Monday, November 14, 2011

INFILTRATING BLOGS, INFILTRATING COUNTRIES


1. Who controls the people-power demonstrations?

Who controls the 'anti-war' groups?

Who is sending annoying comments to your blog?

http://twelfthbough.blogspot.com/ (facilitate this) reveals the methods of the bad guys:

"Slowly penetrate, infiltrate existing institutions like churches, unions, political parties, websites, blogs.

"Subtly gain influence within these organizations and then introduce change from that platform.

"Fully encourage people in their discontents and divisions.

"Use loaded questions to manipulate and exploit people to the pre-set agenda. Fan their tensions as much as possible.

"The organizer must draw an attack onto himself which then cements his credibility with the people... "

Reportedly, Tripoli fell easily to the 'rebels' after 'CIA asset' Gaddafi was allowed to retire to Zimbabwe. Reportedly the CIA had fully infiltrated the Gaddafi regime.

"Using the 'divide and conquer' technique, he/she manipulates one group opinion against the other.

"This is accomplished by manipulating those who are out of step to appear 'ridiculous, unknowledgeable, inarticulate, or dogmatic.'

"He/she wants certain members of the group to become angry, thereby forcing tensions to accelerate."

Read the full explanation here: facilitate this

Website for this image

2. Who is pulling the strings?

National governments serve global corporations, not national interests? - The New American World Order: How It Works

The Banksters are "Stealing Governments": Mario Monti, Italy's New PM

Italy and Greece: Rule by the Bankers

Website for this image

3. Power grows out of the barrel of a gun?

A New, Permanent Presence of U.S. Troops on Australian Soil

Indonesia wants answers on US military plans

Towards a Broader Eurasian Military Alliance? Tehran Applies for Full Membership in the SCO

16 comments:

the truth hurts said...

re 'infiltrating blogs', great article, but it didn't quite make the point that the reason these dark arts are truly effective is that nearly everyone prefers to be led versus being a leader themselves - original ideas are confined to the few. Sadly, I think people generally sleep better at night in the comfort of their own submission.

A. Peasant said...

thanks for the link over Aan.

Anonymous said...

Psychopath infiltration is everywhere and everyone knows it. From blog trolls to puppet governments, these are examples of psychopaths using divisive social engineering tactics because they work. The difference is the scale of their attacks. The axis of devastation depends on the weakness of their 'target' and the psychopath goal. We read about the devasation as kids who committed suicide due to cyber bullying right to the atrocities witnessed in Libya. Or, consider whistleblower Christopher Shale who was murdered because of shale oil.

Anonymous said...

"re 'infiltrating blogs', great article, but it didn't quite make the point that the reason these dark arts are truly effective is that nearly everyone prefers to be led versus being a leader themselves - original ideas are confined to the few."

Yes.

And, this is the key to manipulation of mass opinion (from the top down), yet maintaining the illusion that the movement is grass-roots (it may have started out as a true grass-roots movement, but is fast re-directed from above).

All sides (successfully) use this dynamic. The establishment has tentacles into all large political movements or soon will establish tentacles, if the movement is truly new and organic (grass-roots).

It is particularly useful for gaining control of unfocussed movements.

An example: In America, the "Tea Party" movement started out as grass-roots protest against Federal Government overspending and overcommitment. Tax rates were a secondary concern.

Then the establishment set up (or already had set up) local chapters supposedly empowering the organic Tea Party movement, but with leaders (facilitators) that wanted "lower taxes" the primary and real objective.

Limiting government scope, size, and spending became secondary and was sacrificed on the alter of "no tax increases", period.

Possible compromise on tax levels (thus increasing "buy-in" across a broader political spectrum) to further deficit reduction and limit scope and size of government was forbidden.

And the original grass-roots agenda of limiting government was frustrated.

Just as the elite establishment wanted all along (blocking tax increases as the ultimate aim).

CanSpeccy said...

Excellent points.

Concerning the Internet, people need to understand the likely scale of efforts to manipulate opinion. During WW1, the US Government created the Committee on Public Information, which enrolled 75,000 people as "volunteers who spoke about the war at social events for an ideal length of four minutes, considering that the average human attention span was judged at the time to be four minutes. They covered the draft, rationing, war bond drives, victory gardens and why America was fighting. It was estimated that by the end of the war, they had made more than 7.5 million speeches to 314 million people in 5,200 communities."

Is it likely that the effort deployed today by various governments to influence opinion via intervention in online discussions, creation of supposedly independent websites, etc., is today any smaller? And if it is as great or greater, what is the meaning of "free speech"?

Do the true independents achieve much more than to provide cover to the propagandists?

Anonymous said...

Most alternative news sites are actually controlled opposition with the "exalted leader" weeding out information that does not agree with his own agenda, no matter what factual evidence is presented. Ridicule is the standard procedure against anyone offering undesired views on any controlled subject. Anyone standing his ground on a controversial subject is simply banned. Eventually only compliant supporters remain to give a consensous, which it really isn't. None of the supporters even conceive that they are submitting to a type of brain-washing being done by the facilitator in charge. Loyalty to the exalted controller becomes more important than seeking out reliable information. If questioning presented information is not allowed, then one can presume the controller is following an agenda dictated from higher powers.

aferrismoon said...

Deer Aang

Why do people who read your blog and think you're less than credible [ i.e.: credible enough to keep reading] keep reading.

Considering the range of topic , as well as underlying messages, one may consider 'this blog' as articulating, rather than 'message-driven'.

True or not taking the blog as a 'flow' within MSM programming may prove of more import than hook-line and sinking [i.e.: Aangirfan [or others] as gospel]

cheeers

nobody said...

Good comments. And thanks CanSpeccy, funnily enough a blogstress mate of mine and I are in this precise discussion. I shall forward her your thing.

ciao ciao

n

CanSpeccy said...

Anon,

Excellent account of how a sycophantic following of non-dissenters is created.

The moral is question everything, especially blogs where dissident views are ridiculed or deleted.

Anonymous said...

When I was a kid, I read Vance Packard's The People Shapers.

Since then, I've wondered what drives people to treat their fellow man as an object rather than as a person alike to themselves.

What is up with these RAND researchers who invent things like the Delphi techniques as a means of manipulating their fellow man? Is it just a job to them or is there more to it?

I suspect there is something seriously amiss with such people. They lack empathy, so they cover up and project onto their fellow man by treating him as an automaton. Their research says more about them than it does about their subjects.

Empathy is the essence of the human soul.

A man with no empathy is a man with no soul.

---
"After a while he almost forgot his plans and obsessions. And indeed might've done so altogether."

Anonymous said...

Speaking of controlled opposition wibsites:

One that has drawn my attention, Veterans Today, more specifically, the "Senior Editor" Gordon Duff (other columnists at Veterans Today are not controlled opposition, but Duff is the star of the website and his opinion pieces get the bulk of reads at the website).

Ridicule of unwanted comments without rebutting substantive objections? Yes.

Deleting comments that contradict the agenda of Gordon Duff? Often, but not always.

Gordon Duff supported NATO bombing campaign in Libya and often suppressed comments that disagreed with his position.

His motive?

Hard to say.

But Libya certainly was a "controlled subject".

Everybody has a motive, aka, reason, for their position or actions.

But discerning the motive of another individual is often hard to do unless the individual comes out and tell you his real motive (false motives that sound honorable are often stated as opposed to motives that others would find repulsive or unacceptable).

Aangirfan, I'm sorry if pointing out one individual is inappropriate, but this individual, Gordon Duff, has all the hallmarks discussed in this post and he does get some attention in the alternative media.

Although, Gordon Duff offered this opinion of other alternative media: If you were against taking out Gaddafi then you were a moron or fake alternative media.

I suspect, but can not prove that Duff is sheep-dipped: He supports 911 truth, but tends to offer support to disinformation like "no planes" hit WTC 1 and 2.

Again, sorry to point to an individual, but Duff is a burr under my saddle and is a case study in "controlled opposition" in my opinion.

Anonymous said...

Why Gillard and Rudd do whatever the Yanks ask:

http://deanhenderson.wordpress.com/2010/06/25/mining-cartel-topples-aussie-government-again/

---
"That's a lovely accent you have. New Jersey?"

Honk Bonk Man said...

The HouseResourceOrg channel in the YouTube just had a hearing about the Web as Weapon: Internet as a Tool for Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism - Parts 1 and 2.

They will be sending a new bill to Obongo's office to censure the Internet.

It is a new bill being created by the "chosen ones", as usual. It is coming...

Fungus FitzJuggler III said...

The truth hurts is perfectly correct.

Many of the mobs are only going to improve after a testing or two, so the Old Order had better not overplay their hand.

What does not kill ..... I think that the resources being deployed may be paid for by the old order but used in fact to promote the new new world order, so to speak.

There are some powerful radar installations aside from Pine Gap, in Australia, Oz, that see OTH.

Carrying out the white mans burden, bringing cheap illicit drugs to a gang near you.

Fungus FitzJuggler III said...

Great comments, all!

However, we also adapt and become adepts at thinking for ourselves? 5% of humanity can lead in some way. The rest are sheep. That is the human condition.

What we need are competent leaders who do not corrupt their office. I prefer picking politicians in the same way as we do jurors: no professionals and all serve once for a short time!

Anonymous said...

I shouldn't be laughing but this is so accurate! I get my"News" from 3-4 well known alternative(cough!)sites with forums and been watching this play out. Polarised arguments(nasty ones too),dumbing down,constant quoting msm,sleepers become agitprop-agators,a constant 3 day delay of important stories but immediate relaying of nonsense,strategic banning ah you know what I mean! I actually find the msm MORE informative for really dangerous subjects at the moment. Disgusting but there you go. I may be cynical but the sites seem to be perfectly content as long as the coffers are filled and they don't get busted for it. I'm convinced we're Chinese Firewalled already since I'm finding 10% of the News items relevant to my studies to say 2 years ago. They might as well pull that Internet Switch for all we're getting! Sad but True...

 
Site Meter