9/11 DISINFO

9/11 DISINFORMATION

Disinformation is false information that is used to dismiss legitimate arguments. Posted in this thread are many examples of Disinformation and/or speculative theories that have been purposely spread in order to divide, mislead and/or to discredit the 9/11 Truth Movement. First lets define the terms, explain its purpose and how to recognize it.

DEFINING THE TERMS

Disinformation is false or inaccurate information that is spread deliberately with intentions of turning genuine information useless.
———–
Misinformation is false or inaccurate information that is spread unintentionally. It is distinguished from disinformation by motive in that misinformation is simply erroneous, while disinformation, in contrast, is intended to mislead.
———-
A Shill is an associate of a person selling goods or services or a political group, who pretends no association to the seller/group and assumes the air of an enthusiastic customer. The intention of the shill is, using crowd psychology, to encourage others unaware of the set-up to purchase said goods or services or support the political group’s ideological claims. Shills are often employed by confidence artists. The term plant or debunker is also used.
http://shill.askdefinebeta.com/
——–
In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.
http://www.thewebpsychologist.com/2012/08/27/why-we-troll/
——–
A Gatekeeper is a person who controls access to something, for example via a city gate. In the late 20th century the term came into metaphorical use, referring to individuals who decide whether a given message will be distributed by a mass medium. Gatekeeping is the process through which information is filtered for dissemination, be it publication, broadcasting, the Internet, or some other type of communication.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gatekeeper
——–
Sock Puppets are people – or software programs – who are paid by governments to spread pro-government propaganda primarily in social media platforms. They can have up to ten different personas, each with its own believable profile, and are distinguishable from random internet trolls and mistaken people and outright idiots and fools, by the fact that they are actually appointed and paid by governments.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Earnest_Voice
————
The Limited Hangout tactic is a form of propaganda that is used to reduce backlash against an immoral or would-be illegal act (usually considered a cover-up), by making it seem like the perpetrators have come clean about their role, while still keeping important details hidden. By releasing information that was previously secret or not yet acknowledged, backlash is reduced because some people will believe the cover-up has been fully exposed and admitted to.
http://wideshut.co.uk/glossary/limited-hangout/
————

———–

PURPOSE OF DISINFORMATION

“I am the source for this quote, which was indeed said by CIA Director William Casey at an early February 1981 meeting of the newly elected President Reagan with his new cabinet secretaries to report to him on what they had learned about their agencies in the first couple of weeks of the administration. ” – Barb Honegger

https://www.quora.com/Did-William-Casey-CIA-Director-really-say-Well-know-our-disinformation-program-is-complete-when-everything-the-American-public-believes-is-false
————–
Disinformation Killed 9/11 “Truth”

Disinformation Killed 9/11 “Truth”

————–
Misinformation
http://911research.wtc7.net/disinfo/index.html
————–
Disinformation,Infiltration, Misinformation, Disruption
http://www.truthmove.org/content/disinformation/
————–
How to Destroy the 9/11 Truth Movement (Jeremy Rys)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=awy8cmcuBlk
————-
Saboteurs Attacking The 9/11 Truth Movement:
The No-WTC-Planes/Video-Fakery/Energy-Beams Disinformation Gang
http://www.cosmicpenguin.com/911/disinfo.html
—————
Unsecured Coins XX – Truther Contradictions
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xn9eLolHO1w
—————
Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation
http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20050116064744556
—————
Disinformation: How It Works
http://www.alt-market.com/articles/964-disinformation-how-it-works
—————
How to Identify and Remove Facebook Trolls, Gang-Stalkers, and Disinfo Agents
http://www.gnosticmedia.com/IdentifyRemoveFacebookTrollsAgents
————–
Pay for Comments: Confessions of a paid disinformation internet shill
http://www.sott.net/article/252272-Pay-for-Comments-Confessions-of-a-paid-disinformation-internet-shill
————–
Everything Is A Lie: The Deliberate Intent To Deceive People Is At An All Time High
http://preventdisease.com/news/10/081010_everything_is_a_lie.shtml
————–
How Governments Eliminate and Discredit Genuine Movements
http://www.sprword.com/videos/shills/
—————
Solving 9-11: The Disinformation Campaign (Bollyn)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=eP7NqKv7Ik0
—————
Citizen Investigation Team: Hijacking of the Truth Movement
Citizen Investigation Team: Hijacking of the Truth Movement

Links for dealing with disinformation
Links for dealing with disinformation
————-
Op-Ed: Seven big lies of the 9/11 Truth Movement
http://digitaljournal.com/article/311650
————
Western spy agencies build ‘cyber magicians’ to manipulate online discourse
http://rt.com/news/five-eyes-online-manipulation-deception-564/

“Secret units within the ‘Five Eyes” global spying network engage in covert online operations that aim to invade, deceive, and control online communities and individuals through the spread of false information and use of ingenious social-science tactics.”
————-
Federal government routinely hires internet trolls, shills to monitor chat rooms, disrupt article comment sections
http://www.naturalnews.com/042093_internet_trolls_chat_rooms_federal_government.html
—————
Spies in your Forum? A Guide To Forum Spies (spooks, feds, etc.)
Spies in your Forum? A Guide To Forum Spies (spooks, feds, etc.)
—————
Disinfo in the 9/11 Truth Movement
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4JuU7gxw6E
———–
9/11 Truth and Disinformation: Definitions and Examples
http://911blogger.com/node/6531
———-
9/11 Truth and Division: Disinformation, Agent Provocateurs, and False Adversaries
http://arabesque911.blogspot.ca/2007/10/911-truth-and-division-disinformation.html
———-
Rosetta Stone to 9/11 disinformation
http://www.oilempire.us/state.html
———

WHO’S PAYING ATTENTION?

A) http://911review.org/ OR http://911review.com/

B) http://911scholars.org/ OR http://stj911.org/

C) http://ae911truth.info/ OR http://www.ae911truth.org/
—————-

QUOTES

‎”One of the primary means of immobilizing the American people politically today is to hold them in a state of confusion in which anything can be believed and nothing can be known… nothing of significance, that is.”
— E. Martin Schotz, “History Will Not Absolve Us: Orwellian Control, Public Denial, and the Murder of President Kennedy”

“A honey pot, in intelligence jargon, is a tempting source of information or ‘dangle’ that is set out to lure intended victims into a trap. Ultimately the honey pot is violently and maliciously discredited so as to destroy the credibility of anything stuck to it by association.”
— Michael Ruppert, “Crossing the Rubicon,” p. 184

“There’s fool’s gold because there’s real gold.”
— 13th-century Persian poet Rumi

“The most perfidious way of harming a cause consists of defending it deliberately with faulty arguments.”
— Nietzsche

“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about answers.”
— Thomas Pynchon, Jr.

“Disinformation, in order to be effective, must be 90% accurate.”
— Peter Dale Scott

Mark Twain said that a lie could go halfway around the world before the truth had a chance to get its boots on. Thanks to the internet, this is even more true today.

“It’s not a matter of what is true that counts but a matter of what is perceived to be true.”
— Henry Kissinger (famous American war criminal)

“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.”
— Bertrand Russell

You can fool some of the people all of the time,
and all of the people some of the time,
but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.
— Abraham Lincoln

Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.
— Charles Darwin (1809-1882) 1871

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities
— Voltaire

‎”Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense.”
— Buddha

“The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.”
— Vladimir Lenin

“We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.”
— William Casey, CIA Director.

“It was a disinformation campaign and they are very clever how they do it” “There will be all kinds of efforts to subert your work, all kinds of efforts to corrupt your work, and all kinds of efforts to discredit you.”
“Please understand that… this is what will happen and probably is happening”
— Dr. William Pepper
www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXgPnaQKcyw
—————-

OPERATION MOCKINGBIRD

OPERATION MOCKINGBIRD
www.scribd.com/doc/41631313/Operation-Mockingbird-An-Overview-and-History

“Operation Mockingbird was a secret campaign by the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to influence media. Begun in the 1950s, it was initially organized by Cord Meyer and Allen W. Dulles, it was later led by Frank Wisner after Dulles became the head of the CIA. The organization recruited leading American journalists into a network to help present the CIA’s views, and funded some student and cultural organizations, and magazines as fronts. As it developed, it also worked to influence foreign media and political campaigns, in addition to activities by other operating units of the CIA.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird
————
MOCKINGBIRD: The Subversion Of The Free Press By The CIA
http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/MOCK/mockingbird.php
————

SIGNS YOU ARE DEALING WITH A DISINFO AGENT

25 Rules of Disinformation
http://preventdisease.com/news/10/081010_everything_is_a_lie.shtml

“Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation

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 to 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 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 critical 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 aren’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 facts 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 an 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 News Group (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
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:
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.

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.

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.
Remarkably, 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.”
————-

“SPECULATIVE DISINFO THEORIES”

“The sixth level of disinformation is the promotion of theories that are unable to be tested with available evidence. Such theories are called non-falsifiable: “There is a very important characteristic of a scientific theory or hypothesis which differentiates it from, for example, an act of faith: a theory must be ‘falsifiable’. This means that there must be some experiment or possible discovery that could prove the theory untrue.”

“If a theory can not be tested or corroborated with any available evidence, it can not be proved or disproved. Therefore, non-falsifiable theories can only function to create a never-ending debate. 9/11 researchers are only able to prove what happened on 9/11 with the available evidence. Although speculation is essential in any line of inquiry, speculation alone is never enough to prove a theory—evidence and/or experiments are also needed.”

“It is therefore misleading to promote non-falsifiable hypotheses as if they could explain the events of 9/11 for the simple reason that they can not be proven. If something can not be proved, it will not convince a skeptic. Therefore, non-falsifiable theories will never be compelling enough to help force another 9/11 investigation.”

“Is the directed-beams hypothesis a SCIENTIFIC hypothesis? Let the proponents delineate crucial experiments which will permit testing the hypothesis, and which have the potential of proving the hypothesis wrong. If an hypothesis is not falsifiable by experiments, it is not scientific.”

“Non-falsifiable theories include: Directed energy weapons were used to destroy or partially destroy the World Trade Center Buildings; Aliens destroyed the Twin Towers with their directed energy weapons; Holograms were used on 9/11; God destroyed the World Trade Center Towers with his foot.”

“Those who promote non-falsifiable theories should support the most credible evidence to get another 9/11 investigation. This is the only conceivable way to get definitive answers to un-answerable questions.”

“A non-falsifiable theory has no credible evidence to support it. However, they can be “supported” with misinformation and disinformation. In place of real evidence, non-falsifiable theories are given false credibility with misleading arguments.”

” Consequently, if a theory is supported with false evidence (i.e. misinformation or disinformation), it does not count as actual evidence and the theory retains its non-falsifiable status. However, it is usually tenable to prove that these misleading arguments are false (i.e. they are falsifiable)—but the actual theory preserves its non-falsifiable status if it unsubstantiated with credible evidence.”

“Defenders of non-falsifiable theories will believe what they want to believe, and they will never be proved wrong to their satisfaction. This is worsened when their beliefs are supported by disinformation or misinformation.”
————-

The making of a good disinformation agent is to mix 1/2 truths with 1/2 lies. As this discredits everything.

————————