by Zen Gardner
It’s been outright silence and denial concerning the chemtrail phenomenon since they started this insidious program in the early 90′s. While the aerosol spraying is “as plain as the nose on your face”, public discussion has been held off almost entirely so the vast majority would continue to not even notice.
But they’re ever so slowly changing their tune.
While disinformation claiming these chemtrails are simply contrails from increased air traffic seems to have been a workable “dispersant” on public perception, it’s remained buried in obscure articles or internet pages. A very few scientific TV shows have talked about them, but with the usual dismissive conclusions.
Divide, Demonize and ConquerUsually, those concerned about chemtrails are immediately stigmatized as “conspiracy nuts” and effectively marginalized and lumped together with anything someone might consider a wing-nut. It’s a very effective mental electric fence: “Don’t go there buddy, you’ll be one of them.” And for the self-centered apathetic masses with no backbone or loyalty to truth, it works.
Even more insidious is the fascist control false choice mantra “you’re either with us or you’re with the terrorists”. Very clever, Herr Fascist. But those aren’t the only choices. But it sure works to squelch dissent when enforced by draconian laws such as we have now.
Here’s Wikipedia on false choice or false dilemma:
The logical fallacy of false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, the either-or fallacy) involves a situation in which only two alternatives are considered, when in fact there are other options. Closely related are failing to consider a range of options and the tendency to think in extremes, called black-and-white thinking. Strictly speaking, the prefix “di” in “dilemma” means “two”. When a list of more than two choices is offered, but there are other choices not mentioned, then the fallacy is called the fallacy of false choice, or the fallacy of exhaustive hypotheses.
False dilemma can arise intentionally, when fallacy is used in an attempt to force a choice (“If you are not with us, you are against us.“)
[The phrase "you're either with us, or against us" and similar variations are used to depict situations as being polarized and to force witnesses and bystanders to become allies or lose favor. The implied consequence of not joining the team effort is to be deemed an enemy.]