Hypothetical Disinformation Agent - How would YOU 'invalidate' a legitimate video if one 'got out

reply to post by civilchallenger


You forgot one tactic, which is probably the most annoying one...posting numerous posts where the disinfo agent seems to agree with what's said and simultaneously nudges the subject at hand into a different direction.

your find there are enough people out there who would argue black is blue till the cows come home,without dis-info agents..


but in reality its easy to dis-credit someone...it's easy to de-bunk something

it's hard to prove something,as even proof is not enough sometimes.

What happens when you broadcast the truth is you piss everyone off" -Bill Cooper

It is remarkably easy to influence and manipulate peoples thoughts and ideas, ask any direct salesman or Advertising exec.

Since birth everyone has been told what to do, first by your parents then by our teachers at kindergarden then school then highschool then college next is our boss at work and finally our wives. Throughout all that we also have big brother in background the whole time with laws, social etiquette etc.
People are practically programmed from birth not to think for themselves.

The easiest way to perhaps not discredit but at least make people lose interest is just to have an authority, ANY authority dismiss it as ridiculous and BAMM!!!! 90% of the population move on with their lives. 5% will look some more into it and realise something isnt right but quickly move on and the final 5% will normally be a fringe element that no one listens to anyway as they are obviously crazy.
Its that simple, scary isnt it.

I find it amusing when people imply that disinfo agents go to elaborate measures when in fact because of how stupid the population is a simple statement of "Its a hoax" is enough.

Short of aliens landing and the majority of the sheeple seeing them with their own eyes TPTB have very little to worry about.

reply to post by TheFlash



Personaly speaking I think it is fortunate that people with my mindset are on the side of freedom of information and not the side of hiding it. See , if it was my job to ensure that no information was distributed which would argue with the official line on any given subject, I would have infiltrated every server, every access point to the internet, every single byte of information sent or recieved would be observed and scanned for dissent from the accepted line.

In the event of the discovery of any user sending or recieving information which my government would rather was not commonly available, I would kill the sender, and the reciepient, and burn any server , computer, PDA, or other attatchment which contained that information. I would insert a mechanism into the internet, by which ANY device attatched to a computer, external hard drives, flash drives and other external memory, could be burned as well, by WIFI or by hardwire, and burned beyond recognition or recovery.

I would have laws passed, which mean that any encryption , or effort to conceal the content of any information sent or recieved by internet, text, or any other method is a capital offense, and carries and automatic death scentence, just for suspiscion of being guilty of this crime. I would be a bloody handed , horrible, sick monster. Invalidation is not as effective as total destruction of the information and those who would recieve or send it.

Damn good thing I would never stoop to the level of being employed by a shadowy group of government scum then isnt it?
Thats pretty extreme, but I figure if you are going to do something, might as well be brutaly honest about it.

I'll bite...

I think there was a time back when when this type of disinfo was needed during the last century.

Nowadays very little needs to be done, if anything. For every honest person with pics or video, there is ten or so more shills, hoaxers, and "I can summon/channel/have intercourse with the aliens" tinfoil hatjobs backing them up. Leave it to the unscrupulous masses to muddy the waters. They will and have.

Originally posted by OUNjahhryn
should we really be giving the disinfo agents here tips on how to do their job better? come on guys.....

The ones not having their game put-together is the wild and frantic community of truthseekers doing such a good job in invalidating themselves that i don't see much need for disinfo agents.

That said, if there is a need for psyops, the sophistication is on a level only imaginable to the ones labeled most paranoid. My main goal would be to derail threads like this one, since the only real threat to my disinfo campaign would be people being aware there exists such things as provocateurs, infiltrators and promoters.

I would be sure to promote values of courtesy, free speech and 'you are free to read, but don't come debunking this since you are free to not read - to ensure maximum influx of insanity and destabilize the community with nutjobs posting ridiculous claims and no-one debunkin the claims. If i would be succesful in infiltrating the moderator staff, i would put on a mask of being friendly and sane-skeptic, so i would have an alibi when someone notices the fact that i have been planting weasel words in thousands of posts.

What we are learning from this thread is that even legitimate disagreement, critique and debunking of any paranormal claim can be dismissed as "disinformation".

I highly doubt governments would have specialist agents whom roam the internet just to spread disinformation or debunk every single UFO and alien sighting. Maybe that's me being ignorant or maybe its me just me taking into account all the disinformation which gets spread across the world wide web each and everyday by idiotic hoaxers and time-wasters.

To answer the question I would automatically probe the poster about what they saw and ask simple but common sense questions. I would also ensure I use the technology given to me to track the posters IP address and whereabouts and if I thought the UFO or alien sighting was 'real' I would probably organise a nice little visit.

I do find it interesting how the majority of posters seem to think as soon as someone debunks a video or questions its credibility they get called government agents or get jumped on...Perhaps if people kept things in perspective instead of making up ridiculous conspiracy theories believers and skeptics would find some common ground.

Originally posted by WingedBull
What we are learning from this thread is that even legitimate disagreement, critique and debunking of any paranormal claim can be dismissed as "disinformation".

Exactly what is asked in the thread - typical example of a method of manipulation.

It can be - indicating some people dismiss it
It can be - an opinion
It can be - admitting it is a possbility

Not perhaps gramatically correct - to automatically assume one meaning for the word is what this manipulation relies on. An intentional typo will strengthen the opinion of theone reading the text, if he/she does like most people do: correct the error according to how they believe it was meant to be in correct form. This effect is best seen in the fact that people unconsciously pick up the language nyances of the surrounding population.

An easy way of subconscious manipulation, with the extra bonus of being easily defendable with the grammar defense; either with reference to own skills and how rude it is to nitpick (not everyone is speaking english as their first language!) or the skills of the one that points out this "agenda" (do you know the language, only one of those are gramatically correct!).

reply to post by ProfessorT


You make assumptions like there would be no tomorrow, but at least you acknowledge it

The playing field of the operations is much higher than making posts, if you are on governmental levels. Heck, for all i know, ATS could very well be a front for the CIA.

Taking into account the topic of this thread, and the nature of ATS, i feel i am allowed to say this, and it should not be seen as an accusations since itcertainly is not one.

Just stating the fact that if ATS would want, they could be the ones setting the standard for transparency, security, resistance to infiltration etc. Why this is not done, i don't know - but for this exact reason this is not done - it would be foolish to forget that -if its possible, corruption will happen sooner or later-

reply to post by TheFlash


i would attck the person showing the video that is the easy way, the secong you have anything you against them people will ignore it much more

Sad that people think "debunking" is the most common form of disinformation. "debunking" doesn't really work to sway someone's opinion if they believe. If it can be done in a way that shows a great amount of evidence, it will change people's minds yes, but to do that with a legitimate case, it would be near impossible.

That is why UFOlogy always has a few cases on the books that will always be 'unexplained'. No matter the "debunking" attempts, they have held up to scrutiny.

As far as people thinking disinformation is through attempts to disprove something... It is most likely the opposite. It would be far easier to pepper the alternative information community with bad information than it would be to go out and try and disprove every case that pops up.

Reverse psychology 101.

reply to post by dbove
reply to post by dbove

The playing field of the operations is much higher than making posts, if you are on governmental levels. Heck, for all i know, ATS could very well be a front for the CIA.

Taking into account the topic of this thread, and the nature of ATS, i feel i am allowed to say this, and it should not be seen as an accusations since itcertainly is not one.

See, the thing about ATS and the people that come to these boards is:

Getting to the bottom of the matter is usually number 1 priority. Most people pride themselves on providing factual or at least reliable information.

The community here has gone to great lengths to expose fakers, charlatans, hoaxers, and general frauds that are running an alternative agenda.

They are not asking for you to believe anything, but I can certainly say that they are asking you to question things. The only thing they ask in return is that you follow the T&C, which includes, not posting known hoaxes.

ATS has been a great asset for many people looking to uncover information, you can save the ideas you are having for well known places online that are running alternative agendas.

Originally posted by Myendica
reply to post by TheFlash

 

if someone came out telling the truth, and it was damaging to tptb, they'll just make the messenger look crazy, or destroy their creds by saying he beat his wife... Or some other way of slandering the messenger without debunking the message..

Or just have them arrested for a sex crime, that seems to be the norm these days. They don't kill them anymore, TBTB are deathly afraid of a martyr.

reply to post by TheFlash

if you were a Disinformation Agent charged with hiding the truth about the existence of ET vehicles and beings being here on Earth (assuming this was the case), and someone posted a video providing strong evidence of this reality on the Internet, what would you do to cause the public to disbelieve that evidence?

Simple, and I think my method is already in use today. If I was a disinfo agent, and a damn good one, I would know the best way to discredit a video coming out would be to get ahead of it. Years ahead of it. I would populate the subject with completely ignorant tin foil hat believers that work to make even the slightest mention of this subject in public cause normal people to break into laughter. I would have some folks spend years insisting there are structures on the moon (even going so far as to post pics that show nothing but rocks, yet have plenty of other fools claim to "see" the structures too), I would have groups of people point at youtube videos with nothing more than lights or reflections and claim they are alien spacecraft, I would have morons that know nothing about science post the most idiotic things you can imagine and then some. In short, I would spend years making this subject a laughable joke.

Then, when something serious crops up, it would be so easy to hide it or discredit it because the signal to noise ratio is too much.

Wait a second.....didn't I just describe the actual state of this subject? Yup, sad thing too......

I would create several high-quality fake videos that appear to be of the same event as the original video, but seen from different angles and distances. I would then post them under several different accounts with descriptions that lead viewers to believe that all of the videos are from the same incident but were taken by separate observers. The videos would be left online for people to contemplate for a few days, and I would probably use some of my media contacts to draw attention to this "amazing series of videos".

After the entire thing has been sufficiently hyped up, I would have some or all of my fake videos debunked beyond a shadow of a doubt. The media would show conclusively that my videos - which ARE fake - are fake. The original video would be debunked by association.

A similar tactic would be used if any unacceptably compelling or credible UFO story began getting any traction in the mainstream media. For example, if a number of retired U.S. Air Force personnel were about to come out together in front of the press and say that while they were on active duty, they had been present during incidents in which UFOs seemed to show interest in - or even directly affect - our nuclear weapons systems (or some such thing), I would immediately put my resources to work.

I might, for example, plant a story with one of my major media contacts saying - oh, I don't know - that the United Nations was about to appoint an "Ambassador to Aliens" to be prepared in the event of extraterrestrial contact. The story would have to come from a seemingly credible source, like for instance the science editor of a major UK daily. I would make sure that the story got significant play in the day or two prior to the anticipated press event with the former military men.

Shortly thereafter, it would be revealed that, in fact, the whole alien ambassador story was some kind of "mistake", and that there really was no such plan at the UN to get ready for aliens to land. Several op-ed pieces would be written heaping ridicule on the idea of an "alien ambassador", on the idea of aliens and UFOs in general, and - whether explicitly or by association - on the press event and testimonials that were my target. Everyone would have a good laugh. Situation neutralized.

At least, that's how I would do it.

Originally posted by TheFlash
My question today is this - if you were a Disinformation Agent charged with hiding the truth about the existence of ET vehicles and beings being here on Earth (assuming this was the case), and someone posted a video providing strong evidence of this reality on the Internet, what would you do to cause the public to disbelieve that evidence? You have quite a hefty budget for this work and lots of resources at your disposal...

Almost nothing on the web would be completely convincing without major news following the video as well. Live people on air telling me the video is REAL. Everything is assumed (or feared) CGI until then. Esp if its good. So verification from a major (all) networks would be required - So you can save your money!

You might flood the internet with bogus videos that have similar search keywords and content as the one you are trying to discredit. I have seen that done.

Originally posted by ufoo2012
[SNIP]

That's a smoking gun.