#Anonymous Guide ~ How to Spot a Spy and there methods of truth
suppression/self censorship~
The
Gentleman's Guide To Forum Spies.
1. #COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of a internet
forum
2. Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation
3. Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist
4. How to Spot a Spy (Cointelpro Agent)
5. Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression
____________________________________
COINTELPRO
Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of a internet forum..
There
are several techniques for the control and manipulation of a internet forum no
matter what, or who is on it. We will go over each technique and demonstrate
that only a minimal number of operatives can be used to eventually and
effectively gain a control of a 'uncontrolled forum.'
Technique
#1 - 'FORUM SLIDING'
If
a very sensitive posting of a critical nature has been posted on a forum - it
can be quickly removed from public view by 'forum sliding.' In this technique a
number of unrelated posts are quietly prepositioned on the forum and allowed to
'age.' Each of these misdirectional forum postings can then be called upon at
will to trigger a 'forum slide.' The second requirement is that several fake
accounts exist, which can be called upon, to ensure that this technique is not
exposed to the public. To trigger a 'forum slide' and 'flush' the critical post
out of public view it is simply a matter of logging into each account both real
and fake and then 'replying' to prepositioned postings with a simple 1 or 2
line comment. This brings the unrelated postings to the top of the forum list,
and the critical posting 'slides' down the front page, and quickly out of
public view. Although it is difficult or impossible to censor the posting it is
now lost in a sea of unrelated and unuseful postings. By this means it becomes
effective to keep the readers of the forum reading unrelated and non-issue
items.
Technique
#2 - 'CONSENSUS CRACKING'
A
second highly effective technique is 'consensus cracking.' To develop a
consensus crack, the following technique is used. Under the guise of a fake
account a posting is made which looks legitimate and is towards the truth is
made - but the critical point is that it has a VERY WEAK PREMISE without
substantive proof to back the posting. Once this is done then under alternative
fake accounts a very strong position in your favor is slowly introduced over
the life of the posting. It is IMPERATIVE that both sides are initially
presented, so the uninformed reader cannot determine which side is the truth.
As postings and replies are made the stronger 'evidence' or disinformation in
your favor is slowly 'seeded in.' Thus the uninformed reader will most like
develop the same position as you, and if their position is against you their
opposition to your posting will be most likely dropped. However in some cases
where the forum members are highly educated and can counter your disinformation
with real facts and linked postings, you can then 'abort' the consensus
cracking by initiating a 'forum slide.'
Technique
#3 - 'TOPIC DILUTION'
Topic
dilution is not only effective in forum sliding it is also very useful in
keeping the forum readers on unrelated and non-productive issues. This is a
critical and useful technique to cause a 'RESOURCE BURN.' By implementing
continual and non-related postings that distract and disrupt (trolling ) the
forum readers they are more effectively stopped from anything of any real
productivity. If the intensity of gradual dilution is intense enough, the
readers will effectively stop researching and simply slip into a 'gossip mode.'
In this state they can be more easily misdirected away from facts towards
uninformed conjecture and opinion. The less informed they are the more
effective and easy it becomes to control the entire group in the direction that
you would desire the group to go in. It must be stressed that a proper
assessment of the psychological capabilities and levels of education is first
determined of the group to determine at what level to 'drive in the wedge.' By
being too far off topic too quickly it may trigger censorship by a forum
moderator.
Technique
#4 - 'INFORMATION COLLECTION'
Information
collection is also a very effective method to determine the psychological level
of the forum members, and to gather intelligence that can be used against them.
In this technique in a light and positive environment a 'show you mine so me
yours' posting is initiated. From the number of replies and the answers that
are provided much statistical information can be gathered. An example is to
post your 'favorite weapon' and then encourage other members of the forum to
showcase what they have. In this matter it can be determined by reverse
proration what percentage of the forum community owns a firearm, and or a
illegal weapon. This same method can be used by posing as one of the form
members and posting your favorite 'technique of operation.' From the replies
various methods that the group utilizes can be studied and effective methods
developed to stop them from their activities.
Technique
#5 - 'ANGER TROLLING'
Statistically,
there is always a percentage of the forum posters who are more inclined to
violence. In order to determine who these individuals are, it is a requirement
to present a image to the forum to deliberately incite a strong psychological
reaction. From this the most violent in the group can be effectively singled
out for reverse IP location and possibly local enforcement tracking. To
accomplish this only requires posting a link to a video depicting a local
police officer massively abusing his power against a very innocent individual.
Statistically of the million or so police officers in America there is always
one or two being caught abusing there powers and the taping of the activity can
be then used for intelligence gathering purposes - without the requirement to
'stage' a fake abuse video. This method is extremely effective, and the more so
the more abusive the video can be made to look. Sometimes it is useful to
'lead' the forum by replying to your own posting with your own statement of
violent intent, and that you 'do not care what the authorities think!!'
inflammation. By doing this and showing no fear it may be more effective in
getting the more silent and self-disciplined violent intent members of the
forum to slip and post their real intentions. This can be used later in a court
of law during prosecution.
Technique
#6 - 'GAINING FULL CONTROL'
It
is important to also be harvesting and continually maneuvering for a forum
moderator position. Once this position is obtained, the forum can then be
effectively and quietly controlled by deleting unfavorable postings - and one
can eventually steer the forum into complete failure and lack of interest by
the general public. This is the 'ultimate victory' as the forum is no longer
participated with by the general public and no longer useful in maintaining
their freedoms. Depending on the level of control you can obtain, you can
deliberately steer a forum into defeat by censoring postings, deleting
memberships, flooding, and or accidentally taking the forum offline. By this
method the forum can be quickly killed. However it is not always in the
interest to kill a forum as it can be converted into a 'honey pot' gathering
center to collect and misdirect newcomers and from this point be completely
used for your control for your agenda purposes.
CONCLUSION
Remember
these techniques are only effective if the forum participants DO NOT KNOW ABOUT
THEM. Once they are aware of these techniques the operation can completely
fail, and the forum can become uncontrolled. At this point other avenues must
be considered such as initiating a false legal precedence to simply have the
forum shut down and taken offline. This is not desirable as it then leaves the
enforcement agencies unable to track the percentage of those in the population
who always resist attempts for control against them. Many other techniques can
be utilized and developed by the individual and as you develop further
techniques of infiltration and control it is imperative to share then with HQ.
_____________________________
Twenty-Five
Rules of Disinformation
Note:
The first rule and last five (or six, depending on situation) rules are
generally not directly within the ability of the traditional disinfo artist to
apply. These rules are generally used more directly by those at the leadership,
key players, or planning level of the criminal conspiracy or conspiracy to
cover up.
1.
Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don't
discuss it -- especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it's
not reported, it didn't happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.
2.
Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus
on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some
otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the 'How dare you!'
gambit.
3.
Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges,
regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other
derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method
which works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the
public can learn of the facts are through such 'arguable rumors'. If you can
associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a 'wild
rumor' from a 'bunch of kids on the Internet' which can have no basis in fact.
4.
Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent's argument
which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to
look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your
interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the
weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy
them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated
alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.
5.
Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the
primary 'attack the messenger' ploy, though other methods qualify as variants
of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as 'kooks',
'right-wing', 'liberal', 'left-wing', 'terrorists', 'conspiracy buffs',
'radicals', 'militia', 'racists', 'religious fanatics', 'sexual deviates', and
so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same
label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
6.
Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the
opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or
simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and
letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can
be called upon without having to explain criticism, reasoning -- simply make an
accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any
subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent's viewpoint.
7.
Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that
the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This
avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.
8.
Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and
present your argument with enough 'jargon' and 'minutia' to illustrate you are
'one who knows', and simply say it isn't so without discussing issues or
demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.
9.
Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid
discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any
sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a
conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.
10.
Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man --
usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make
charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with - a kind of
investment for the future should the matter not be so easily contained.) Where
it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it
dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent
charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually then be
associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash
without need to address current issues -- so much the better where the opponent
is or was involved with the original source.
11.
Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or element of
the facts, take the 'high road' and 'confess' with candor that some innocent
mistake, in hindsight, was made -- but that opponents have seized on the
opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities
which, 'just isn't so.' Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later, and
even publicly 'call for an end to the nonsense' because you have already 'done
the right thing.' Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for
'coming clean' and 'owning up' to your mistakes without addressing more serious
issues.
12.
Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events
surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire
affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the
matter to begin to lose interest more quickly without having to address the
actual issues.
13.
Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning
backwards or with an apparent deductive logic which forbears any actual
material fact.
14.
Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the
crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best with issues qualifying for
rule 10.
15.
Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless
the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.
16.
Vanish evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you
won't have to address the issue.
17.
Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed
here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial
comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This
works especially well with companions who can 'argue' with you over the new
topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key
issues.
18.
Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else,
chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which
will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render
their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the
issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses
the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how 'sensitive
they are to criticism.'
19.
Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of
the 'play dumb' rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an
opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that
is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his
disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or
withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing
issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of
media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even
deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning
or relevance.
20.
False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and
manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations -- as useful tools to
neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the
crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be
easily separated from the fabrications.
21.
Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body.
Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive
issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are
required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the
prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and
that the evidence is sealed and unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a
favorable verdict is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed.
Usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also
be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim.
22.
Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s)
or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific,
investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In
this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.
23.
Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to
distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of
unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as
such) to distract the multitudes.
24.
Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing
opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to
address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and
detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail
information, or merely by destroying them financially, emotionally, or severely
damaging their health.
25.
Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and
you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen.
____________________________
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 DIS-INFO 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 phony
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 pseudo-identification." 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
pseudo-identification 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. 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 emphatic 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 effective
(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 expression 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 re-compensate much too quickly following such an effective
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. Activism 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 commitment.
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.
----------------------
~ #Anonymous
This post was taken from the The Gentleman's Guide To Forum Spies http://insurgencymod.blogspot.com/2012/07/gentlemans-guide-to-forum-spies.html
