A simple method to detect disinfo-agents

Originally posted by zorgon
Though the McMoon tapes have nothing at all to do with this thread.... yes I have had good luck with that

Even you would be surprised... for one it has led me to direct contact with a navy astronaut who hold two of Russia's highest space awards..

Ok, to be fair I will have to check them out later. You're right, that was an ad hom lobbed at you because I was irritated and it has nothing to do with this thread.

There is just so much going on out there that you are not aware of... I guess you don't have the 'need to know'

I have zero "need to know", as I have no official government capacity whatsoever....well, other than waiting for my 4 years of inactive service to tick by.

As to your question... no its not crap in regards THIS thread... as only someone familiar with the protocol would react as you have and as a couple others have in the past. The only average surfers that would know it are those that pay attention to posts or have had reason to so some serious research...

Right, but you're dancing around my point: SIPRNET itself means nothing in the context of this thread. The type of info on SIPRNET is not nearly as glorious as the casual person might think, so dropping lines in this thread about having access to it is erroneous. Other people don't know any better, so they think, "Wow, this guy has all kinds of inside information!". What they don't know is how bland and irrelevant any such info would be.

And the latter two groups have no reason to react

You cannot use the reaction of someone as "proof" that they're a disinfo agent. This is just really, really, bad logic. You may just run into someone who knows exactly what SIPRNET is, and calls this "name dropping" out for what it is.

Originally posted by thrashee
You cannot use the reaction of someone as "proof" that they're a disinfo agent. This is just really, really, bad logic.

Hmmm no? Well it got your dander up and earned me a 'bonus'

But yeah your right... SIPRnet only has secret... and that is mostly boring... the good stuff is higher up

Originally posted by thrashee Other people don't know any better, so they think, "Wow, this guy has all kinds of inside information!". What they don't know is how bland and irrelevant any such info would be.

Hmmm bland...

How about a stealth 'coating' that when applied to object makes them effectively invisible? The principle is similar to fiber optics but on a nano level. How about one who was skeptic here once upon a time works on 'coating applications' on a non existing robotic space plane? I even have a copy of the patent..

I consider that interesting... but as you admitted... you don't have the need to know

But I will add a note from my source... just for you...

Hi, Ron...Good Morning!

Thanks for the note and you certainly touch on points of similiarity and interest (proving that great minds think alike!).

I am free to talk about any of my published US Patents which are in the public domain. I am, however, under an edict from DoD under the NSA to 'report any inquiries relative to the stealth patent'. I had a phone call from a person who identified himself as an 'Undersecretary of Defense' and the person read a statement to me which I later found was excerpted from the National Security Act, as amended. I was 'ordered' to report any inquiries of any kind, by anyone, to DoD relative to that case (patent). I've only had to do that one time in 20 years when a group of Isreali's, based in Philly, contacted me relative to undertaking collaboration on some 'project' in Haifa. I reported this as instructed and the group 'disappeared' shortly thereafter.

So yeah, seems I might have a tad of inside information

After reading this thread, it occurs to me that a really great way for a true disinfo agent to cover his tracks would be to out himself, then claim to have left his evil profession behind out of disgust. Then all he said on the subject of disinfo campaigns and psyops would not only have an air of authenticity, but he could present himself a hero as well as an authority on the subject. That would be the perfect way to gain the trust of at least some people, while allowing cover to imply that there are other, more insidious disinfo agents lurking.

Everyone here realizes, of course, that just by discussing the possible psychologies and tactics supposed disinfo agents might use, you're only giving disinfo agents valuable data to adapt their techniques, right?

Just a thought for those who are seriously concerned about them.

reply to post by Skyfloating


I would say that what you suggest is virtually impossible to do and even if possible would take up an incredible amount of time that could be devoted to more productie tasks.

Your use of the word disinformation agents has too narrow of a focus. The real damaging disinformation agents are those that will put out info, data, even, as being totally correct from some unnamed inside source. One of the best examples of that in my estimation is the much-touted TR-3 flying triangle that used a whirling pool of mercury and reduces gravity up to about 90% of the craft and crew's weight. Sounds great, right! But what keeps that other 10% hovering or what engines (that make no sound) allow it to have classic UFO characterics of movement? I will grant you that the triangles are our three-axis control solution to true UFO principles, but the point is to not let you believe that these are true null-mass vehicles that have deep space capabilities. Any time you hear the term "anti-gravity" used in reguard to UFOs or the TR-3s, etc., that is a sign of disinformation or at the least a lack of looking at the observed data of such craft.

The other "agents" that can fall into that catagory is the attraction of internet "buddies" that want to get inside your head because your post tends to tell them you have some deeper info you are hiding. But, actually, there is going to be every type if agent out there. I think that possible a major aspect of the innane, post on this site that seems to come from bored high-schoolers is really clever efforts to piss-off and drive off hard-working researchers and thus keep a lid on intelligent dissemination of info.

I am suprised nobody has linked me to being a disinfo agent. They could pay me to do it anytime. Sure I may be an asshole but trust me guys I am not in any way connected to any goverment agencies at all. I mean really...who would ever guess that I would be an asset working for a certain agency and since I injured my leg in Azerbaijan while chasing down a target I have been sent to do disinfo until I heal up. Silly...

Would you classify disinfo guys as spooks? Surely if they are trained by an agency they should be good enough to completely blend in. Sure the disinfo playbook has some interesting points and so does this thread but I think it would be more complicated than that. Same goes for them if they are trained by another party outside of the goverment.

[edit on 24-2-2009 by nastalgik]

Originally posted by thrashee
Everyone here realizes, of course, that just by discussing the possible psychologies and tactics supposed disinfo agents might use, you're only giving disinfo agents valuable data to adapt their techniques, right?

Just a thought for those who are seriously concerned about them.

Yes. Revealing the manipulation method renders the method ineffective.

I get really irritated when I get called "a disinfo agent." This often happens just when I disagree with someone. Then, WHAMMY, out comes the disinfo card.

I can understand a certain level of paranoia around here, but when people make outlandish claims (like NASA being a military organisation) and you call them on it, they get upset and start distracting attention away from their invalid claims.

This, in my view, is bloody ridiculous.

It`s hard to tell who is a disinfo agent, and i never accuse anyone of being one.
But here`s somthing to think about.

If take for instance Roswell.
If the real truth came out that intelligently controlled extraterrestrial crafts DID NOT crash, and alien bodies WERE NOT RECOVERED, then couldn`t all the proponents for the case who present it and argue for it be considered disinfo agents themselves?

Originally posted by Skyfloating
Yes. Revealing the manipulation method renders the method ineffective.

Not really. All you're really doing is enabling everyone here to be paranoid about just about anything as simple as disagreeing with you, and thus, creating dissension in your own ranks. In fact, this will backfire on you, as you will not be able to distinguish between true "disinfo agents" and those who simply disagree.

But then again, you never could distinguish this from the start, so nothing has truly changed.

Disinformation exists in regular life doesn't it? I mean, seems like a lot of people believe things that other would define as 'lies' and they each see the other perhaps as 'blind'. So if you are compensated for wearing a mask and making up lame threads on the internet, it's better than a lot of things other people do. It's not gonna distract me or anybody real from knowing the truth. If Mr. Burns (irritating, imo, so thanks for explaining that) decided to come clean and yet doesn't want to go into detail, it'll still be okay.

How the hell can I tell dis information from dat information??

Originally posted by Kandinsky
If I was a disinfo agent, I'd run at least two personas from separate IPs. I'd take advantage of onion routing to create stooges that would support my opinions. The two main personas would take opposing perspectives. I could be loud and dynamic or subtle and subversive...

[plus another two paras of clever stuff]

Wow. This all makes me feel pretty stupid. It's all I can do just to post honestly and reasonably on these boards. I mean, sure, we know there are disinfo guys around (and I only spotted one I was pretty sure of on Downtown436's foe list) but of course (as I found out to my cost today by inadvertently naming one) the T&C prohibits us making our suspicions known.

A good disinfo agent is a liar that tells the occasional truth and an honest man that tells the occasional lie. I'm not convinced that there is a way of uncovering a good disinfo agent

What about an honest man that gets things wrong occasionally?

I'd have to agree with scordar that the safest way to spot disinfo agents is to use the Michael Sweeney disinfo playbook. If you're alert and fight fair you can usually expose the inconsistencies and disingenuousness in a disinfo agent's posts.

Myself I am more inclined to take the view that ignorance rather then dis info rules the day almost always . Take the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan for example at times I estimate that 80% of posts on those topics are just plain ignorance which either comes from people being blinded by there political views or a lack of understanding of counter insurgency warfare . I have given up on having discussions where the majority of ignorant posters are ruling the roost and starring every anti US post that comes along regardless of its factual accuarcy .

To successfully spread dis info on the internet where info is so ready available at least a basic elementary understanding of the relevant issue is needed .

Originally posted by UmbraSumus
[And are there double-agents of dis~info prowling cyberspace ?

I'd say so. I think I found one (not from this site) and exposed him as such on this thread.

I do not know the guy but i have seen a couple of his threads.
I am talking about RAZIMUS.

I bet he will be a hell of a disinfo agent detector.

I agree that disinfo agecy is not as much an issue on present internet which is quite uncontrolable.
However sites of mass influence such as ATS may be potential targets.
If such the case a couple of people or little more would be able to serve the scope of dissinfo.

An old advice from a friend?
Make the best of what you have and forget the rest. Its just a matter of perception which is all relative by itself.

My 55 European cents.

thanks for the tips. but what if they read this thread wont they learn and adapt?

Originally posted by CrashGecko
thanks for the tips. but what if they read this thread wont they learn and adapt?

It`ll still work on the unaware. You simply adapt your technique depending on who you are talking too.

Thats why its, imo, better to rely on ones own "inner sense / intuition" when it comes to discerning truth from fiction.

reply to post by RFBurns



How did you get involved in such a thing?

And what sort of topics were you derailing?