"Truth is it's own defense"- 25 ways to put some teeth into the disinfo agents that live to bury the same

6 posts / 0 new

Hello truthseekers -wherever yee may be.

I came accross this essay tonight and thought it quite valuable. I'll post enough to give a flavor for it and the

link for the rest of it. Reeel Good Stuff.

Twenty-Five Ways To Suppress Truth: The Rules of Disinformation (Includes The 8 Traits of A Disinformationalist) by H. Michael Sweeney
copyright (c) 1997, 2000 All rights reserved
(Revised April 2000)

Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation

Built upon Thirteen Techniques for Truth Suppression by David Martin, the following may be useful to the initiate in the world of dealing with veiled and half-truth, lies, and suppression of truth when serious crimes are studied in public forums. This, sadly, includes every day news media, one of the worst offenders with respect to being a source of disinformation. Where the crime involves a conspiracy, or a conspiracy to cover up the crime, there will invariably be a disinformation campaign launched against those seeking to uncover and expose the truth and/or the conspiracy. There are specific tactics which disinfo artists tend to apply, as revealed here. Also included with this material are seven common traits of the disinfo artist which may also prove useful in identifying players and motives.

The more a particular party fits the traits and is guilty of following the rules, the more likely they are a professional disinfo artist with a vested motive. People can be bought, threatened, or blackmailed into providing disinformation, so even "good guys" can be suspect in many cases.

A rational person participating as one interested in the truth will evaluate that chain of evidence and conclude either that the links are solid and conclusive, that one or more links are weak and need further development before conclusion can be arrived at, or that one or more links can be broken, usually invalidating (but not necessarily so, if parallel links already exist or can be found, or if a particular link was merely supportive, but not in itself key to) the argument. The game is played by raising issues which either strengthen or weaken (preferably to the point of breaking) these links. It is the job of a disinfo artist to interfere with these evaluations... to at least make people think the links are weak or broken when, in truth, they are not... or to propose alternative solutions leading away from the truth. Often, by simply impeding and slowing down the process through disinformation tactics, a level of victory is assured because apathy increases with time and rhetoric.

It would seem true in almost every instance, that if one cannot break the chain of evidence for a given solution, revelation of truth has won out. If the chain is broken either a new link must be forged, or a whole new chain developed, or the solution is invalid and a new one must be found... but truth still wins out. There is no shame in being the creator or supporter of a failed solution, chain, or link, if done with honesty in search of the truth. This is the rational approach. While it is understandable that a person can become emotionally involved with a particular side of a given issue, it is really unimportant who wins, as long as truth wins. But the disinfo artist will seek to emotionalize and chastise any failure (real or false claims thereof), and will seek by means of intimidation to prevent discussion in general.

It is the disinfo artist and those who may pull their strings (those who stand to suffer should the crime be solved) MUST seek to prevent rational and complete examination of any chain ofevidence which would hang them. Since fact and truth seldom fall on their own, they must be overcome with lies and deceit. Those who are professional in the art of lies and deceit, such as the intelligence community and the professional criminal (often the same people or at least working together), tend to apply fairly well defined and observable tools in this process.However, the public at large is not well armed against such weapons, and is often easily ledastray by these time-proven tactics. Remarkably, not even media and law enforcement have
NOT BEEN TRAINED to deal with these issues. For the most part, only the players themselves understand the rules of the game.

http://www.whale.to/m/disin.html

Peace,

Reystoke

reystoke's picture
reystoke
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Comments

Looks fine,

Thank You

reystoke's picture
reystoke
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Looks fine,

Thank You

reystoke's picture
reystoke
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

As I have been saying for awhile, liars know they need to frame the lie and sell it. People who think they are speaking the truth tend to think it can win in its "naked" state. They don't think of framing because that would go against the authority of the naked truth. I think it just means going unarmed to a knife fight. Then the next mistake is to take a knife to a gunfight.

The point is to figure out the propaganda game.

Liberals have tended to approach politics with issues. The obvious injustice and incorrect information behind homophobia cries out for justice. But only if you are operating in the Liberal or Progressive narrative. If you are coming from the narrative of the Right, homosexuality is part of the corruption that threatens America's future along with abortion. For many, having God love America requires being against these "sins." Try to talk facts to them. No hope.

We have to challenge their narrative for its lack of reality and fact as well as for being a story without a real future. Our own narrative could use a significant update and revision. We are not going to "restore" the America of the past. Post-imperial America cannot be the continued empire or the culture that produced it. It will draw deeply on our experience, and the past will provide the prologue. The future, however, is arriving everyday in a morning near you. Stay tuned in to make the changes.

DRC's picture
DRC
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Your observations and comments are completely on point.

My hope is that this tool box will be used on this board to red flag (hopefully) the people on the board that try any of these tactics at the time they try them.

In the end the right/conservative/ Burkean "truth" is 180 degrees from enlightenment "truth".

Actually the conflict is over how man will be governed based on the percieved nature ot the universe

and the most paradoxical "creation" to come out of that universe.

If one believes man's nature is essentially "bad" then you believe man needs to be controlled

in very rigid ways.

We know what the Enlightenment view is so enough said

Peace

Reystoke

reystoke's picture
reystoke
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

There is a real problem in the good v bad human nature argument because we misunderstand the doctrine of Original Sin to be about a "bad" human nature. The converse is to propose that liberalism requires a "good" human nature and to invoke the Enlightenment Age of Reason as the modern alternative to grace. Decision followed by an act of moral endeavor to live out the principle becomes the modern path to salvation, religious and secular.

It leads to stupidity like Alan Greedspan believing that the great saints of the economy would make rational decisions and avoid the false and irrational in finance. After all, if the "liberal" view of good human nature is needed, we do depend upon people making good decisions and acting in moral integrity on those good decisions. If that is the test, we clearly need a Strong Father to discipline us.

Wrong. The argument for democracy and self-government is not that we are really good. It is that tyrants are terrible. If we do not govern ourselves, others who are far less qualified than we will rule over us.

The point of Original Sin and Predestination is that we do not have the answers for others. It is not about their becoming like us. We are peers in the need for grace and forgiveness, and when we start there we have less pride to defend. And the moral ground shifts as we peers stop competing for salvation and care for one another. Resentments against "bad decisions" fade and concern for the abuses of power over others rise.

Free will religion hates both ideas, and one of the truths of theology is that both/ands are the nature of truth. The Enlightenment did dispel the myths of theocracy and dogma. Authority shifted from the ordained by God to the voice of the People (inspired by the Holy Spirit), and conscience became the active liberal partner of "the mind" as essential freedom and dignity. No longer were we dependent upon priests and masters for knowledge and moral conduct. But that did not mean that we had become "rational humans" who live by making good decisions and living according to decided principles. It did not make us error free or free of the need for grace and love.

DRC's picture
DRC
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Currently Chatting

Can Democrats Set Out a New Path?

Democrats must embrace a pro-government platform, not run away from it.

Those were the sentiments of Senator Chuck Schumer today, in a speech given at the National Press Club. Talking about the reasons for Democrats’ losses on Election Day, Schumer said that those losses were proof that the American people and middle-class want a government that will work more effectively for them.

Powered by Pressflow, an open source content management system