It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
There are many methods of disinformation from spreading lies to setting up straw men. There is a whole lexicon of disinfo tactics and it can be overwhelming to the novice like myself. For some background on some of the methods of disinfo check out this site. Fintan Dunn has done a lot of reporting on the CIA fake internet sites here.
In the case of 9/11 disinformation I've found that they use three main tactics:
1. Ignore it: For most Americans, if it's not on TV it doesn't exist. By studiously ignoring an issue the media can make it disappear. This has been spectacularly effective in the case of 9/11. Almost universally; main stream media avoid this topic like the plague.
2. Infiltrators: An agent of the perpetrators pretends to be a truth seeker. He publishes some statements supporting 9/11 truth (usually on some minor topic) and, gains some notoriety (with the help of other agents and insiders) He then discredits himself by coming out with some outrageous statements or actions like saying he is an alien abductee or UFOlogist etc. thereby throwing discredit onto the whole 9/11 truth topic.
3. Attacking straw men: This classic debate tactic is to re-frame the opponents argument making it seem that some weak point or minor issue is crucial and then shooting it down. The aircraft "pods" are the best example of this tactic.
The 9/11/01 attack was a complex psychological operation carefully designed to conceal the truth, in spite of numerous obvious red flags in the fraudulent official story. As such it relies on the dissemination of memes that overpower rational consideration of the evidence. One of the most important memes is the idea that all people who question the basic tenets of the official story are loony conspiracy theorists, whose ideas are not worthy of consideration. Part of the construction of this meme was to make the attack so audacious that even a straightforward accounting of the basic facts sounds too outrageous to possibly be true.
The ideas that the Twin Towers were destroyed by explosive demolition and that top-level administration officials were involved in the planning and execution of the attack are so painful that most people reflexively reject them, even if that means ignoring mountains of evidence. Nevertheless the perpetrators run the risk that these ideas will gain currency and begin to be examined with some objectivity if the loony conspiricism meme fails to maintain its hold.
Nonsense as a Weapon
An effective tool for reinforcing the loony conspiricism meme is the introduction of theories that that have no basis in evidence, such as the idea that no planes hit the towers. The association of these ideas with the careful research of investigators in the 9/11 Truth Movement stands to set back the cause of awakening the larger public to the facts of the attack.
A series of websites have promoting more or less obvious hoaxes since the attack. Examples are 911Review.org (See 9/11 Review REVIEWED), and Physics911.net. Both adopted as their centerpiece the idea that no jetliner crashed at the Pentagon -- an idea that may be single most elaborate and well-orchestrated hoax used to undermine the credibility of the 9-11 Truth Movement.
More traditional media such as videos and books have also been used to discourage rational inquiry into the crimes of 9/11/01 by associating alternatives to the official narrative with uncritical thinking and junk science.
Several of these websites, videos, and books have been promoted in segments of the 9/11 Truth Movement that may seem surprising, given how effectively such material is used by the cover-up as ammunition against the spectrum of 9/11 Truth efforts. (A prime example of this is the March 2005 Popular Mechanics attack piece.) There are many possible reasons for this:
Because people inclined to accept that the attack was an inside job tend to be more open-minded in general, they are more likely to entertain a range of ideas, and are somewhat handicapped in appreciating the potency of ill-founded or poorly presented theories in discrediting good research.
Many working on social justice causes like 9/11 are reluctant to admit that there are saboteurs in their midst. The idea that the struggle to expose the crime is just a contest between the official story and alternatives is comforting in its simplicity. Recognizing that the struggle is a two-or-more-front war of ideas can be intimidating or even overwhelming.
Hoaxes come in many levels of sophistication and subtlety. Whereas few people have ever taken the hologram plane theory seriously, and the pod-plane theory was long ago rejected by most aspiring 9/11 activists, the Pentagon no-jetliner theory continues to detract from substantive evidence implicating insiders in the attack.
One more thing Ivan. When will you be presenting your evidence that John Lear, Craig Ranke and others are - in your words - conspirators to the murder of over 3,000 innocents?
When will you be presenting your evidence to the authorities for persecution? Or are they in on it too (Inflationary Model)? You've been "working" on your evidence for almost seven years, no?
Originally posted by deltaboy
reply to post by IvanZana
Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
The leader of the Albany, NY truth club calls it quits; says CD, beam weapons and all the other conspiracies concerning 9-11 are nonsense. Actually, he isn't quite so charitable in his descriptions.
Even if you don't agree with him, read his blog all the way through and see if his insights resonate with you.