The Gentleperson's Guide To Forum Spies

[mkultra]

How many of these techniques have been seen here?

http://pastebin.com/irj4Fyd5

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 prepositined 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 (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 favour 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 favour 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 'favourite 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 favourite '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 unfavourable 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 precidence 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 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.&quot

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.

[Democracyinkind]

1. Yeah, it is unfathomable that anyone else than

Agent Mike would ever use such tactics.

to the author of that piece:

Maybe it would have been more effective to compile a list that does not consist of traits that almost everyone who ever posts on a discussion board uses. Much of that list is just simple, normal behavior for people on the internet.

Taking this list seriously will cause a perceived inflation of "Cointelpro agents" of truly biblical proportions.

[annabanana]

4. Oh by all means.. Ignore this post.

[Democracyinkind]

15. Agent Mike? Is it you?

The list in the OP would suggest yes.

Which was like exactly the point I originally made.

[patrice]

94. It shouldn't be ignored. But we should discuss how to avoid false positives, since those,

intended or not, will fulfill agent mike's mission.

To me, this means we should begin by discussing the list item by item and then apply it item by item and in applying it, we should avoid beginning with accusations and use questions instead, socratic questioning, and be willing to honestly accept proffered answers, unless and until it becomes necessary to do otherwise and if it does become "necessary" to no longer accept an answer, the process should be lather-rinse-repeat, i.e. do not begin with accusations.

The reason it is important not to begin with accusations is because that fulfills agent mike's mission. Questions pose the opportunity to learn and explicate and if someone doesn't want to answer, well then that has to be accepted too without accusation, but of course it would be interesting if it is a dominant pattern though it could just mean the person is incapable of answering and isn't hiding an agenda that is destructive to the discourse here.

[annabanana]

96. Sounds reasonable.

Sounds critical.

[patrice]

98. I think you're right. This is critical. nt

[mkultra]

14. seems irrelevant if the story is really written by cointel

Also seems obvious that truly effective measures would need to seem natural, just directed and in large scale. Otherwise they would stand out.

[Democracyinkind]

17. I smell an epistemic conundrum here somewhere. NT

[heaven05]

70. ohhh!

you're very smart

[Democracyinkind]

73. ohh!

you've aqcuired the skill of making backhanded compliments. Impressive.

[heaven05]

79. thank you

I should admit I reserve it for very special people

[xtraxritical]

83. Do you people really think you're that important? Who really cares what is posted? lol

[heaven05]

84. most

most or they wouldn't be here, I imagine. Not 'you people'!

[annabanana]

85. The responses to this thread suggest

it might end up in meta

[mkultra]

123. yes, politics cleary has no real importance

[heaven05]

44. but, but

Last edited Mon Jul 23, 2012, 10:47 AM - Edit history (2)

cointelpro did happen then, why not an updated version conceived by a 'rovian' evil genius. not so out of the realm of possibility. excellent post mkultra. pure info.

[Democracyinkind]

54. Well yeah.

But COINTELPRO was about more than writing letters to the editor.

[heaven05]

62. true

I was there. I just know what's probable with people who hold power and control over the unwashed masses.

[zeemike]

89. Well I would agree with one thing that this could be edited

And take out a lot of unnecessary detail that CAN be normal behaviour....and it would make it a better read...but that too could be seen as a trait if you wanted to. and is also normal behaviour in some people who write.
That is the whole point of manipulation...to make it look like normal behaviour
The point is that you can still spot it even if it is hidden among normal behaviour and he list come pretty good ones...one's I have seen so many times before used to break things up when people come together.

I hope everyone reads this even if it is too wordy because it is the key to understand how you are being controlled and to break free of it.

[muriel_volestrangler]

103. 'Edited'? The whole point of it is it's a compilation

It's the Big Bumper Book Of How People Think They Are Being Watched And Manipulated By The Government Which Is Very Afraid Of The Fearless Truth Telling They Are Doing.

[zeemike]

109. And the compilation shows what?

That people are paranoid?...what else is new
But just because you are paranoid does not mean they are not out to get you....and in fact paranoia comes from fear and fear is what they want to create....so they would encourage it.

For what it's worth.


There's something happening here
What it is ain't exactly clear
There's a man with a gun over there
Telling me I got to beware
I think it's time we stop, children, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down
There's battle lines being drawn
Nobody's right if everybody's wrong
Young people speaking their minds
Getting so much resistance from behind
I think it's time we stop, hey, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down
What a field-day for the heat
A thousand people in the street
Singing songs and carrying signs
Mostly say, hooray for our side
It's time we stop, hey, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down
Paranoia strikes deep
Into your life it will creep
It starts when you're always afraid
You step out of line, the man come and take you away
We better stop, hey, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down
Stop, hey, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down
Stop, now, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down
Stop, children, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down

[muriel_volestrangler]

111. That paranoia can unite the left and right wing

Look at how this has got so many recommendations here, despite the right wing origins of it.

But you can't edit what someone paranoid writes - that would make their paranoia worse.

[mkultra]

125. The compilation shows that regular activities used in volumn

and in specific ways can have a compounded effect. It also shows that people engaged in purposeful disinformation demonstrate patterns in which most of their posts will be of these types with little else.

[Raksha]

190. Good point: "That is the whole point of manipulation...

to make it look like normal behavior."

However, when the same poster uses a number of these techniques, and tends to use the same "repertoire" repeatedly over time, after a while it becomes fairly obvious that this person is a paid troll or infiltrator. Most of them (probably unconsciously) develop a repertoire of these gambits that work for them, and tend to use the same ones repeatedly. But then so do amateur trolls.

[booley]

101. it's not the traits...

. It's the pattern.

The more these traits are seen, the more suspicious one should become.

[dogknob]

146. Anything easy is not worth having n/t

[annabanana]

2. EVERY DUer should ~*bookmark*~ this thread!. . . n/t

[malaise]

8. Agreed

[turtlerescue1]

13. Thanks, just did that.

[loudsue]

37. I bookmarked it first thing. I'm so sick of these tactics on DU that I could scream.

So many good DUers through the years have become so frustrated with these tactics that they have left -- or they have gone postal and subsequently been tombstoned.

The original post - the effectiveness of these tactics, is why I'm lacking hope that this country can ever be turned around.

[Blue_Tires]

53. Actually, the mods should pin it at the top

especially every election year...

[Initech]

82. Done.

[glinda]

140. Thanks. Bookmarked.

[CBGLuthier]

3. IS there a technique that involves putting up posts that take three hours to read?

[annabanana]

5. ..ugh... too hard... can't lift...

Ahhhh... give up

[Fumesucker]

7. Brevity is not only the soul of wit but of communication also..

I'm willing to slog through that much text but I have to be pretty sure there's going to be a payoff in something I learned..

You begin by telling people what it is you're going to tell them, then you actually tell them the information, then you tell them again what it is that you just told them.

Getting information into a readable and easily understood format/context is the hardest part of communication.

[mkultra]

22. I guess i get a "4" on the essay portion.

[Fumesucker]

63. I wouldn't have offered constructive criticism except for your post about too heavy to lift..

It is the writer's responsibility to convey their information in as easy a manner as possible for the reader to understand if the writer wishes as many people as possible to read and understand what is written. Some of your readers are sending you a message, you can heed it or not as you wish..

It's clear you went to considerable trouble to put together what you did but not all that many people are going to slog through that much text without some idea in advance of the payoff.

Explaining complex things to people is a damn difficult task, it's somewhat easier face to face where you can solicit immediate feedback on what people are picking up, via text on the internet it's much harder.

ETA: I'm reminded of this quote..

"The present letter is a very long one, simply because I had no leisure to make it shorter." -Blaise Pascal.

[zeemike]

90. And I would recommend George Orwell's essays on writing

To anyone who wants to write effective activist literature...he understood it better than anyone.

[mkultra]

16. TL;DR

use normal techniques in specific ways and for specific means.

[Scootaloo]

136. There's an easy counter for it, at least.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

6. Wow!

[ananda]

23. Yeah.

I feel so paranoid and stoopid now.

I think I'll just go watch tv and give up.

Lol

[japa beads jamie]

131. Wow, you said LOL

That must mean that the OP is totally worthless...

[Confusious]

156. mah tinfoil hat is on crooked

teh aliens could be reading mah thoughts!

[TalkingDog]

9. If you want to see this in action, just go check out some of the recent gun threads.

Especially the ones that don't have any real reason for being. They don't add to the conversation, discuss problems or how to solve them. They just serve as a way to get people who have different views on a subject to bash each other.

[Democracyinkind]

11. Doesn't your example prove

that what is listed in this OP is simply normal behavior when discussing things on the internet?

Or are those threads all authored by Cointelpro agents?

I find only one of those two mutually exclusive views to be persuasive, and it's not the latter.

[mkultra]

20. yes, that is correct but meaningless

It should be obvious that any covert approach uses standard methods in a directed and compounded fashion.

[Democracyinkind]

21. The term "false positive" and witch hunt comes to mind. At least to mine. NT

[mkultra]

24. you are using technique #2

of the Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation.

[Democracyinkind]

38. Case in point

I am a normal, unpaid poster.

Not Agent Mike.

[zeemike]

99. And if you were agent mike you would deny it.

I hope to convince you that even the revelation of what they are doing and how they are doing it can be used destructively too.

By saying there is a witch hunt.
By making it a witch hunt
and by crying about the witch hunt.
And many derivatives of the above.
It all comes down to divide and conquer and to those people skilled in manipulation they can turn anything to their advantage...that is why they win and why we lose.

And the solution for that is covered in this OP....no emotional response and no judgment of someone as "one of them"....because we can't know who they are and so we just watch what they do.

[Democracyinkind]

119. To me this thread implies that some would be eager

to go a hunting some witches.

I just don't find the list very constructive, is all. It's a recipe for generating false positives, and for that it should be criticized.

[zeemike]

130. It seems to me that it is always the same dichotomy presented.

Either there are none or that everyone is. and once that is established we can chose up sides and fight....thus the divide and conquer....when the obvious truth is there are some but not all are...the ones that are are hidden from view.

And there is only one way to defeat this and that is with not judging it by any clues but by the actions themselves and being wise to the game...which this does point out.
But if you start calling out and trying to ban people it is a mistake.
I have my suspicions about people but you will never know it because I will never say it...that suspicion and the clues I have I keep to myself and use it to inform myself not others.
It is the only way not to get caught up in the game.

[Democracyinkind]

184. Hey maybe there are.

All I'm saying is this list won't help you jack shit with identifying them.

[zeemike]

186. Identifying them is not the way to go.

You should never try to identify them....no need to play detective.
There is power in knowledge but only when you keep it to yourself.
For instance most manipulation depends on misdirection and once you see someone trying to direct you away from some thing by presenting a more emotional one you can use that knowledge to keep you focused on what you know.
In other words the best way to counter it is to let them play spy and informer...just keep an eye on them and you can use it to your advantage....but if you blow their cover you lost the advantage.

[pintobean]

183. Agent Mike is a sleeper

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=143728

[TalkingDog]

25. Given news articles on "sock puppet" governmental agents on the internet over the past year or so,

And the recent story on using the American military training people to "troll" on jihadist recruiting website discussion boards, I'd say no.

It might be normal behavior, but the fact that agent provocateurs can direct the flow of the conversation to create an artificial consensus puts it in the realm of possible propaganda.

If it were simply some basement dwelling 14 y.o. there would be a chance for a more organic conversation to take place. But there is, according to new articles and the government themselves, a concerted effort to direct and control online discussion. Maybe not on Cooks.com or a making miniatures for fun discussion board, but most certainly on a political site like DU.

[Democracyinkind]

43. The fact remains that, given

that I and you are both right, this list is simply useless in identifying cointelpro agents.

Although it could be very useful for constructing echo chambers in which dissent is delegitimzed by forwarding the unsupported suspicion that anyone using such tactics must be a government agent.

[heaven05]

64. wonder

you're so quick to damn mkultra, I wonder

[patrice]

88. Democracyinkind is not damning. S/he's raising legitimate PROCESS questions. You are the one

damning him/her, without authentic response to the question: H-O-W does one avoid false positives, since false positives, intended or otherwise, will result in impeding information and understanding.

[heaven05]

91. what?

?????????????? I did answer. I was there for the witch hunts and misinformation perpetrated by cointelpro and many here have answered his original query in spades

[patrice]

97. The point is: Apply this list to a hypothetical case of suspected disruption, how do you do that?

How, stepwise, do you use this list to identify authentic agitprop without creating a lot of false-positives which result in the very effects that you're trying to avoid by identifying agitprop in the first place.

If I'm still confusing, would you please indicate precisely which of the words I have written here are the ones that derail you?

[heaven05]

133. ohhh!

Did I mention that murder also was part of the operating procedure in the cointelpro operation. take your hypothetical case and suspected disruption to the classroom, lord I hope you're not teaching, and try it out on some really smart students. I've been there and agitprop ain't hypothetical. Saw in Vietnam too. You line of thinking tries to over-intellectualize an issue and misses the certain info that can help us spot a rat. Good luck.

[patrice]

177. I'm talking about this board. I don't know what you're talking about. nt

[TalkingDog]

104. I do not disagree. I do not agree either. Let's just say I'll be skeptical of all positions.

Or, more positively, I'll keep an open mind.

[eridani]

154. Tactics that work, if you can figure out a way

Do things that will be effective regardless of whether your opponent knows about them in advance or not. A good pitcher wll tend to prevail against a good hitter. Even if the hitter correctly predicts, say, a fastball, if the pitcher is good enough the hitter will still miss.

[pscot]

61. Why is it so important to you

to undermine the validity of the OP? Methinks thou doth protest too much.

[Democracyinkind]

68. Discussing things is what I'm here for.

I'm doing the exact same thing as you just did: writing down my opinion.

If pointing out obvious deficiencies in the list is "undermining the validity of the OP", well, color me undermined!

[mkultra]

77. is it what you get paid to do?

[heaven05]

93. yep

[lumberjack_jeff]

92. To what end? n/t

[TalkingDog]

106. For shits and giggle, of course.

n/t

[lumberjack_jeff]

107. Aren't we all here for shits and giggles?

The OP was about coordinated efforts to manage discussion for social engineering purposes.

I don't see who wins by sowing discord between people who own guns and those who don't.

To answer my own question: republicans, I suppose, since there's no comparable fault line in their party.

[TalkingDog]

121. You make a couple of fair points. Thank you for adding to the discussion.

n/t

[Javaman]

10. Is this article Fare Use?

You posted more than 4 paragraphs.

[mkultra]

18. i doubt it

The orginal poster indicated that it was shareable. Not official fair use. Feel free to try and get this post taken down by claiming otherwise.

[Javaman]

45. That's why I was asking.

It had the appearance of it being "shareable".

I don't like posting useless alerts.

[mkultra]

78. no problem

[TalkingDog]

27. I've seen this on other sites. The caveat was that it had to be posted in it's entirety

and.... I think you had to include the authors name. But it would be easy enough to find out. Google.

I'm off to the vet.

[leveymg]

42. It's been posted and reposted all over. Some interesting comments at DKOS

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/07/22/1112509/-The-Gentleperson-s-Guide-to-Forum-Spies

This isn't copyrighted material -- I looked and can only find the same version that links back to a post with no author's name or copyright notice -- this was clearly intended to be widely disseminated in its entirety.

Very useful, even if it didn't originate with a gov't agency, as some have surmised. DU should post it as a reference and a guide to troll activities that can, and in a lot of cases should, lead to tombstoning.

[muriel_volestrangler]

60. it's all nicked from various sources over the years, such as Ron Paul forums

Sorting out copyright would be a nightmare. The "COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of a internet forum" section appears to come from the Daily Paul Liberty Forum, 4 years ago, for instance: http://www.dailypaul.com/60831/techniques-for-dilution-misdirection-and-control-of-a-internet-forum

And here's jshowell's version, from a few days before, on the same forum: http://www.dailypaul.com/60383/troll-techniques

If in doubt, denounce anyone who comes to claim they own copyright as a government agent trying to suppress free speech

More: Parts 2 and 3 are claimed as copyright, since 1997, by H. Michael Sweeney - see eg http://www.wattpad.com/358461-twenty-five-ways-to-suppress-truth-the-rules-of?p=8#!p=1

Part 4 is claimed to come from a booklet "How To Spot a Spy" - though the earliest I can see that claimed is by the nutty Laura Knight-Jadczyk, part of 'Signs of the Times', in 2006 - and she'll say anything, so who knows.


Part 5 may come from Dave Martin, in 1999 - http://www.dcdave.com/article3/991228.html

[leveymg]

81. Parts 2 and 3 by H. Michael Sweeney - gives permission to reprint in whole with author's

acknowledgement "in tact" (sic). There's the intact author info - anyone who wants to read all ten pages can go to http://www.wattpad.com/358461-twenty-five-ways-to-suppress-truth-the-rules-of?p=8#!p=1

Speaking merely as an observer, I think that should cover it from a copyright standpoint, now that we've determined there may be some original material included.

[mkultra]

122. you have my thanks

[muriel_volestrangler]

137. However, you didn't reprint it in full

Here's a link to it: http://www.proparanoid.net/truth.htm

Bits that weren't in your version (I presume someone else edited them out, before you saw it):

This why concepts from the film, Wag-The-Dog, actually work. If you saw that movie, know that there is at least one real-world counterpart to Al Pacino's character. For CIA, it is Mark Richards, who was called in to orchestrate the media response to Waco on behalf of Janet Reno. Mark Richards is the acknowledged High Priest of Disinformation. His appointment was extremely appropriate, since the CIA was VERY present at Waco from the very beginning of the cult to the very end of their days - just as it was at the People's Temple in Jonestown. Richards purpose in life is damage control.
...
(12) Example: 'I don't see how you can claim Vince Foster was murdered since you can't prove a motive. Before you could do that, you would have to completely solve the whole controversy over everything that went on in the White House and in Arkansas, and even then, you would have to know a heck of a lot more about what went on within the NSA, the Travel Office, and the secret Grand Jury, and on, and on, and on. It's hopeless. Give it up.'

Proper response: 'You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your completely evade issues and attempt others from daring to attempt it by making it a much bigger mountain than necessary. You eat an elephant one bite at a time. Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 12 - enigmas have no solution)?'

(13) Example: 'The news media operates in a fiercely competitive market where stories are gold. This means they dig, dig, dig for the story -- often doing a better job than law enforcement. If there was any evidence that BATF had prior knowledge of the Oklahoma City bombing, they would surely have uncovered it and reported it. They haven't reported it, so there can't have been any prior knowledge. Put up or shut up.'

Of course, these are embarrassingly right wing and anti-Democrat, not to mention completely fucking nuts (and there's more - excuses for Willis DeCarto, for instance, or Ruby Ridge nonsense). So it's not that surprising that someone edited them out, to make it 'suitable' for liberal websites. But I think you need to read the original to capture the true paranoid flavour.

[mkultra]

128. Technique #2 - 'CONSENSUS CRACKING'

[Quantess]

12. I'm jealous that some DUers might be getting paid to post here.

While here I am, just wasting time.

[Democracyinkind]

19. This!!!!

And quite frankly, the very idea offends me.

Surely I would have been offered such a job, what with my astounding powers of reasoning and all that!

[A Simple Game]

48. For me three names come to mind very quickly.

But it may just be two people, I think one is a sock puppet.

[Mojorabbit]

108. I know, right? I ought to be vacuuming the living room. nt

[Mimosa]

143. Rotfl!

That post cracked me up. Immediately the carpeted stairs which are frosted with 2 weeks of cat hair sprung to mind.

Mkultra's OP sounds paranoid if applied to D.U.. D.U. is a reflection of the Democratic Party. We have always been diverse. Consensus isn't what we do. I can't remember the Will Rogers quote.

However, I do think there are a couple of DNC people who effectively deliver the talking points. I doubt there are any Operation Mockingbird types here. I think they hit mainstream news sources primarily at the news (and blog) delivery level, not the commentaries.

[Nostradammit]

150. Ummm... Hate to break it to you, but, uh...

This place is crawling with "Operation Mockingbird" types.

By their fruits you will know them.

[stevenleser]

170. Hate to break it to you, but, the very idea of that is ridiculous.

I'm not saying that it is above the intelligence agency of any country in the world to do something like that if it would yield some kind of important result(s).

But the fact of the matter is, there is nothing that influencing DU would yield any agency in terms of results. No internet forum is nearly big enough to influence enough of the country in any direction on policy. If you took all of the major internet discussion forums of all ideological persuasions in the US, I doubt there are enough people in all of them to where influencing them would matter. That is before you get into the more detail oriented problems like, for instance, trying to get all of DU and all of HotAir to go the same way on an issue.

The only folks that buy stuff like this are the kind that generally buy into creative speculation ideas.

[Nostradammit]

171. I'm sorry, did you say something?

[stevenleser]

172. Yes, only I wasn't passive aggressive. nt

[Nostradammit]

175. Oh, really?

"The only folks that buy stuff like this are the kind that generally buy into creative speculation ideas."

Speculation like Tuskegee, Paperclip, MKUltra, SHAD, Northwoods, Gulf of Tonkin, Watergate, Iraqi WMD, etc, etc, etc?

[stevenleser]

178. Yes, really. All the things you just noted had a point to them. You and I wouldnt have done them

but they actually had a point.

Paying goons to post on internet forums does not have a point. It accomplishes nothing.

[Nostradammit]

180. Yeah, no regime has ever tried to sway public opinion.

Thanks for helping me to see things more clearly.

[stevenleser]

148. I know, how do I sign up to at least get an offer I can look over?

[Edweird]

26. "Malignant pseudoidentification" That phrase is a keeper.

[Safetykitten]

168. I agree. I am SO using that from now on.

[ThoughtCriminal]

28. This reminds of of the infamous "Guide for Communist Subversion"

which was pretty much a right-wing invention to prove that liberal causes were commie plots.

Anyone else notice #11 and #12 under "Truth Suppression"?

Apparently people who deny that the Clinton's killed Vince Foster are part of this conspiracy to undermine the internet.

[Democracyinkind]

40. Ding Ding Ding

Of course, your screenname was a dead give away that you wouldn't have problems for seeing this OP for what it is.

[heaven05]

65. again

there you go again, proving the post true

[Democracyinkind]

66. Are you accusing me of being a cointelpro agent?

Case in point. I'm not.

[mkultra]

126. "case in point"

i dont think you are using this phrase correctly.

[Confusious]

157. I'm sure, with that long of a list

we could find SOME catagory you fit into.

Probably the "denial" one. By denying it, you prove it...

[muriel_volestrangler]

110. Yes, all parts come from right wing conspiracy theorists

See links in #60.
Part 1 comes from the Ron Paul Liberty forum. 'Nuff said.
Part 2 and 3 from H. Michael Sweeney, whose site covers topics such as:
911 Oklahoma City JFK Political Control Technology NWO Flight 800 Media Control
Part 4 from Laura Knight-Jadczyk, who believes beings from Cassiopeia are talking to her (see, at that link: "Now, certainly, our Cassiopaean Transmissions claim to come "from the future," but those same C's say, unequivocally, that no "positive" being ever "abducts" anyone.&quot
Part 5 comes from a major Vince Foster conspiracy theorist - David Martin. See http://www.dcdave.com/article1/961127.htm , and unsurprisingly, a right wing nutter - associated with the American Patriot/Freedom/News Network, Newsmax and so on.

It's all right wing, and all paranoid.

[SidDithers]

160. Kick for this post...

Good work sourcing this nonsense.

Too bad the OP isn't worried about all the right wing content in the post.

Sid

[Marrah_G]

162. yup

[tanyev]

29. RESULT: Nobody's mind has been changed,

but at least the disruptor has been safely contained on the internet for several hours instead of bothering people he knows.

[Le Taz Hot]

30. Translation:

If you're not 100% behind the Democrats and everything they do (or don't do) you must be an agent provocateur. Give me a break. This is some paranoid shit. Nice imitation of Michelle Bachmann though.

[Confusious]

159. Paranioa strikes deep

into your heart it will creep.

[pintobean]

187. You know, it increases my paranoia,

like looking in my mirror and seeing a police car.
But I'm not givin' in an inch to fear.
I promised myself this year.
I feel like I owe it to someone.

[leveymg]

31. Thank you for posting this - good, useful information that all DUers should be familiar with

[snooper2]

55. I would print it and keep it next to your bed...

Read a different paragraph every morning so you stay on your toes!!!

[leveymg]

75. Here's an excellent bedside book: Christopher Simpson's, "The Science of Coercion"

Science of Coercion: Communication Research and Psychological Warfare, 1945-1960
Science of Coercion: Communication Research and Psychological Warfare, 1945-1960 [Christopher Simpson] on Amazon.com. *FREE* super saver shipping ...
"Worldview Warfare" and The Science of Coercion
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/SIM311A.html

Nov 23, 2003 – Excerpts from The Science of Coercion: Communication Research and Psychological Warfare 1945-1960, by Christopher Simpson (Oxford ...
Science of Coercion - Google Books
books.google.com › History › United States › 20th Century
Rating: 5 - 1 review
books.google.com - In this provocative study, Christopher Simpson demonstrates how the government-funded psychological warfare programs of the Cold War ...

OSS Psychological and Communications Studies Research, by Paul ...
www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/oss/worldview.htm
By Christopher Simpson, 1994 ... World War II spurred the emergence of psychological warfare as a particularly promising new form of applied communication ...

[petronius]

86. Not safe enough! I've pasted a printout over the right side of my screen so it's always fresh

What was the end of your post, by the way: "so you stay..." what?

[snooper2]

95. on your toes!!! ( you can't see that in my post?)

Maybe we found a new DU3 bug LOL

[stevenleser]

167. No! Shrink it down and have it sewn onto the insides of your eyelids!

This is such valuable information!!!!!1111111!1!1

[Bobbie Jo]

32. Yup

You Better Believe It!

....and remaining cohorts.

Good post.

[MadHound]

33. So now anybody who disagrees with you is a "forum spy"?

Please, take your divisive, paranoid shit somewhere else.

Trying to turn posters against each other in this manner is repugnant.

[lightworker at work]

120. Congrats! You sound like the OP's poster child.

[MadHound]

135. Yes, that's right, I've been a "forum spy" here for ten years

You on the other hand have been here what, two hours.

Gee you pick up on things quick now, don't you

[eridani]

155. Better get busy on the job, then

That mouse isn't going to click itself, you know! n/t

[stevenleser]

138. Quite so. I think the worst thing you can do to the 'other side' is get them all suspicious of each

other.

It's much more destructive to have 20 innocent DUers accusing each other of being an agent than it is to allow a couple of agents to post undetected.

Many of DU's own rules and savvy community automatically deal with people attempting to be disruptive. We're all familiar with tactics like thread-jacking and concern trolling. Those are some of the more common ways people disrupt forums.

[Mimosa]

144. I thought the same thing

And a year ago or less I used to wonder whether you, StevenLeser, were posting on behalf of some entity (MICC) because I perceived your posts as pro-war or something.

Lately I've been accused of being something I'm not so I've gained some perspective.

[stevenleser]

147. I'm certainly willing to entertain offers of large sums of money to post on the internet.

I'm not saying I would accept any, but I wouldnt mind seeing the offers and what is required.

[Coyotl]

34. Translation in one sentence

Online forums are a great place to talk to yourself and nobody else except the few trolls keeping track of what you think.

[Confusious]

158. You're a troll

everyone here is a troll! I'm the only real person here! you're all coinpro agents!

[Coyotl]

188. Oh damn, now I have to crawl back under my bridge

and change my user name on DU again I need a better disguise!

[bluedigger]

35. Too long; where's the part where you make people distrust everything on the forum?

[IDemo]

36. Rules of Disinformation #14 is often seen here

Regardless of the problem raised by an OP, if they don't have the solution at hand then they are labeled as "just b*tching". Clue here: not all of society's issues are easily solved, much less by lone individuals on the internet.

[Comrade_McKenzie]

39. I wonder how many people are employed to do this. nt

[snooper2]

57. Last numbers were between 6-700 at a CIA front..

Of course they are all in India though-

They even outsource our spying and intelligence programs! The fucking bastards LOL


I think they are listed on this site-

http://www.callcentersindia.com/call_center_directory.php?id=9_callcenter

[Shankapotomus]

41. If there are any Rethugs on DU

doing this they are wasting their time as far as me. I am a registered democrat and progressive and will go my grave that way. And if my politics ever do evolve, I certainly won't turn conservative.

[heaven05]

69. exactly

was in the 60's-70's, am now.

[japa beads jamie]

132. So you support drone attacks as long as the dude or dudette

have a big fat D after their name? Fraud!

[Shankapotomus]

134. No.

but all things being equal, I will support the dem.

[SidDithers]

46. ...

Sid

[sharp_stick]

71. Picture Stolen By Me Sid

I may use that on more than one occasion.

[SidDithers]

74. Steal away!...

I made it years ago for discussions in the dungeon, but it seemed appropriate here

Sid

[Nostradammit]

151. Oh look! It's SidDithers.

[caseymoz]

47. But in other words

You can't spot one without taking and following them over a long time. So, only the administrators can detect suspected cointelpros. Don't try this at home. Amateurs can only guess, and you could bet now they'll be guessing a lot now.
You haven't helped. What you've done is given the mob a rope and incited fear.

I like the one "They're opposed to conspiracy theories." Yes, there's no conspiracy theory too silly, too incredible, to be false, and if you believe anything else, you're obviously part of the conspiracy.

And that's not to say that perhaps agents are working this forum. But imagine the labor involved in administering multiple accounts. In other words, they're human, too. Disinformation can still be countered by skilled argument in a forum. Other techniques the administrators will have to detect.

[woo me with science]

49. Heh.

Last edited Mon Jul 23, 2012, 12:55 PM - Edit history (2)

A good DUer already made this much simpler:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002850016

[blue neen]

50. I doubt very much that it is just the FBI using these tactics.

.

[leveymg]

52. But, I have no doubt the NRA, the nuclear power industry, and other astroturfers do.

So much of this stuff is privatized these days, hard to draw a line.

[snooper2]

51. Jesus H. Christ on a hotdog my trackwheel was smoking ROFL

You are the one keeping the file on everyone here right?


Why don't you just do a data dump and tell us everything about everyone!


Oh, and you never did give me you phone #

[Democracyinkind]

56. According to the list provided in the OP

you are a cointelpro shill.

Explain yourself.

[snooper2]

58. Well, I can but I can't-

I can tell you I've talked to agents of the government in the past, but I can't tell you what about-


I can tell you that on the Friday six moons from the previous Monday after the date the 16th president was inaugurated something big will happen.

[heaven05]

67. ditto

back atcha

[mkultra]

80. (800)-555-GFYS

[pscot]

59. This should be pinned somewhere as a permanent resource

This is true meta.

[slackmaster]

72. Teh Interwebz iz Series Bidness!!!!111!!!

[AllyCat]

76. Bookmarked! This is fantastic. k/r

Lets send this up the page so there is no "forum sliding"

[arely staircase]

87. forward this by email to ten friends or

you hate america and will have bad luck.

sincerely,

agent staircase

[Zorra]

100. Yep. Thanks. That's the book on corporate hacks and the Anti-Social Justice Movement.

[Enrique]

102. this OP looks like disinformation to me

it is pretty rare to see Internet posts with absolutely no sourcing information whatsoever. Whoever wrote this expects people to just absorb what they have written without any critical thinking at all, not even ask who is telling them these things. This suggests something to me about the motives of the person who wrote it, they are not giving information to thinking people, they are spreading propaganda to people who are open to it. Very open to it.

Another thing I notice is people not making the point I just made. I'm sure I'm not the only one, and yet no one else says it. What is it that makes us not want to call this stuff out?


edit: I meant disinformation, because it looks deliberate.

[muriel_volestrangler]

113. Sources are in #60 and #110

It's a compilation of right wing conspiracy theory sites, but obviously strikes a note with many DUers.

[patrice]

112. Shouldn"t this be in Meta- ?

[Arctic Dave]

114. A while back I was posting similar information at DU2 and

had all the post removed as "spamming".

Good post. Seems odd that people would get angry about simple information being presented to them.

I guess they think that PR firms and intelligence corporations are make believe.

[Enrique]

116. it isn't information

of all the vast amounts of bullshit on the Internet, among the worst is these unattributed chain email type things. they all look like information, but they are far from it.

[Arctic Dave]

117. Sure, if it makes you feel better.

http://www.nspra.org/



It's all made up, no one has ever went to the schools or courses.

[Enrique]

118. it's not all made up

just the stuff that looks like chain emails and gets posted at places like Ron Paul's liberty forum.

[Arctic Dave]

124. Why? Do they not get trolls there?

If so, how can we stop it from happening from everywhere?

[mahina]

115. And at the same time, avoid paranoid people.

I'm glad you posted this and agree with much of it. Thanks.

[4nic8em]

127. basic synopsis...

Just because you're paranoid, it doesn't mean they're not out to get you...

[Zalatix]

129. Technique #5 - 'ANGER TROLLING' - LOL my response is completely outside their box.

Instead of calling for violence against the cops, I say they should be de-funded.

Cops can't haul me into prison for saying their funding should be cut.

[SidDithers]

139. Kick for woo from dubious sources in GD!!...

Yay!

Sid

[greytdemocrat]

166. My God!!!

That OP put me to sleep pretty damn quick!!! Is that one of the tactics???

[RagAss]

141. I'm so fucking confused, I just put myself on Ignore !

[chalky]

142. Hell, after reading that whole thing, I'm now pretty sure I'm a troll.

I'll be keeping a close eye on the next items I post, but I'm sure I'll be issuing an alert on something I'll be saying in the near future.

[Zalatix]

149. As the old Soviet-era saying goes, "There's a line in the book for everyone."

[Marrah_G]

164. +1

[Marrah_G]

163. Ahem- there is now cofee on my monitor!

Damn you Ragass!

[RagAss]

173. ..

[Marrah_G]

176. coffee too!

See what happens when my coffee doesn't make it to my tummy?

[NuttyFluffers]

145. ... and thus people attribute negative changes to communities as a naturally entropic phenomenon

but how can it never be the work of an organized and calculating external group? ah... that exposes one to wingnuttery and discredit from the herd.

the powers have an answer to all your problems, you might have heard it: "Blame yourself!"

the answer is you either believe people in general are good, and thus real evil exists to thwart a generally genial and cooperative populace. and therefore your work is a perpetual uphill battle, like Sisyphus.

or you believe people in general are bad, and thus nothing can ever be changed and civilization is just forever waiting to spiral into its own inevitable oblivion. and therefore you can sit there absolved and watch it go to hell.

hint: the world's still here, and things have markedly improved over the millennia...

[cali]

152. I could not care less

true or not.

[Skidmore]

153. In the "how to spot" category, they forgot one.

Pick a user name which sound can at once be construed as holding dearly to your team's creed while being one of the other team--making it sound like you are at war is the best option. Really, I can usually spot the covert operator by their user name shenanigans.

[fasttense]

161. Thanks for posting.

This is good information to keep in mind. RepubliCONS seem to use these techniques all the time. A few posters here on DU use these techniques as their only argument style.

[Marrah_G]

165. I am not now, nor have I ever been a Communist

Oh wait.....nevermind

[Robb]

169. This is a little short, could you expand on this a little?

[scheming daemons]

174. does this happen on DU? you "BETTER BELIEVE IT"

[stevenleser]

179. Let's assume BBI was an 'agent'. What do you think they accomplished on behalf of whomever

was paying them?

That person and whatever they were spouting is regarded with scorn and ridicule.

[sendero]

181. Interesting.

.... but many of these techniques are not going to work here.

For example, "forum sliding". Every post on a thread kicks it to the top, so trying to add irrelevant posts to a thread isn't going to work.

"Show me yours and I'll show you mine" might work on a moron.

I'm pretty sure we have some of these folks here, but since we are not allow to name them I'm not going to worry about it.

[Warren DeMontague]

182. Jesus Christ, Tolstoy, think you could condense that thing a bit?

Hmmm. Which tactic is that?

[Democracyinkind]

185. Jesus Christ, Thomas Mann, Robert Musil

I just couldn't resist

[Coyotl]

189. The Internet Troll As The Trickster Archetype

Deja DU, Aug-29-07: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1694538

Internet trolls can have real power. They can alter your emotional landscape, insert their presence very tangibly into your life. Being trolled can be a harrowing experience. Because of the implicit anonymity built into Internet dialogue, the user often has no clear idea who is harassing ...............

[nadinbrzezinski]

191. This is old

And yes, we have even seen it at work..here.

It coud be coincidence, but certain subjects really bring it out.