See other Sports Articles
Title: Bot Tactics
Source:
El Pee/FR
URL Source: http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a394fc1cf0ba9.htm
Published: Feb 21, 2005
Author: Becky Saunders/metabird1
Post Date: 2005-02-21 08:16:52 by crack monkey
Keywords: Tactics
Views: 258
Comments: 16
Just found this on my drive. Becky posted it in the biker bar last summer - at the same time as the big Goldi thread on FU. I think the thread pissed him off and this is his way of showing he's on top of us. Be that as it may, it explains a lot about what you see in the bots. Title: 25 Rules of Disinformation Source: TOS URL Source: http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a394fc1cf0ba9.htm Published: Jun 20, 2000 Author: metalbird1 Post Date: 2004-09-13 04:56:53 by Becket Saunders 3 Comments Note: 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 criminal conspiracy or conspiracy to cover up. 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 issues. 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 viewpoint. 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 defensive. 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 them 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 crime 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 crime 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 crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place. 16. Vanishing evidence and witnesses. 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 murder weapon). 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 Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed an unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict (usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim) 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 authoritatively. 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 death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by proper intimidation with blackmail or other threats. 25. Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen. FAIR USE NOTICE: The above may be copyrighted material, and the use of it on LibertyPost.org may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available on a non-profit basis for educational and discussion purposes only. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 USC § 107. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Post Comment Note: It appears this article may belong in category "Crime & Corruption" (score 15, matching words crime, criminal, grand jury, murder, evidence), Consider the reasons offered for posting from ajazeera. A propaganda organ of the ME, which spreads snuff films and lies from our enemies-to encourage the death of our troops, destroy their espirit de corps-thier and our morale. Consider. Should a source of toxic propaganda and snuff films be used as a 'news' source-and proudly-claiming it is balance, free speach, etc. Becket Saunders posted on 2004-09-13 05:11:40 ET Reply Trace www.cmyoung.com/PDF/Propaganda_And_Fahrenheit.pdf Psychological Operations in Guerilla Warfare http://www.parascope.com/ds/1096/psyops.htm Becket Saunders posted on 2004-09-13 05:13:31 ET Reply Trace
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest 1. To: All (#0)
2. To: All (#0) Propaganda Tactics and Fahrenheit 9/11 Dr. Kelton Rhoads Draft of...
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: All (#0)
Identify which rules are regularly employed by boteye.
And what most people do not understand.. is that it is futile to try to 'argue' with these people.. totally pointless they are propagandists and agents..
Identify which rules are regularly employed by boteye. Is it ALL but #25? 25. Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen. He vacates on the weekends & holidays, but it's not his fault that his local library has M-F hours only.
If he'd just do #25, LP would look like a ghost town.
palo's tactics are completely different: 1. Ignore all unpleasant facts and quotes. 2. Be pleasant always, with everyone. 3. Be especially syrupy pleasant with those you disagree. 3. Upper case letters are too harsh, use only the pleasant lower case. 4. Send pleasant flower bouquets whenever it seems like the pleasant thing to do. 5. Be as contradictory, illogical and uninformed as possible, while still being pleasant.
Awww, hell, I like palo. She's maddening sometimes, but I see her like a bunny, if rabbits dropped a whole lot of acid, and smoked baggies of weed (their little paws and lack of opposable thumbs preclude rolling blunts, I'd guess). I always put the lower case thing down to some sort of homage piece to e e cummings? Maybe it's just the drugs. Or maybe it's that bots don't like "Shift" because it implies change? :D
When someone obfuscates as much as she is doing lately, she is no longer being honest or funny. She said the same thing about Gannon as she did about Bernie Kerik, that they have done nothing wrong. And, of course, she supports Bush.
I know...she wasn't always thus, or at least to that degree. I don't even read LP anymore. There are a couple of people I still like and we get into arguments via email over them continuing to stay there.
Excellent list. Please add: 6. Try not to use articles such as a, an, or the. Avoidance of articles makes you sound foreign, and that makes you sound worldly and sophisticated even when you have field mice nesting in your printer.
LOL!! The field mice was a very nice touch.
rodents are
LOL! An almost byeltsinesk palo, only better - wonderful. They only wish they could made that much sense.
byeltsin is so sweet
In many of my posts, I’ve accused certain ‘personalities’ of being “PSYOPS [Psychological Operations] technicians.” However, a variety of E-mails have asked the question, “How can you be sure – or suspect – that PSYOPS are being conducted?” From my own observations & research, the patterns of the personalities that I address are evident. 1. The ‘personalities’ are attached to only incredibly sensitive issues. 2. They get instantly “personal.” 3. They are detached from "normal" standards of morality, such as the traditional American justice standards - including the Constitutional Bill of Rights. 4. They ONLY support the 'government,' regardless of any practical, compelling or moral positions to the contrary. It gets more complex from there. However, the underlying issue goes to the question of the casual poster, “How would I recognize a “PSYOPS Technician? How does it work?” Another valid question is, ”How would you distinguish a ‘good-guy’ from a ‘bad-guy?’” The simple answer to that question is that the ‘good-guy’ seeks to educate, discuss, debate or illustrate – with obviously noble intent. The ‘good-guy’ is anchored to admirable principles or causes. Condemning the burning of Mt. Carmel or James Beck, versus a serious attempt to arrest them/him; speaks to an attachment to “American Justice.” Approving or cheering the burning of them/him – without any sincere remorse - is self-serving barbarism. The ‘bad-guy’ is uniquely a ‘destroyer.’ “Perception Control = Emotional Control = Mind Control” Six Methods for Online Perception Control 1. Ensure that the ‘targeted’ person is unaware of what is going on and how she or he is being manipulated/changed – one step at a time – or by who. Keep the person on the edge of the question, “What do you want me to say?” Ensure that the ‘acceptance/approval’ steps are easy to take. Never issue a ‘broad-brush’ challenge for changed thoughts & attitudes. 2. Control the person’s social environment; especially control the person’s time. Online participants should be required to answer detailed questions, with the questions designed to “frame” a controlled conclusion – unknown to the unwitting participant. Persist in the questions – to the last detail, until the trap is sprung, or the person makes self-defeating mistakes/conclusions. The questions should be framed toward a later goal of quoting the person – “Well, you previously said ‘X,’ are you changing your mind?” 3. Systematically effect a sense of powerlessness in the person. Two attacking is better than one. (Never allow it to appear that an ‘attack group’ is in operation, versus creating the impression that “All good people think like ___.” Task the person’s physical, mental and emotional energy. Wear the person down, via never-ending questions, challenges or innuendos - or a variety of selected psychological techniques. Focus, so as to trigger the long-term EMOTIONAL element of “shame.” (Implied: “A truly GOOD person wouldn’t think/speak like that.” Personal image/credibility/integrity is the first-up line of attack.) 4. Manipulate any system of rewards, punishments and/or experiences [character enhancement or attack] in such a way as to inhibit any behavior that reflects the person’s desired social identity. Online manipulation goes to the proposition, “IF you imitate ME/US, I’ll quit saying bad things about you.” In the presumptions of the human experience, ‘seniority’ implies authority or association WITH authority and a capability to effect harm. Breach any online ‘friendships.’ 5. Manipulate a system of rewards, punishments, and experiences in order to promote the ‘desired’ group’s ideology, norms or belief system and group-approved behaviors. “You can’t say that!” “You REALLY should learn how to think.” Tout the experiences of those who ‘complied.’ 6. Inject/imply a closed system of logic and an authoritarian structure, which is oriented around ‘no feedback’ and refuses to be modified except by perceived leadership approval or executive order. “I really hope you don’t actually believe that could be TRUE!” “That question has already been answered.” “The issue is self-evident; let’s move on.” The world of "Information Warfare" and "PSYOPS" is complex and detailed. Most articles on the Internet are oriented around military themes. However, their application to the domestic population is a matter of altering a handful of terms & environmental arenas. The U.S. military - including the National Guard and Reserves - are trained at riot control. Delta Force was advising - at a minimum - at WACO and the Seattle WTO conference. It's simply naive to think that the domestic U.S. population is exempt from such issues as "Information Warfare" and PSYOPS" Just remember the volumes of headline articles asserting that Saddam had literally 'tons' of WMDs. Then note the reality and the post-war exposure of the lies which were successfully sold to the public - and Congress. The key revelation as to whether PSYOPS is present, versus debate or education, is the obvious element of "intent;" who/what benefits? However, that "intent" is not always evident. For example, the WMD debate draws attention away from the clear War Crimes in the corrupt invasion of both of Afghanistan and Iraq. The "16 words" drew attention away from the more damnable and undeniable lies of the ENTIRE Bush team. The focus also limited the casual observer's attention to the single speech. The harsh reality is that the effect of the lies and the associated personalities had a terrible effect on all of humanity. The clear suggestion is that the "campaign" is just getting started! THE METHODOLOGY WORKS!
Whew! Thank you. Just in time. I could feel the hot dry desert air on my face and feel the nibbling of the field mice at my nightgown, it was that close!
A Quiz:
#2. To: crack monkey (#1)
#3. To: crack monkey (#1)
A Quiz:
#4. To: robin (#3)
#5. To: Samuel Gray (#4)
#6. To: robin (#5)
Upper case letters are too harsh, use only the pleasant lower case.
#7. To: Samuel Gray (#6)
#8. To: robin (#7)
#9. To: robin (#5)
#10. To: h-a-l-f-w-i-t-t (#9)
#11. To: robin (#10)
God's little creatures
I have adopted several neocons
they live in my printer
my cat is democrat
and wants to eat
them
#12. To: h-a-l-f-w-i-t-t (#11)
#13. To: robin (#12)
i love being like him
russia is very cold place though
i hope byeltsin is warm
thank you robin
love, What am I DOING?? I've got to snap out of it!
#14. To: crack monkey (#0)
#15. To: h-a-l-f-w-i-t-t (#13)
#16. To: robin (#15)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest