How to identify trolls and paid agents on social media sites

Hello World Dear Anons
Today we will inform You on
how to identify trolls and paid agents on social media sites.
Awareness is power.
Anonymous
Thanks to cryptome and revolution-news for sharing this breakdown of the deliberate manipulation
ploys/tactics that are commonly in use on social media sites by those who intend to
suppress truth and socially engineer community members.
1.
COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of internet forums2.
Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation3.
Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist4.
How to Spot a Spy (Cointelpro Agent)5.
Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression
COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of internet forums
There are several techniques for the control and manipulation of an internet forum, no
matter what it is, 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 an '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 pre positioned on the forum and
allowed to 'age.'
Each of these mis-directional 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 pre positioned
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 non-useful 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 (which
you can see in operation all the time at www.abovetopsecret.com) 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 manner 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 criminality 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 non-acceptance.
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 dis-info artist is that emotions can seem artificial.Most people,
if responding in anger, for instance, will express their animosity throughout their rebuttal.
But dis-info 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 dis-info
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 dis-informationalist,
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.
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 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 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 intra-psychic
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.
8.
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 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.
Here an example of zionist paid shills

How to identify trolls and paid agents on social media sites | subs

Latest Posts