too many Navy pilots who don't have a college degree. Another claimed no knowledge of a particular topic/situation but later claimed first-hand knowledge of it.

8) BONUS TRAIT: Time Constant. Recently discovered, with respect to News Groups, is the response time factor. There are three ways this can be seen to work, especially when the government or other empowered player is involved in a cover up operation:

1) ANY NG posting by a targeted proponent for truth  can result in an IMMEDIATE response. The government and other empowered players can afford to pay people to sit there and watch for an opportunity to do some damage. SINCE DISINFO IN A NG ONLY WORKS IF THE READER SEES IT - FAST RESPONSE IS CALLED FOR, or the visitor may be swayed towards truth.

2) When dealing in more direct ways with a disinformationalist, such as email, DELAY IS CALLED FOR - there will usually be a minimum of a 48-72 hour delay. This allows a sit-down team discussion on response strategy for best effect, and even enough time to 'get permission' or instruction from a formal chain of command.

3) In the NG example 1) above, it will often ALSO be seen that bigger guns are drawn and fired after the same 48-72 hours delay - the team approach in play. This is especially true when the targeted truth seeker or their comments are considered more important with respect to potential to reveal truth. Thus, a serious truth sayer will be attacked twice for the same sin.  

I close with the first paragraph of the introduction to my unpublished book, Fatal Rebirth:

Truth cannot live on a diet of secrets, withering within entangled lies. Freedom cannot live on a diet of lies, surrendering to the veil of oppression. The human spirit cannot live on a diet of oppression, becoming subservient in the end to the will of evil. God, as truth incarnate, will not long let stand a world devoted to such evil. Therefore, let us have the truth and freedom our spirits require... or let us die seeking these things, for without them, we shall surely and justly perish in an evil world.

BC Politics

I have tried to stay out of the political realm because there are so many great bloggers out there who provide an alternative voice. However I urge all of you to read the following post by Laila Yuile on her site I'm Laila Yuile and this is how I see it

Bloggers like her,  Bill Tielemen, Norm Farrell, Grant G. (The Straight Goods), and BC Mary (The Legislature Raids), Rafe Mair, Ross K (The Gazetteer) and others allow the people of BC to hear the truth about the way politics in BC are today.
After reading the 100 reasons I had to go for a walk to calm down, it is very distrubing for those of you who stilll believe in our political system. I am beginning to have my doubts.

 http://lailayuile.wordpress.com/100-reasons-gordon-campbell-must-go/