Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

25 Rules of Disinformation

page: 1
26
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 03:03 AM
link   
Hi guys! I've just found this article identifying the 25 basic rules of disinformation used by public figures or governmental agents.



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.


Source: 911truth.org

So for all of those who see disinfo agents everywhere, read this, then use discernment. It's no mystery some disinfo agents are assigned to some theme (such as 2012, NWO, etc), so I guess this tool may be of good use.

edit on 3-1-2011 by Gab1159 because: (no reason given)
edit on 3-1-2011 by Gab1159 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 04:00 AM
link   
Good call! This is also a ploy used by certain media types - certain right wing radio talk show hosts use it as well.
They used to be called "journalists".
Is it any wonder we don't - can't- believe what we are fed through the mainstream media?!



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 04:31 AM
link   
We all have been witness to this type of behavior on ATS.



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 05:21 AM
link   
Rule 26; Read a list such as this one and accuse others of being disinfo agents.



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 05:21 AM
link   
Double post.
edit on 3-1-2011 by 547000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 05:42 AM
link   
evry member on ats should read this
good job
lets expose all sisinfo
and ignore them when they try and attack our characters



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 11:40 AM
link   
Sounds like Fox News' instruction manual.



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 11:43 AM
link   
It's a bummer there isn't a perma-pin.



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 11:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Gab1159
 


I posted this a while back under the title "25 Tactics of Truth Suppression"...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

But the original source I got it from is now unavailable (conspiracy!?
) so I'm glad it was posted again, I think it's a very good summary.



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 12:05 PM
link   
Great Link

The sad thing is, that the "agents" are succeeding a lot of the time. I have seen great threads die just because a dis info agent comes in and totally rip on the poster or other posters, scaring others away from posting on the topic.

It's easy to find a dis info agent though, just read all or most of there posts, and if they are mostly disagreeing with posters that claim a conspiracy, then chances are they either have a sad life or a dis info agent.


Think about it, if you didn't believe in this "conspiracy stuff", would you waist your time finding and posting on conspiracy sites and posts?



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 01:50 PM
link   
One man's "disinfo" is another man's "information".

Is it "disinfo" if the "disinfo" leads to the denial of ignorance? Is the label "disinfo" earned by mere disagreement with a poster? Is it "disinfo" to prove no conspiracy exists where one is suspected?

I'm trying to figure out why people on a conspiracy site would have such an issue with information that can help show whether their belief is rooted in reality or fallacy. I mean the last time I checked the ATS motto is "Deny Ignorance"; so why deny information which can lead to a denial of ignorance?



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 02:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Dilligaf28
 


Please read the 25 tactics again. Attacking people's character / ignoring evidence / avoiding issues is far from denying ignorance.



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 02:39 PM
link   
reply to post by thewholepicture
 


Ahhh, Thanks for this. I have seen many great threads taken down by these techniques here as well and have pointed out the tactics when I can. It's good to see a summary of them. It's the same business as media propaganda-easy to recognize when you know what you are looking for. Important to note though that everyone that uses one or several of these techniques are not necessarily disinfo agents-some people just like arguing and manipulating for the joy of it.



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 02:44 PM
link   
Makes me laugh about how you people question my story that is 100% true, and do all that stuff in that article trying to ridicule me, and get me banned for just speaking the truth.



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by andy1033
 


Andy, I've just arrived back from the planet Zogg where the reptilian overlord "Bingy-Badgy" made me an honourable reptilian. I am also Jesus reincarnated.

All of the above is 100% true.

Do you believe me?




posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by jessejamesxx
 


Perhaps I should provide an example of such "disinfo" as well as my opinion of it then ask you yours.

If on a chemtrail thread someone quotes a youtube video as proof of something only later to have someone offer sane rational scientific proof that the video is a fake or offers some sort of dishonesty then who would be the disinfo agent? Is the person offering up the youtube video offering disinfo or is the person showing the truth of the youtube video's fallacy the disinfo person?

In my opinion the "disinfo" label would be applied to the person offering the youtube video as evidence. The person whom offered the evidence to "deny ignorance" about the video wouldn't be a disinfo agent.

What is your opinion
edit on 3-1-2011 by Dilligaf28 because: to add my opinion



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 03:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Dilligaf28
 


rules 20,22,23 come to mind thou in my opinion they could be
consolidated into a single one: Muddy The Waters
edit on 3-1-2011 by DerepentLEstranger because: added edit



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 03:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by thewholepicture
It's easy to find a dis info agent though, just read all or most of there posts, and if they are mostly disagreeing with posters that claim a conspiracy, then chances are they either have a sad life or a dis info agent.


You make the mistake of thinking that disinfo = anti-conspiracy. That's not necessarily true. A disinfo agent will use the tactics in the OP to convince people of his position, using false information. That's where the 'disinfo' part comes in. There is the possibility of disinfo agents on either side of any issue or conspiracy.

It would be wrong to assume that someone using the tactics in the OP is necessarily a disinfo agent. Seventy-five percent of the people on ATS use those tactics. I don't think 3/4 of us are disinfo agents.
I sure hope not!



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 05:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Gab1159
 


Throw in one flying saucer and the whole topic has had it . The word conspiracy implies lunacy . No one wants to be viewed as a lunatic . The information world is big business and so is the disinformation business . For those weak people that doesn't have the stomache to navigate through the BS the truth can not be found . For sure our news companies can't be trusted because the Banksters own them too!



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 05:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Dilligaf28
 


Denial of ignorance is something we have been failing to do for a while now...





new topics

top topics



 
26
<<   2 >>

log in

join