ATS's slogan is "Deny Ignorance" this is something we should be all striving to do. But ATS has an enemy, it is disinformation.
So what is disinformation exactly?
Dictionary.com defines Disinformation as this:
1. Deliberately misleading information announced publicly or leaked by a government or especially by an intelligence agency in order to influence
public opinion or the government in another nation: “He would be the unconscious channel for a piece of disinformation aimed at another country's
intelligence service” (Ken Follett).
2. Dissemination of such misleading information.
Disinformation does not begin and end with government though. Corporations push disinfo also. Disinformation is spread to control you. It is there in
plane sight, everyday. You open the newspaper, it is there. You click on the TV, it is there. Even when you sit in front of your computer, it is
To "Deny Ignorance" is to deny the disinformation that is spoon fed to us. Many people in the world don't question the information we receive. But
on ATS just about all information is challenged.
How is disinformation spread?
There are those that 'make' the disinformation, and there are those who buy into it and repeat it.
Those that make the disinformation are very powerful people such as politicians and CEO s. These are the people with the power. They will do anything
to keep the power and to gain more power. Disinformation is a tool for the power corrupted to control how you think. Sometimes it is just used to keep
you buying a certain product, other times it is used to manipulate the public's actions.
Then there are those who buy into the disinfo. They may be people you talk to on the street or even right here on ATS. These are not bad people, they
have only bought into the disinfo that has been given to them.
Sometimes disinformation comes to us from someone who is on the 'payroll'. These are bad people. They know exactly what they are doing and have been
trained to do it.
With the size of ATS it would be naive to think that these agents of disinfo are not among us.
However keep in mind that just because someone doesn't agree with you it makes them a disinfo agent. Although I suppose you would never truly
They are there though hiding in plain sight.
What are some disinformation tactics?
There are many tactics used. The following list comes from
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 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" 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 so 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 "minutiae"
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 with denial 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. 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 them 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. 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 loose interest more quickly without having to
address the actual issues.
13. Alice in Wonderland Logic.
Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards with an apparent deductive logic in a way that 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 for items
qualifying for rule 10.
15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions.
This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in
16. Vanishing 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 may require 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 (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) is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed.
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
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. [Witness the Lewinsky
scandal, the Elian Gonzalez, Natalie Holloway coverage]
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 proper intimidation with blackmail or other threats.
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.
These are methods used against us when we are trying to "Deny Ignorance" I recommend getting to know them.
What do I do if a Disinfo tactic is used on me?
You may think it would be hard to 'battle' with a disinfo tactic but it isn't.
For example, lets say you are facing "5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule."
The thing to do is call them on it.
You say "You are avoiding the issues and trying to sidetrack me with name calling and ridicule. Lets please discuss the issue and stay away from
making this a personal issue."
It is that easy.
Will disinformation ever stop?
No. Disinformation will always be there just as greed and superiority will always be here. But that doesn't mean we should give up. Those that spread
disinfo know that ATS reaches a lot of people and they see it as a big opportunity to dis inform the public.
This is an opportunity for us also. We have the opportunity to stand up stand against disinfo. We don't have that opportunity when disinfo is spread
on TV or in the News Paper.
Good luck and remember, your posts count. You make a difference!
[edit on 25-8-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]