Strong, credible allegations of high-level criminal activity can bring down a government. When a government lacks an effective, fact-based defense, it must employ other techniques whose success depends heavily upon a cooperative, compliant press & a mere token opposition party.
1. Dummy up.
If it's not reported, it's not news, & it didn't happen.
2. Wax indignant.
This is also known as the "How dare you?" gambit.
If it's not reported, it's not news, & it didn't happen.
2. Wax indignant.
This is also known as the "How dare you?" gambit.
3. Characterize the charges as "rumors" or, better yet, "wild rumors" & "fake news". If, in spite of the news blackout, the public is still able to learn about the facts, it can only be through fake news they are "crazy" for believing.
4. Knock down straw men.
Deal only with the weakest aspects of the weakest charges. Even better, create your own straw men. Make up wild rumors (or plant false stories) & give them lead play when you appear to debunk all the charges, real & fanciful alike.
Deal only with the weakest aspects of the weakest charges. Even better, create your own straw men. Make up wild rumors (or plant false stories) & give them lead play when you appear to debunk all the charges, real & fanciful alike.
5. Call skeptics names.
Be sure to use heavily loaded verbs & adjectives when characterizing charges & defending government & its defenders. Carefully avoid fair & open debate w/ anyone you have maligned. For insurance, set up your own "skeptics" to shoot down.
Be sure to use heavily loaded verbs & adjectives when characterizing charges & defending government & its defenders. Carefully avoid fair & open debate w/ anyone you have maligned. For insurance, set up your own "skeptics" to shoot down.
6. Impugn motives.
Marginalize critics. For instance, suggesting they are not really interested in the truth but are simply pursuing a partisan political agenda or are out to make money (compared to over-compensated adherents to the government line who, presumably, are not).
Marginalize critics. For instance, suggesting they are not really interested in the truth but are simply pursuing a partisan political agenda or are out to make money (compared to over-compensated adherents to the government line who, presumably, are not).
7. Invoke authority.
Here the controlled press and the sham opposition can be very useful.
Here the controlled press and the sham opposition can be very useful.
8. Dismiss the charges as "old news."
Say "that has been debunked."
Say "that has been debunked."
9. Come half-clean.
AKA "confession & avoidance" or "limited hangout," creates an impression of candor & honesty while admitting to relatively harmless "mistakes", often requires embrace of a fall-back position different from the one originally taken.
AKA "confession & avoidance" or "limited hangout," creates an impression of candor & honesty while admitting to relatively harmless "mistakes", often requires embrace of a fall-back position different from the one originally taken.
10. Characterize the crimes as impossibly complex & the truth as ultimately unknowable.
11. Reason backward, using the deductive method with a vengeance. With thoroughly rigorous deduction, troublesome evidence is irrelevant. E.g. We have a completely free press. If evidence exists, they would have reported it.
12. Require the skeptics to solve the crime completely.
e.g. If Epstein was murdered, who did it and why?
e.g. If Epstein was murdered, who did it and why?
13. Change the subject.
This technique includes creating/publicizing distractions.
14. Lightly report incriminating facts, and then make nothing of them. This is sometimes referred to as "bump and run" reporting.
This technique includes creating/publicizing distractions.
14. Lightly report incriminating facts, and then make nothing of them. This is sometimes referred to as "bump and run" reporting.
• Baldly and brazenly lie.
A favorite way of doing this is to attribute the "facts" furnished the public to a plausible-sounding, but anonymous, source.
A favorite way of doing this is to attribute the "facts" furnished the public to a plausible-sounding, but anonymous, source.
• Expanding further on numbers 4 and 5, have your own stooges "expose" scandals and champion popular causes. Their job is to pre-empt real opponents and to play 99-yard football. A variation is to pay rich people for the job who will pretend to spend their own money.
• Flood the Internet w/ agents.
This answers the question, "What could possibly motivate a person to spend hour upon hour on Internet news groups defending the government/the press & harassing genuine critics?" Don't the authorities have defenders enough in print, radio & tv?
This answers the question, "What could possibly motivate a person to spend hour upon hour on Internet news groups defending the government/the press & harassing genuine critics?" Don't the authorities have defenders enough in print, radio & tv?
Check out PropOrNot ID Service 🇺🇸 (@ propornot) twitter.com/propornot?s=09
The damage PropOrNot did to scores of news and opinions websites in late 2016-2017 provides the basis of a massive civil suit. I can say that because I know a lot about a number of entities that are involved and the enormous amount of money behind them.
In this article, you’ll meet some of the people staffing PropOrNot, the people and publications that provide their expenses & cover the logistics, a few of the deep state players. After that, you’ll meet the NGOs that are funding and orchestrating all of it.
The Interpreter is a product of the Atlantic Council. The Digital Forensics Research Lab has been carrying the weight in Ukrainian-Russian affairs for the Atlantic Council. Fellows working with the Atlantic Council in this area include Bellingcat.
StopFake
Irena Chalupa, sister to the same Alexandra Chalupa that brought the term Russian hacking to worldwide attention, is a nonresident fellow with the Atlantic Council’s Dinu Patriciu Eurasia Center.
Irena Chalupa, sister to the same Alexandra Chalupa that brought the term Russian hacking to worldwide attention, is a nonresident fellow with the Atlantic Council’s Dinu Patriciu Eurasia Center.
Irena Chalupa is a senior correspondent at RFE/RL where she has worked for 20+ years & previously served as an editor for the Atlantic Council, where she covered Ukraine and Eastern Europe & also the news anchor for Ukraine’s propaganda channel Stopfake.org
The Chalupas are the first family of Ukrainian propaganda. She works with and for Ukrainian Intelligence through the Atlantic Council, Stopfake.org, and her sisters Andrea (EuromaidanPR) and Alexandra.
Dimitry Alperovich – CEO of Crowdstrike.
The strand that ties this crew together is they all work for Ukrainian Intelligence.
PropOrNot -> Atlantic Council -> Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG)
Who are the BBG? The Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) is an independent agency of the US government.
PropOrNot -> Atlantic Council -> Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG)
Who are the BBG? The Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) is an independent agency of the US government.
On January 1, 2016, the Interpreter became a special project of RFE/RL & under the oversight of the BBG.
The BBG’s bipartisan board was eliminated & replaced w/ a single appointed chief executive officer as part of the NDAA for FY 2017 passed in December 2016.
The Secretary of State had a seat on the board of the BBG until December 2016. Why the change?
The Secretary of State had a seat on the board of the BBG until December 2016. Why the change?
During the 2016 election, the BBG developed a major conflict of interest. At least two BBG board members worked actively for the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign.
These government officials were working against the president-elect after the election. It looks like it didn’t go unnoticed. In the following linked article, it shows that they should be investigated for their part in an attempted coup.
While the BBG is supposed to be neutral it has continuously helped increase tensions in Eastern Europe. Currently, the Atlantic Council’s main effort is to ignite a war with Russia. This may set up a major conflict of interest.
The purpose of PropOrNot has been to trick people into demanding that freedom of speech be rolled back. This was/is to be done by destroying fact-based media. If you read further, the entire plan is laid out starting from 2015 when it started coming together.
The purpose of PropOrNot has been to trick people into demanding that freedom of speech be rolled back. This was/is to be done by destroying fact-based media. If you read further, the entire plan is laid out starting from 2015 when it started coming together.
That little statement about the free speech rally says it all. It would hardly be noticed unless you were looking for metadata.
Now you can say it’s only a sentence and who cares? Nobody communicates through metadata do they? Wasn’t that what PropOrNot was all about?
Now you can say it’s only a sentence and who cares? Nobody communicates through metadata do they? Wasn’t that what PropOrNot was all about?
Do you see it there in the metadata, at the bottom of the image is an ad for a job.
The Boston ‘Free Speech’ Rally was billed by the social networks and MSM as a fascist rally. They learned that with just a little nudge, they can make you demand nationalist repression.
The Boston ‘Free Speech’ Rally was billed by the social networks and MSM as a fascist rally. They learned that with just a little nudge, they can make you demand nationalist repression.
This is the Pravy Sektor hacker RUH8. The common thread for these hackers is clear if you read the linked material on the profiles that make up these organizations. They work for Bellingcat, Informnapalm, the Atlantic Council, Ukrainian Intel, and the Diaspora.
Were they given access to United States Government Top-Secret Secure Servers?
They work directly for Ukrainian Intel. Bellingcat works directly for Ukrainian Intel & works w them & Atlantic Council. Stopfake.org is a product of Irena Chalupa who works for RFE/RL, the Atlantic Council & the Ukrainian government.
Crowdstrike has an ongoing relationship w Ukrainian Intel & these particular hackers. Is it possible that Crowdstrike conjured up Fancy Bear, the “hacker(s)” responsible for divulging internal Democratic Party emails that supposedly tipped the 2016 election in Trump’s favor?
If so, this would mean that approval was given at the highest levels – presumably former Secretary of State John Kerry – for Ukrainian intelligence hackers to have access to servers inside a U.S. Government Agency bc of PropOrNot & Atlantic Council’s reliance on the hackers.
The Atlantic Council works for the same people who staff RFE/RL & works closely w/ the Ukrainian World Congress (UWC).
1/29/2016 UWC President & Atlantic Council President & CEO officially signed a Memo of Agreement to renew cooperation began Sept. 2014.
1/29/2016 UWC President & Atlantic Council President & CEO officially signed a Memo of Agreement to renew cooperation began Sept. 2014.
March 2015, Ukrainian Information Policy designer Joel Harding laid out what to expect going forward in the following statements:
“In military IIO [Inform and Influence Operations] center on the ability to influence foreign audiences, US, and global audiences, and adversely affect enemy decision making through an integrated approach. Even current event news is released in this fashion.
Each portal is given messages that follow the same themes because it is an across the board mainstream effort that fills the information space entirely when it is working correctly.”
The purpose of “Inform and Influence Operations” is not to provide a perspective, opinion, or lay out a policy. It is defined as the ability to make audiences “think and act” in a manner favorable to the mission objectives.
This is done through applying perception management techniques which target the audience’s emotions, motives, and reasoning.
These techniques are not geared for debate. It is to overwhelm and change the target psyche.
These techniques are not geared for debate. It is to overwhelm and change the target psyche.
Using these techniques information sources can be manipulated and those that write, speak, or think counter to the objective are relegated as propaganda, ill-informed, or irrelevant.
While the above sounds gloriously overoptimistic, Harding, along with his little band of Kremlin Troll hunters personally started developing the idea of organizations capable of blackballing journalists and publications in a way that could not be construed as censorship.
Harding’s connections in media are huge. Through his friend Matthew Armstrong, Harding had access to the board of the Broadcasting Board of Governors, staffed by a who’s who of network and radio broadcast, print media & shortwave CEOs & heavy hitters. They are behind RFE/RL.
On the other end of this in 2015, Joel Harding was assembling a group of miscreants to attack the social networks of different journalist and publications. The crude logic behind a direct assault was that by developing, training, and overseeing vast troll networks...
...they could speak over their opposition (people that their employers wanted to be silenced) and subdue dissident online conversation and control the information.
Where this wasn’t feasible, they set up hack and harass attacks at various publications to get them to stop publishing hard-hitting journalists. This still hasn’t been entirely effective because it caused publishers to dig in and harden their internet properties instead.
The softer approach Harding pushed in March 2015 quickly developed into the unified media strategy he wanted for the U.S. and Europe. Control information & don’t allow contradicting information or news into the media stream. When it does get in, call it propaganda.
Know your logical fallacy and be prepared to name and counter it w/ proven NWO Sock Puppets & Gaslighting Trolls are powerless to defend against it.
learning-mind.com/logical-fallac…
learning-mind.com/logical-fallac…
Have you ever lost an argument even though you knew you were right? You may have been a victim of logical fallacies. Understand these fallacies & your arguments won't easily be sabotaged again.
learning-mind.com/logical-fallac…
learning-mind.com/logical-fallac…
1. Strawman
The strawman fallacy is when one person misrepresents or exaggerates someone else’s argument to make it easier to attack. In this case, rather than connect with the actual debate, you misrepresent the other person’s arguments completely.
The strawman fallacy is when one person misrepresents or exaggerates someone else’s argument to make it easier to attack. In this case, rather than connect with the actual debate, you misrepresent the other person’s arguments completely.
2. Slippery slope
We have all heard people with extreme views use this argument. It is when you say that one behaviour will lead to another behaviour with no evidence that this is the case.
prospect.org/economy/idle-p…
We have all heard people with extreme views use this argument. It is when you say that one behaviour will lead to another behaviour with no evidence that this is the case.
prospect.org/economy/idle-p…
3. False cause
In this fallacy, it is assumed that because one thing is followed by another, the first thing must have caused the second. False cause fallacy is the reason behind the superstitious thinking.
learning-mind.com/logical-fallac…
In this fallacy, it is assumed that because one thing is followed by another, the first thing must have caused the second. False cause fallacy is the reason behind the superstitious thinking.
learning-mind.com/logical-fallac…
4. Black or white
In this fallacy, an argument is made between two things without considering that there could be an alternative in between.
Often people use this to get others on their side by saying ‘you are either with me or against me‘.
In this fallacy, an argument is made between two things without considering that there could be an alternative in between.
Often people use this to get others on their side by saying ‘you are either with me or against me‘.
5. Bandwagon
This is one of the weirdest logical fallacies, but it happens all the time. It is the argument that the opinion of the majority is always right.
This is one of the weirdest logical fallacies, but it happens all the time. It is the argument that the opinion of the majority is always right.
6. Ad hominem
Latin for ‘to the man’ this fallacy is when a person attacks someone personally rather than attacking their argument.
Latin for ‘to the man’ this fallacy is when a person attacks someone personally rather than attacking their argument.
7. Anecdote
This fallacy is where because something happened to you, it will also happen to everyone else.
This fallacy is where because something happened to you, it will also happen to everyone else.
8. Appeal to ignorance
An appeal to ignorance is where you use the lack of information to support whatever argument you choose.
An appeal to ignorance is where you use the lack of information to support whatever argument you choose.
9. Guilt by association
In this fallacy, someone is presumed guilty of one offence simply because they are guilty of another or of associating with someone perceived as bad.
In this fallacy, someone is presumed guilty of one offence simply because they are guilty of another or of associating with someone perceived as bad.
10. Loaded question
In this fallacy, a question is asked in such a way that it leads the conversation in a certain direction.
Politicians & journalists sometimes use this fallacy. e.g. “So, are you always in favor of the government controlling our lives?”
In this fallacy, a question is asked in such a way that it leads the conversation in a certain direction.
Politicians & journalists sometimes use this fallacy. e.g. “So, are you always in favor of the government controlling our lives?”
HaHa! Ass Clowns vs Class Clowns
Who's funnier?
Who's funnier?
