PDA

View Full Version : Things to know...




Seth M.
06-06-2007, 10:03 PM
From debates where you know your opponent to forums and news groups such as this where you do not, it is necessary to understand these seven traits. The better one understands behavior related to truth suppression and debate the better one can discern what actions are necessary to triumph over their opponent. :)

---
Seven traits of the disinformationalist

1) Avoidance. They never actually discuss issues head-on or provide constructive input, generally avoiding citation of references or credentials. Rather, they merely imply this, that, and the other. Virtually everything about their presentation implies their authority and expert knowledge in the matter without any further justification for credibility.

2) Selectivity. They tend to pick and choose opponents carefully, either applying the hit-and-run approach against mere commentators supportive of opponents, or focusing heavier attacks on key opponents who are known to directly address issues. Should a commentator become argumentative with any success, the focus will shift to include the commentator as well.

3) Coincidental. They tend to surface suddenly and somewhat coincidentally with a new controversial topic with no clear prior record of participation in general discussions in the particular public arena involved. They likewise tend to vanish once the topic is no longer of general concern. They were likely directed or elected to be there for a reason, and vanish with the reason.

4) Teamwork. They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams. Of course, this can happen naturally in any public forum, but there will likely be an ongoing pattern of frequent exchanges of this sort where professionals are involved. Sometimes one of the players will infiltrate the opponent camp to become a source for straw man or other tactics designed to dilute opponent presentation strength.

5) Anti-conspiratorial. They almost always have disdain for 'conspiracy theorists' and, usually, for those who in any way believe JFK was not killed by LHO. Ask yourself why, if they hold such disdain for conspiracy theorists, do they focus on defending a single topic discussed in a news group or forum focusing on conspiracies? One might think they would either be trying to make fools of everyone on every topic, or simply ignore the group they hold in such disdain.Or, one might more rightly conclude they have an ulterior motive for their actions in going out of their way to focus as they do.

6) Artificial Emotions. An odd kind of 'artificial' emotionalism and an unusually thick skin -- an ability to persevere and persist even in the face of overwhelming criticism and nonacceptance. This likely stems from intelligence community training that, no matter how condemning the evidence, deny everything, and never become emotionally involved or reactive. The net result for a disinfo artist is that emotions can seem artificial. Most people, if responding in anger, for instance, will express their animosity throughout their rebuttal. But disinfo types usually have trouble maintaining the 'image' and are hot and cold with respect to pretended emotions and their usually more calm or unemotional communications style. It's just a job, and they often seem unable to 'act their role in character' as well in a communications medium as they might be able in a real face-to-face conversation/confrontation. You might have outright rage and indignation one moment, ho-hum the next, and more anger later -- an emotional yo-yo. With respect to being thick-skinned, no amount of criticism will deter them from doing their job, and they will generally continue their old disinfo patterns without any adjustments to criticisms of how obvious it is that they play that game -- where a more rational individual who truly cares what others think might seek to improve their communications style, substance, and so forth, or simply give up.

7) Inconsistent. There is also a tendency to make mistakes which betray their true self/motives. This may stem from not really knowing their topic, or it may be somewhat 'freudian', so to speak, in that perhaps they really root for the side of truth deep within.

---

pEace

RonPaul4President
06-06-2007, 10:37 PM
What about the infamous, "Demonize your Enemies"? A favorite trick of the KKKowards.

Brandybuck
06-06-2007, 10:48 PM
Anti-conspiratorial
So in other words, if someone doesn't believe in a conspiracy, they're "disinformationalists"? Nice little coccoon you're constructing there...

Seth M.
06-06-2007, 11:42 PM
So in other words, if someone doesn't believe in a conspiracy, they're "disinformationalists"? Nice little coccoon you're constructing there...

Ive highlighted in bold youre words... you have misinterpreted the info

and to answer you NO

Now in argument or debate if a person presumes that there is no such thing as a conspiracy then.. that person is highly suspect of suppressing the truth and/or being dishonest in their position.

X_805
06-06-2007, 11:46 PM
I do not think that very many people truly believe that they are lying. They just don't know the truth. No one really does.

Seth M.
06-06-2007, 11:56 PM
I do not think that very many people truly believe that they are lying. They just don't know the truth. No one really does.


who is they? and I get your point.. it is true that no one knows all truth.. or is it? :D

X_805
06-07-2007, 12:00 AM
who is they? and I get your point.. it is true that no one knows all truth.. or is it? :D

They is everyone that anyone might disagree with. Is it true that no one knows all truth? Well, if you're a Christian... but we won't go there. :p

Not every single political or economic system in all its variations has ever been tried nor will they. So I don't think we'll ever know exactly which ones work. We can only base it off of what we have had in the past. And that's just economics and politics.