List of common political tricks - disinfo tactics

Discussion in 'Freedom and Liberty' started by melbo, Dec 5, 2010.

  1. melbo

    melbo Hunter Gatherer Administrator Founding Member

    List of control and disinfo tactics. Not sure where I first found it.

    The first rule and last five (or six, depending on situation) rules are
    generally not directly within the ability of the traditional disinfo artist
    to apply. These rules are generally used more directly by those at the
    leadership, key players, or planning level of the organized crime syndicate
    we know as government.

    1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know,
    don't discuss it -- especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc.
    If it's not reported, it didn't happen, and you never have to deal with the

    2. Become incredulous and indignant./ Avoid discussing key issues and
    instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being
    critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as
    the "How dare you!" gambit.

    3. Create rumor mongers./ Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges,
    regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other
    derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method
    works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public
    can learn of the facts are through such "arguable rumors". If you can
    associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a
    "wild rumor" which can have no basis in fact.

    4. Use a straw man./ Find or create a seeming element of your opponent's
    argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and
    the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists
    based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation,
    or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their
    significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the
    charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of
    the real issues.

    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

    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

    8. Invoke authority./ Claim for yourself or associate yourself with
    authority and present your argument with enough "jargon" and "minutiae" to
    illustrate you are "one who knows", and simply say it isn't so without
    discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.

    9. Play Dumb./ No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered,
    avoid discussing issues with denial they have any credibility, make any
    sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a
    conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.

    10. Associate opponent charges with old news./ A derivative of the straw
    man usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make
    charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with. Where it
    can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it
    dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent
    charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually then be
    associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash
    without need to address current issues -- so much the better where the
    opponent is or was involved with the original source.

    11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions./ Using a minor matter or
    element of the facts, take the "high road" and "confess" with candor that
    some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made -- but that opponents have
    seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply
    greater criminalities which, "just isn't so." Others can reinforce this on
    your behalf, later. Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for
    "coming clean" and "owning up" to your mistakes without addressing more
    serious issues.

    12. Enigmas have no solution./ Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events
    surrounding the issue, and the multitude of players and events, paint the
    entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following
    the matter to begin to loose interest more quickly without having to address
    the actual issues.

    13. Alice in Wonderland Logic./ Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning
    backwards with an apparent deductive logic in a way that forbears any actual
    material fact.

    14. Demand complete solutions./ Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to
    solve the problem at hand completely, a ploy which works best for items
    qualifying for rule 10.

    15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions./ This requires creative
    thinking unless the act was planned with contingency conclusions in place.

    16. Vanishing evidence./ If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you
    won't have to address the issue.

    17. Change the subject./ Usually in connection with one of the other ploys
    listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or
    controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more
    manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can "argue"
    with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to
    avoid discussing more key issues.

    18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents./ If you can't do anything
    else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses
    which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and
    generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you
    avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their
    emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by
    then focusing on how "sensitive they are to criticism".

    19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs./ This is perhaps a
    variant of the "play dumb" rule. Regardless of what material may be
    presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and
    demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist,
    but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be
    safely destroyed or withheld, such as a shredded govt. study). In order to
    completely avoid discussing issues may require you to categorically deny and
    be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are
    acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other
    authorities have any meaning or relevance.

    20. False evidence./ Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues
    designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations as useful
    tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best
    when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the
    facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.

    21. Call a parliamentary committee study, Supreme court test, or other
    empowered investigative body.// Subvert the (process) to your benefit and
    effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without true public input. Once
    convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be acceptable to the
    committee/court as evidence when properly handled, damaging evidence can be
    discarded. For instance, if you own the judicial/committee officials, it can
    insure an official hearing hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is
    sealed, refused or buried and unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once
    a favorable verdict (usually, this technique is applied to find the govt.
    innocent, but it can also be used to obtain authority when seeking to extend
    govt. powers) is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed.

    22. Manufacture a new truth./ Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s),
    leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via
    scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes
    favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so

    23. Create bigger distractions./ If the above does not seem to be working
    to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of
    unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them
    as such) to distract the multitudes.

    24. Silence critics./ If the above methods do not prevail, consider
    removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the
    need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their meeting
    with an accident, an arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their
    character by release of damaging information, or merely by proper
    intimidation with blackmail or other threats.

    25. Vanish or seek less contentious employment./ If you are a key holder
    of dirty secrets or otherwise overly operationally illuminated and you think
    the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen. Find a
    cozy non controversial plumb in the public or private sector (secured with
    your party loyalty) and evade the heat your policies have created. Or if you
    really F****ED up a lot of people....vacate to a third world dictatorship
    that understands your brand of politics where your tax swollen bank account
    will allow you to live like a king.
  2. Brokor

    Brokor Live Free or Cry Moderator Site Supporter+++ Founding Member

    Great post. I still have several old books on political strategy/theory myself. All in storage...perhaps I should get around to dust them off.
  3. ghrit

    ghrit Bad company Administrator Founding Member

    Why bother hauling out the books? You can see all these tactics (and more) in daily use, if your eyes are open. Just watch any interviews with politicians when they are asked a "yes or no" question. Observe the "do you still beat your wife" type questioning in committee settings. Listen to the pomposity in speeches in congressional committee hearings. (They learn that crap in law school, all part of debating techniques for use in court.)
  4. Minuteman

    Minuteman Chaplain Moderator Founding Member

    It depends on what the meaning of the word is, is. :rolleyes:
  5. Disciple

    Disciple Monkey+

    Melbo; Excellant post........I'm going to print that out as soon as I get some more ink for my printer.......... I am a college student at an online school in Political science, and see this very thing quite often in homework assignments. I am trying to get to be Journalist. The reason I am going to school for poli sci. is the fact I want a good inside look at they're way of doing things in washington, I know all I have to do is read alot and and then publish what I find, but thats just a blog and you cant really get a decent paycheck from that. So I need to be able to get credentials,and to do that I have to have a degree........So I am learning a whole lott of great information to use against them. But I'm also giving myself a heavy dose of our founding fathers and the bible so I can keep my Head on straight.
  6. VHestin

    VHestin Farm Chick

    I wonder if career politicians even know the difference between truth and lies anymore, or it's just truth=impeachment and lies=(re)election.
  7. Whiteboy192004

    Whiteboy192004 Monkey+

    Awesome post melbo. Im.tired of hearing all this crapfrom our"leaders"
survivalmonkey SSL seal warrant canary