URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Trom (The Resolution of Mind)
  HTML https://theresolutionofmind.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Games Strategies
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 47--------------------------------------------------
       Eight Traits of the Dis-Informationalist
   DIR By: Colleen
       Date: February 27, 2014, 8:24 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist
       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 commentator become 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) 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:
       a) 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.
       b) 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.
       c) 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.
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       How to Spot a Spy (Cointelpro Agent)
       One way to neutralize a potential activist is to get them to be
       in a group that does all the wrong things. Why?
       1) The message doesn't get out.
       2) A lot of time is wasted
       3) The activist is frustrated and discouraged
       4) Nothing good is accomplished.
       FBI and Police Informers and Infiltrators will infest any group
       and they have phoney activist organizations established.
       Their purpose is to prevent any real movement for justice or
       eco-peace from developing in this country.
       Agents come in small, medium or large. They can be of any ethnic
       background. They can be male or female.
       The actual size of the group or movement being infiltrated is
       irrelevant. It is the potential the movement has for becoming
       large which brings on the spies and saboteurs.
       This booklet lists tactics agents use to slow things down, foul
       things up, destroy the movement and keep tabs on activists.
       It is the agent's job to keep the activist from quitting such a
       group, thus keeping him/her under control.
       In some situations, to get control, the agent will tell the
       activist:
       "You're dividing the movement."
       [Here, I have added the psychological reasons as to WHY this
       maneuver works to control people]
       This invites guilty feelings. Many people can be controlled by
       guilt. The agents begin relationships with activists behind a
       well-developed mask of "dedication to the cause." Because of
       their often declared dedication, (and actions designed to prove
       this), when they criticize the activist, he or she - being truly
       dedicated to the movement - becomes convinced that somehow, any
       issues are THEIR fault. This is because a truly dedicated person
       tends to believe that everyone has a conscience and that nobody
       would dissimulate and lie like that "on purpose." It's amazing
       how far agents can go in manipulating an activist because the
       activist will constantly make excuses for the agent who
       regularly declares their dedication to the cause. Even if they
       do, occasionally, suspect the agent, they will pull the wool
       over their own eyes by rationalizing: "they did that
       unconsciously... they didn't really mean it... I can help them
       by being forgiving and accepting " and so on and so forth.
       The agent will tell the activist:
       "You're a leader!"
       This is designed to enhance the activist's self-esteem. His or
       her narcissistic admiration of his/her own activist/altruistic
       intentions increase as he or she identifies with and consciously
       admires the altruistic declarations of the agent which are
       deliberately set up to mirror those of the activist.
       This is "malignant pseudoidentification." It is the process by
       which the agent consciously imitates or simulates a certain
       behavior to foster the activist's identification with him/her,
       thus increasing the activist's vulnerability to exploitation.
       The agent will simulate the more subtle self-concepts of the
       activist.
       Activists and those who have altruistic self-concepts are most
       vulnerable to malignant pseudoidentification especially during
       work with the agent when the interaction includes matter
       relating to their competency, autonomy, or knowledge.
       The goal of the agent is to increase the activist's general
       empathy for the agent through pseudo-identification with the
       activist's self-concepts.
       The most common example of this is the agent who will compliment
       the activist for his competency or knowledge or value to the
       movement. On a more subtle level, the agent will simulate
       affects and mannerisms of the activist which promotes
       identification via mirroring and feelings of "twinship". It is
       not unheard of for activists, enamored by the perceived
       helpfulness and competence of a good agent, to find themselves
       considering ethical violations and perhaps, even illegal
       behavior, in the service of their agent/handler.
       The activist's "felt quality of perfection" [self-concept] is
       enhanced, and a strong empathic bond is developed with the agent
       through his/her imitation and simulation of the victim's own
       narcissistic investments. [self-concepts] That is, if the
       activist knows, deep inside, their own dedication to the cause,
       they will project that onto the agent who is "mirroring" them.
       The activist will be deluded into thinking that the agent shares
       this feeling of identification and bonding. In an
       activist/social movement setting, the adversarial roles that
       activists naturally play vis a vis the establishment/government,
       fosters ongoing processes of intrapsychic splitting so that
       "twinship alliances" between activist and agent may render whole
       sectors or reality testing unavailable to the activist. They
       literally "lose touch with reality."
       Activists who deny their own narcissistic investments [do not
       have a good idea of their own self-concepts and that they ARE
       concepts] and consciously perceive themselves (accurately, as it
       were) to be "helpers" endowed with a special amount of altruism
       are exceedingly vulnerable to the affective (emotional)
       simulation of the accomplished agent.
       Empathy is fostered in the activist through the expression of
       quite visible affects. The presentation of tearfulness, sadness,
       longing, fear, remorse, and guilt, may induce in the
       helper-oriented activist a strong sense of compassion, while
       unconsciously enhancing the activist's narcissistic investment
       in self as the embodiment of goodness.
       The agent's expresssion of such simulated affects may be quite
       compelling to the observer and difficult to distinguish from
       deep emotion.
       It can usually be identified by two events, however:
       First, the activist who has analyzed his/her own narcissistic
       roots and is aware of his/her own potential for being
       "emotionally hooked," will be able to remain cool and unaffected
       by such emotional outpourings by the agent.
       As a result of this unaffected, cool, attitude, the Second event
       will occur: The agent will recompensate much too quickly
       following such an affective expression leaving the activist with
       the impression that "the play has ended, the curtain has
       fallen," and the imposture, for the moment, has finished. The
       agent will then move quickly to another activist/victim.
       The fact is, the movement doesn't need leaders, it needs MOVERS.
       "Follow the leader" is a waste of time.
       A good agent will want to meet as often as possible. He or she
       will talk a lot and say little. One can expect an onslaught of
       long, unresolved discussions.
       Some agents take on a pushy, arrogant, or defensive manner:
       1) To disrupt the agenda
       2) To side-track the discussion
       3) To interrupt repeatedly
       4) To feign ignorance
       5) To make an unfounded accusation against a person.
       Calling someone a racist, for example. This tactic is used to
       discredit a person in the eyes of all other group members.
       Saboteurs
       Some saboteurs pretend to be activists. She or he will ....
       1) Write encyclopedic flyers (in the present day, websites)
       2) Print flyers in English only.
       3) Have demonstrations in places where no one cares.
       4) Solicit funding from rich people instead of grass roots
       support
       5) Display banners with too many words that are confusing.
       6) Confuse issues.
       7) Make the wrong demands.
       Cool Compromise the goal.
       9) Have endless discussions that waste everyone's time. The
       agent may accompany the endless discussions with drinking, pot
       smoking or other amusement to slow down the activist's work.
       Provocateurs
       1) Want to establish "leaders" to set them up for a fall in
       order to stop the movement.
       2) Suggest doing foolish, illegal things to get the activists in
       trouble.
       3) Encourage militancy.
       4) Want to taunt the authorities.
       5) Attempt to make the activist compromise their values.
       6) Attempt to instigate violence. Activisim ought to always be
       non-violent.
       7) Attempt to provoke revolt among people who are ill-prepared
       to deal with the reaction of the authorities to such violence.
       Informants
       1) Want everyone to sign up and sing in and sign everything.
       2) Ask a lot of questions (gathering data).
       3) Want to know what events the activist is planning to attend.
       4) Attempt to make the activist defend him or herself to
       identify his or her beliefs, goals, and level of committment.
       Recruiting
       Legitimate activists do not subject people to hours of
       persuasive dialog. Their actions, beliefs, and goals speak for
       themselves.
       Groups that DO recruit are missionaries, military, and fake
       political parties or movements set up by agents.
       Surveillance
       ALWAYS assume that you are under surveillance.
       At this point, if you are NOT under surveillance, you are not a
       very good activist!
       Scare Tactics
       They use them.
       Such tactics include slander, defamation, threats, getting close
       to disaffected or minimally committed fellow activists to
       persuade them (via psychological tactics described above) to
       turn against the movement and give false testimony against their
       former compatriots. They will plant illegal substances on the
       activist and set up an arrest; they will plant false information
       and set up "exposure," they will send incriminating letters
       [emails] in the name of the activist; and more; they will do
       whatever society will allow.
       This booklet in no way covers all the ways agents use to
       sabotage the lives of sincere an dedicated activists.
       If an agent is "exposed," he or she will be transferred or
       replaced.
       COINTELPRO is still in operation today under a different code
       name. It is no longer placed on paper where it can be discovered
       through the freedom of information act.
       The FBI counterintelligence program's stated purpose: To expose,
       disrupt, misdirect, discredit, and otherwise neutralize
       individuals who the FBI categorize as opposed to the National
       Interests. "National Security" means the FBI's security from the
       people ever finding out the vicious things it does in violation
       of people's civil liberties.
       -------------
       Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression
       Strong, credible allegations of high-level criminal activity can
       bring down a government. When the government lacks an effective,
       fact-based defense, other techniques must be employed. The
       success of these techniques depends heavily upon a cooperative,
       compliant press and a mere token opposition party.
       1. Dummy up. If it's not reported, if it's not news, it didn't
       happen.
       2. Wax indignant. This is also known as the "How dare you?"
       gambit.
       3. Characterize the charges as "rumors" or, better yet, "wild
       rumors." If, in spite of the news blackout, the public is still
       able to learn about the suspicious facts, it can only be through
       "rumors." (If they tend to believe the "rumors" it must be
       because they are simply "paranoid" or "hysterical.")
       4. Knock down straw men. Deal only with the weakest aspects of
       the weakest charges. Even better, create your own straw men.
       Make up wild rumors (or plant false stories) and give them lead
       play when you appear to debunk all the charges, real and
       fanciful alike.
       5. Call the skeptics names like "conspiracy theorist,"
       "nutcase," "ranter," "kook," "crackpot," and, of course, "rumor
       monger." Be sure, too, to use heavily loaded verbs and
       adjectives when characterizing their charges and defending the
       "more reasonable" government and its defenders. You must then
       carefully avoid fair and open debate with any of the people you
       have thus maligned. For insurance, set up your own "skeptics" to
       shoot down.
       6. Impugn motives. Attempt to marginalize the critics by
       suggesting strongly that they are not really interested in the
       truth but are simply pursuing a partisan political agenda or are
       out to make money (compared to over-compensated adherents to the
       government line who, presumably, are not).
       7. Invoke authority. Here the controlled press and the sham
       opposition can be very useful.
       8. Dismiss the charges as "old news."
       9. Come half-clean. This is also known as "confession and
       avoidance" or "taking the limited hangout route." This way, you
       create the impression of candor and honesty while you admit only
       to relatively harmless, less-than-criminal "mistakes." This
       stratagem often requires the embrace of a fall-back position
       quite different from the one originally taken. With effective
       damage control, the fall-back position need only be peddled by
       stooge skeptics to carefully limited markets.
       10. Characterize the crimes as impossibly complex and the truth
       as ultimately unknowable.
       11. Reason backward, using the deductive method with a
       vengeance. With thoroughly rigorous deduction, troublesome
       evidence is irrelevant. E.g. We have a completely free press. If
       evidence exists that the Vince Foster "suicide" note was forged,
       they would have reported it. They haven't reported it so there
       is no such evidence. Another variation on this theme involves
       the likelihood of a conspiracy leaker and a press who would
       report the leak.
       12. Require the skeptics to solve the crime completely. E.g. If
       Foster was murdered, who did it and why?
       13. Change the subject. This technique includes creating and/or
       publicizing distractions.
       14. Lightly report incriminating facts, and then make nothing of
       them. This is sometimes referred to as "bump and run" reporting.
       15. Baldly and brazenly lie. A favorite way of doing this is to
       attribute the "facts" furnished the public to a
       plausible-sounding, but anonymous, source.
       16. Expanding further on numbers 4 and 5, have your own stooges
       "expose" scandals and champion popular causes. Their job is to
       pre-empt real opponents and to play 99-yard football. A
       variation is to pay rich people for the job who will pretend to
       spend their own money.
       17. Flood the Internet with agents. This is the answer to the
       question, "What could possibly motivate a person to spend hour
       upon hour on Internet news groups defending the government
       and/or the press and harassing genuine critics?" Don t the
       authorities have defenders enough in all the newspapers,
       magazines, radio, and television? One would think refusing to
       print critical letters and screening out serious callers or
       dumping them from radio talk shows would be control enough, but,
       obviously, it is not.
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 1