It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


mentalities of disinformation agents. discussion.

page: 1

log in


posted on Aug, 18 2007 @ 01:17 PM
I was interested in prying and getting inside the mind of a disinformation agent. While their tactics are welcome for discussion I would like to focus rather, on their psyche. Is an otherwise unethical existance a product of false logic and un-truths, or is it a product of disinformation it self. As a disinformation agent they must walk on both sides of the fence. They must use an oppinion or stance that is widely accepted to convey the notion or idea that might even go againsty the ideologies of its audience. They have to do more than act out a part, they must form valid arguments to stay within reason of their role, yet remain loyal to their purpose and intent.

could they begin as our relative brothers in being victims of disinformation, and just evolve to their reasons by aid of those that seek to benefit from it. Like us,Taking the cues to arrive upon a set of predetermined conclusions that are in fact not our own, but have been juxtapposed to our real rational in a way that we fell we "naturally" arrived upon them. This with out realizing that through things implied we were guided into forming these oppinions. could it be this or is it rather an age old SUB-CULTURE of those that wish to mask their intentions while getting support and help needed so as to realize them.

If the later is true then we who are the victims of subversion are a forced subculture of those that do not know, while those that know create their purpose by separating themselves from the majority. Then by preserving that dissunion, so as to exploit our fractionality to their singular benefit.
I say this as it is that most disinformation IMHO comes in the form of a dividing force, or alienating mentalities that together would naturally find common ground, hence defend each other by there common interests. as opposed to their mutual destruction at the hands of each other creating an opportunity for the an outside force to reep the benefits and emerge the savior of a conflict it created artificially between two or more peoples or ideas.

[edit on 18-8-2007 by newyorkee]

posted on Aug, 18 2007 @ 02:54 PM
I have tried to discuss disinformation in various other threads - tactics, motives etc. So I appreciate your version.

I read your thread several times and I think you may be suggesting a point that I had not thought of before. Some agents of disinformation are, in essence, just mules (if you will) sent out, on purpose, into the world by others to proclaim what they believe to be true - but it is in fact false information.

Is this, in part what you are saying?

Otherwise, all the possibilities you raise are most likely accurate.

posted on Aug, 19 2007 @ 02:44 AM
yeah I think it is probably every dynamic you can think of, employed in a case specific way so as to maximise transfer, and absorbtion. If five minutes on MTV does for teens what an hour and a half of fox news does for average voting adults, you use either more as a referance to vocabulary, "sound, or flavor". this while looking for useful simmilarities with ideologies shared between normal thought and intended thought. That can be hijaked and made to suit an alternate purpose without appearing to make any disruption of the normal train of thought.

It must be exausting

[edit on 19-8-2007 by newyorkee]

posted on Aug, 30 2007 @ 06:00 PM
You forgot about the ego boost. Can you imagine being the ruler of your own little web of lies? It'd give a sense of quite a bit of power. In essence, you control the truth and can give it or seem to give it (through disinfo) at will. That would only apply to primary agents (the ones that really do know the truth, or part of it), but I think self-satisfaction is a very valid motivation.

posted on Sep, 18 2007 @ 02:14 PM
[edit on 18/9/07 by Doobie Snacks]

[edit on 18/9/07 by Doobie Snacks]

posted on Sep, 18 2007 @ 02:15 PM
There was a time, a few years ago, when I had a major epiphany. I realized that 99.9% of everything I had ever been told was a lie, and that 99.9% of everything I will be told would just be more lies built upon the foundations of the old ones.

That said, I think a common thread through the psyche of all amatuer disinfo-agents is that for the most part, they believe 99.9% of what their told to believe. Their minds have digested and fully absorbed all the lies that have been spoon fed to them throughout the course of their lives. These lies have become so imbedded into every fiber of their being, that they now define themselves and reality through the prism of these lies. When someone challenges these lies, they challenge these peoples perception of reality and even their very sanity. To prove one major lie is to prove the possibilty that their are many more lies, thus they aggressively defend these lies on all fronts in order to keep their world in...order.

This says nothing of the proffessional disinfo-artists (Journalists, PR agents, spokespersons, real disinfo-agents, etc) who knowingly deal in half-truths, but I think it's the mentality of the amatuer disinfo-agents (Trolls) that have become the norm throughout the "internets".

Has anyone ever woken you up in the middle of a really good dream?
If you could, would you shut them up and go back to your dream? -I think that's what the majority of them are trying to do.


top topics

log in