FrankRep
08-20-2009, 11:17 AM
Agent Provocateurs (http://www.jbs.org/jbs-news-feed/5247)
Art Thompson | John Birch Society (http://www.jbs.org/)
20 August 2009
A spate of incidences has crossed my desk ― actually my computer ― over the last couple of days that indicates we need to caution our members on the attempts of agent provocateurs and others who simply do not think through the ramifications of their actions on their ― and our ― ability to educate the public.
Our general task is to educate the public, especially opinion molders, not only about the problems we face as a nation, but about correct solutions. This is harder than it seems. The mainstream media is often awash in reportage and commentary that is encapsulated in just the right "spin" to promote big government "solutions." It's pervasive, so much so that when grassroots activists working for freedom and limited government approach new people, the message they convey sometimes can seem sometimes esoteric, sometimes unusual. Very often it is entirely new to the people we approach. We fight against the current, manufactured, zeitgeist. Consequently, we have to be wise in our approach to new people so that at the onset of our discourse we are taken seriously and not abruptly dismissed.
We've seen the problems we face amply demonstrated at the recent parties, rallies, and town hall meetings that have occurred. These have been a petri dish of examples demonstrating how such events are not the best means to effect change. We have yet to read a sign at these events that builds understanding among the uninformed. What they do is to capture the imagination and amusement of kindred spirits, but not those who need more information to break through the fog of confusion and simply make up their minds.
Much of what I see reminds me of the tactics of the Left ― without the favorable media coverage. And, it is the media coverage that makes or breaks a demonstration’s impact.
Step back for a moment and think of yourself as an average American who comes in contact with a person who is actively trying to stop the growth of government. You may be curious, perhaps a fence-sitter, leaning a little in either direction but really haven’t solidified your position. Mr. Activist approaches you with information; he is pleasant, well dressed and mannered, with materials that reflect the same image.
Your response to his approach will be entirely different than your response would be to an activist that approaches you wearing a mask of Obama as the Joker from the Batman movie. The problem is that these jokers seem to be the ones out front at the aforementioned events.
There can be no doubt that among the “friends” we see at such events are scattered among them enemies to make our movement look bad and "extremist," as well as others who never seem to understand how to sell themselves or their positions on the issues. The media will always seek these people out and it is these folks will represent the entire body of people in attendance and who are shown on the evening news. It will not matter if all other attendees are dressed professionally, the media will find that one person who fits the extremist label and focus on him.
For many years our movement has been the victim of individuals and organizations whose primary job it is to embarrass us. Often, it does not come from the Left, it comes from our own government in the form of “informants,” what the media calls government-hired agent provocateurs.
A recent example is the case of Hal Turner of New Jersey. Mr. Turner is in a great deal of legal trouble in two states. You may recall that he is the man who gave impetus to the rumor of the Amero ― the replacement for the dollar ― already being in circulation. Several people and organizations picked up on the story and had egg on their faces when it was shown the story was false.
Mr. Turner, as part of his defense in his legal battles, claims that he is an FBI-trained informant, trained to be an agent provocateur. The government will not confirm or deny his allegation.
But it brings to mind incidences over the past 45 years, cases where it was verified that such activity occurred. We are aware of two named operations and other unnamed initiatives where the government through one agency or another masterminded such operations against conservative movements.
As to the Left doing the same, within the last year we had an individual who wanted to write for our publications and websites. He said that while he disagreed with us on some points, he would be happy to write on subjects that we did agree on. It was a good thing that we had someone in headquarters who knew who he really was and his past history.
This man is now a cleric selling his views dressed as a man of religious intent. He was a terrorist in the 1960s and 1970s. The head of the FBI called him the most dangerous terrorist in the United States at that time. He probably thought that by now no one would have been around to figure out who he really was.
Of course, first it would be articles, then volunteering to make speeches at our events, then ingratiating himself with our people more and more until it blew up in our face. This man came out of an era when the communists asked their American terrorist leaders to change their image into men of the cloth: Christian, Jewish, and Muslim. Many did in order to be more successful. Most became Muslim to sell Islamic terrorism.
This and many other examples abound. The people involved will do everything they can to get us to do things that neutralize our effectiveness with our educational-action agenda.
The short of it is this: We have to be very careful how we come across to those who may not agree with us. After all, we are trying to convince them to join us. When we are approached to do something in a public venue that may seem a little out of sorts, think it through and ask questions: “What will be the impact on the general public? Will it help us to sell our cause, or turn people off?”
We all want innovation and out-of-the-box thinking, but be cautious.
SOURCE:
http://www.jbs.org/jbs-news-feed/5247
Art Thompson | John Birch Society (http://www.jbs.org/)
20 August 2009
A spate of incidences has crossed my desk ― actually my computer ― over the last couple of days that indicates we need to caution our members on the attempts of agent provocateurs and others who simply do not think through the ramifications of their actions on their ― and our ― ability to educate the public.
Our general task is to educate the public, especially opinion molders, not only about the problems we face as a nation, but about correct solutions. This is harder than it seems. The mainstream media is often awash in reportage and commentary that is encapsulated in just the right "spin" to promote big government "solutions." It's pervasive, so much so that when grassroots activists working for freedom and limited government approach new people, the message they convey sometimes can seem sometimes esoteric, sometimes unusual. Very often it is entirely new to the people we approach. We fight against the current, manufactured, zeitgeist. Consequently, we have to be wise in our approach to new people so that at the onset of our discourse we are taken seriously and not abruptly dismissed.
We've seen the problems we face amply demonstrated at the recent parties, rallies, and town hall meetings that have occurred. These have been a petri dish of examples demonstrating how such events are not the best means to effect change. We have yet to read a sign at these events that builds understanding among the uninformed. What they do is to capture the imagination and amusement of kindred spirits, but not those who need more information to break through the fog of confusion and simply make up their minds.
Much of what I see reminds me of the tactics of the Left ― without the favorable media coverage. And, it is the media coverage that makes or breaks a demonstration’s impact.
Step back for a moment and think of yourself as an average American who comes in contact with a person who is actively trying to stop the growth of government. You may be curious, perhaps a fence-sitter, leaning a little in either direction but really haven’t solidified your position. Mr. Activist approaches you with information; he is pleasant, well dressed and mannered, with materials that reflect the same image.
Your response to his approach will be entirely different than your response would be to an activist that approaches you wearing a mask of Obama as the Joker from the Batman movie. The problem is that these jokers seem to be the ones out front at the aforementioned events.
There can be no doubt that among the “friends” we see at such events are scattered among them enemies to make our movement look bad and "extremist," as well as others who never seem to understand how to sell themselves or their positions on the issues. The media will always seek these people out and it is these folks will represent the entire body of people in attendance and who are shown on the evening news. It will not matter if all other attendees are dressed professionally, the media will find that one person who fits the extremist label and focus on him.
For many years our movement has been the victim of individuals and organizations whose primary job it is to embarrass us. Often, it does not come from the Left, it comes from our own government in the form of “informants,” what the media calls government-hired agent provocateurs.
A recent example is the case of Hal Turner of New Jersey. Mr. Turner is in a great deal of legal trouble in two states. You may recall that he is the man who gave impetus to the rumor of the Amero ― the replacement for the dollar ― already being in circulation. Several people and organizations picked up on the story and had egg on their faces when it was shown the story was false.
Mr. Turner, as part of his defense in his legal battles, claims that he is an FBI-trained informant, trained to be an agent provocateur. The government will not confirm or deny his allegation.
But it brings to mind incidences over the past 45 years, cases where it was verified that such activity occurred. We are aware of two named operations and other unnamed initiatives where the government through one agency or another masterminded such operations against conservative movements.
As to the Left doing the same, within the last year we had an individual who wanted to write for our publications and websites. He said that while he disagreed with us on some points, he would be happy to write on subjects that we did agree on. It was a good thing that we had someone in headquarters who knew who he really was and his past history.
This man is now a cleric selling his views dressed as a man of religious intent. He was a terrorist in the 1960s and 1970s. The head of the FBI called him the most dangerous terrorist in the United States at that time. He probably thought that by now no one would have been around to figure out who he really was.
Of course, first it would be articles, then volunteering to make speeches at our events, then ingratiating himself with our people more and more until it blew up in our face. This man came out of an era when the communists asked their American terrorist leaders to change their image into men of the cloth: Christian, Jewish, and Muslim. Many did in order to be more successful. Most became Muslim to sell Islamic terrorism.
This and many other examples abound. The people involved will do everything they can to get us to do things that neutralize our effectiveness with our educational-action agenda.
The short of it is this: We have to be very careful how we come across to those who may not agree with us. After all, we are trying to convince them to join us. When we are approached to do something in a public venue that may seem a little out of sorts, think it through and ask questions: “What will be the impact on the general public? Will it help us to sell our cause, or turn people off?”
We all want innovation and out-of-the-box thinking, but be cautious.
SOURCE:
http://www.jbs.org/jbs-news-feed/5247