PDA

View Full Version : Cognitive Infiltration of the conspiracy forums



stardustaquarion
26th April 2010, 19:36
Interesting video, I guess most of us know that there is an effort to disband and misinform groups that are seeking thruth

We have always needed discernment in this planet but as the going gets tougher and 2012 get nearer, discernment is no loger a luxury is a vital necessity

New laws and regulationg in Australia and UK http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=18597 that will restric the internet. Surely other countries will follow

Specific strategies include harrasment and other nasty strategies: 25 ways to suppress the truth

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, it may be required that 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.
http://www.whale.to/m/disin.html

Cognitive infiltration is just another strategy

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/u4udQ_VB0xs&hl=en_GB&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/u4udQ_VB0xs&hl=en_GB&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

So if it was a maze before well...now it is a "triple decker" maze

:confused:

Hiram
26th April 2010, 20:01
I am very aware of this happening...as I hope everyone else is. The best way to combat this sort of "cognitive attack" when you encounter it is to absolutely do not allow yourself to be attached to any outcome from what you post. Think about that for a moment.

If what you post elicits a angry or skeptical response from someone...address the issue directly and calmly once or twice. If they still insist on goading the argument...simply move on and no longer engage them. This is not easy to do, but it really works.

A great example of this occurring was from the old forum. People would post something and then take great offense when people on the forum didn't take it seriously or didn't believe them. The point is...... WHO CARES? Its not a trial...the other folks are not a jury.

You simply share for those who wish to hear. No more, no less. What's that? You think I'm full of nonsense? Hmmm. Thanks for sharing your opinion. Moving On....."

Do not forget WHY EXACTLY you are here, on this forum. You don't need everyone to believe you. You're just sharing.

Do you see how it is your very attachment to some form of outcome when you share info, that TPTB might use against you? If you have no expectation...then they are pretty much powerless. Its a great way to approach these topics, and if you use this technique, there is nothing to fear from these cretins who use this strategy.

rosie
26th April 2010, 20:06
More on this:

Cass Sunstein is President Obama's Harvard Law School friend, and recently appointed Administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.

In a recent scholarly article, he and coauthor Adrian Vermeule take up the question of "Conspiracy Theories: Causes and Cures." (J. Political Philosophy, 7 (2009), 202-227). This is a man with the president's ear. This is a man who would process information and regulate things. What does he here propose?

[W]e suggest a distinctive tactic for breaking up the hard core of extremists who supply conspiracy theories: cognitive infiltration of extremist groups, whereby government agents or their allies (acting either virtually or in real space, and either openly or anonymously) will undermine the crippled epistemology of believers by planting doubts about the theories and stylized facts that circulate within such groups, thereby introducing beneficial cognitive diversity. (Page 219.)

Read this paragraph again. Unpack it. Work your way through the language and the intent. Imagine the application. What do we learn?

* It is "extremists" who "supply" "conspiracy theories."
* Their "hard core" must be "broken up" with distinctive tactics. What tactics?
* "Infiltration" ("cognitive") of groups with questions about official explanations or obfuscations or lies. Who is to infiltrate?
* "Government agents or their allies," virtually (i.e. on-line) or in "real-space" (as at meetings), and "either openly or anonymously," though "infiltration" would imply the latter. What will these agents do?
* Undermine "crippled epistemology" -- one's theory and technique of knowledge. How will they do this?
* By "planting doubts" which will "circulate." Will these doubts be beneficial?
* Certainly. Because they will introduce "cognitive diversity."

Put into English, what Sunstein is proposing is government infiltration of groups opposing prevailing policy. Palestinian Liberation? 9/11 Truth? Anti-nuclear power? Stop the wars? End the Fed? Support Nader? Eat the Rich?

It's easy to destroy groups with "cognitive diversity." You just take up meeting time with arguments to the point where people don't come back. You make protest signs which alienate 90% of colleagues. You demand revolutionary violence from pacifist groups.
Link to articale: http://axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/Article_58123.shtml

perfectresonance
26th April 2010, 20:20
(APPLAUSE)

Nice post Hiram. If we all followed those rules things would settle down nicely.

Give yourself a treat. You've earned it :)

perfectresonance
26th April 2010, 20:21
(deleted message) having some browser problems - sorry

Hiram
26th April 2010, 20:26
Thanks Rosie for putting this into layman's terms for all of us to grasp.

These agent's provacateurs might be good, but they are ineffective at tackling certain subjects, and with certain individuals. Their weak spot is that they are trying to make something happen.

In person: You let them know that your happy to hear their opinion, and what they have to share, but taking up more than one's alotted time is self-indulgent. Thats a kind way of letting them know that endlessly repeated arguments will not be tolerated.

On Line: Again, thanking someone for sharing their opinion ad their perspective is the correct approach. Stay focused on the topic at hand, and eventually, if their activity doesn't seem to be ending, cease interactions with them completely. Disregard attempts to GOAD you. You will not win an argument, and you can't win an argument online. Even if you try it...you'll end up feeling drained and wasted later on. Its not worth it.

You can't fight cointelpro by fighting them.....you have to outsmart them--and use their own energy against them. Psychological Tai-Chi.

frank samuel
26th April 2010, 20:28
Is great advice , many people love to post their opinions about every single subject sometimes the words are rough and aggressive, some people take offense while others just remain calm. It is impossible to be well informed on every single subject so often our opinions suffer from the foot in mouth disease , I know that I can raise my hand as taken part in the foot in mouth disease in AV1. Now learning my lesson it has help me to become a little more mature. I am here to help in any way I can as much as possible I try to contribute in the areas that I have a bit of experience. I suggest to pause and reread the post before getting into a clash of titans debate, for some they love a good argument for others it just leaves you with a unhappy feeling in the pit of your stomach. I am for freedom of speech but I also respect the fact that everyone is entitle to his or her opinion irregardless of whether I agree with it or not.

Blessings to all...:yield::peace::crazy_pilot::wub:

Hiram
26th April 2010, 20:30
(APPLAUSE)

Nice post Hiram. If we all followed those rules things would settle down nicely.

Give yourself a treat. You've earned it :)

Thanks Pefectres! I've enjoyed reading your reasoned and well thought-out posts as well. Youre fair...with a hint of sarcastic mirth. A skeptical mind. I'm glad your here, and your voice is one of the notes that is played here.

K626
26th April 2010, 23:25
There are definitely some on here. I will sense them and vapourise so no worries. :cool:

K

Hiram
26th April 2010, 23:56
K626::eek::thumb:

HORIZONS
27th April 2010, 01:18
Good thread - thanks for the information - will be more cognitive of my emotional fire :flame:

stardustaquarion
27th April 2010, 10:30
I am very aware of this happening...as I hope everyone else is. The best way to combat this sort of "cognitive attack" when you encounter it is to absolutely do not allow yourself to be attached to any outcome from what you post. Think about that for a moment.

If what you post elicits a angry or skeptical response from someone...address the issue directly and calmly once or twice. If they still insist on goading the argument...simply move on and no longer engage them. This is not easy to do, but it really works.

A great example of this occurring was from the old forum. People would post something and then take great offense when people on the forum didn't take it seriously or didn't believe them. The point is...... WHO CARES? Its not a trial...the other folks are not a jury.

You simply share for those who wish to hear. No more, no less. What's that? You think I'm full of nonsense? Hmmm. Thanks for sharing your opinion. Moving On....."

Do not forget WHY EXACTLY you are here, on this forum. You don't need everyone to believe you. You're just sharing.

Do you see how it is your very attachment to some form of outcome when you share info, that TPTB might use against you? If you have no expectation...then they are pretty much powerless. Its a great way to approach these topics, and if you use this technique, there is nothing to fear from these cretins who use this strategy.

Very wise words Hiram, thank you

http://trompe-loeil.co.uk/Pics/WiseOldOwl.jpg

=[Post Update]=


More on this:

Cass Sunstein is President Obama's Harvard Law School friend, and recently appointed Administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.

In a recent scholarly article, he and coauthor Adrian Vermeule take up the question of "Conspiracy Theories: Causes and Cures." (J. Political Philosophy, 7 (2009), 202-227). This is a man with the president's ear. This is a man who would process information and regulate things. What does he here propose?

[W]e suggest a distinctive tactic for breaking up the hard core of extremists who supply conspiracy theories: cognitive infiltration of extremist groups, whereby government agents or their allies (acting either virtually or in real space, and either openly or anonymously) will undermine the crippled epistemology of believers by planting doubts about the theories and stylized facts that circulate within such groups, thereby introducing beneficial cognitive diversity. (Page 219.)

Read this paragraph again. Unpack it. Work your way through the language and the intent. Imagine the application. What do we learn?

* It is "extremists" who "supply" "conspiracy theories."
* Their "hard core" must be "broken up" with distinctive tactics. What tactics?
* "Infiltration" ("cognitive") of groups with questions about official explanations or obfuscations or lies. Who is to infiltrate?
* "Government agents or their allies," virtually (i.e. on-line) or in "real-space" (as at meetings), and "either openly or anonymously," though "infiltration" would imply the latter. What will these agents do?
* Undermine "crippled epistemology" -- one's theory and technique of knowledge. How will they do this?
* By "planting doubts" which will "circulate." Will these doubts be beneficial?
* Certainly. Because they will introduce "cognitive diversity."

Put into English, what Sunstein is proposing is government infiltration of groups opposing prevailing policy. Palestinian Liberation? 9/11 Truth? Anti-nuclear power? Stop the wars? End the Fed? Support Nader? Eat the Rich?

It's easy to destroy groups with "cognitive diversity." You just take up meeting time with arguments to the point where people don't come back. You make protest signs which alienate 90% of colleagues. You demand revolutionary violence from pacifist groups.
Link to articale: http://axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/Article_58123.shtml

Thank you Rose, very clear

Love :wave:

=[Post Update]=


There are definitely some on here. I will sense them and vapourise so no worries. :cool:

K

There were some in AV1 but agree like the english say

http://www.product-reviews.net/wp-content/userimages/2008/02/keep-calm-and-carry-on-porcelain-mug.jpg cuppa anyone? :roll:

JoshERTW
28th April 2010, 11:29
Hiram and Stardust,

Thanks for the intelligent discussion on this topic, I'm of the opinion that "peaceful non-compliance" is the only effective method of protest against the current establishment. I think you have made a great point in that this same method can be applied to "discussions" and not just actual physical confrontations. Peacefully "non-comply" with argumentative posters, and keep the flow of discussion moving in a positive direction. Ignore the negative detractors and they will go away (though I imagine they will get much louder first, and possibly for a while).

I often try to post things on this forum without attachment to the outcomes, I'm not as avid a poster as some but when I do post something its simply a tidbit of information I stumbled across that "popped out" and I felt should be passed on. If others don't feel the same way, then so be it. Keep up the good work.

mike1414
28th April 2010, 12:17
I am very aware of this happening...as I hope everyone else is. The best way to combat this sort of "cognitive attack" when you encounter it is to absolutely do not allow yourself to be attached to any outcome from what you post. Think about that for a moment.

If what you post elicits a angry or skeptical response from someone...address the issue directly and calmly once or twice. If they still insist on goading the argument...simply move on and no longer engage them. This is not easy to do, but it really works.

A great example of this occurring was from the old forum. People would post something and then take great offense when people on the forum didn't take it seriously or didn't believe them. The point is...... WHO CARES? Its not a trial...the other folks are not a jury.

You simply share for those who wish to hear. No more, no less. What's that? You think I'm full of nonsense? Hmmm. Thanks for sharing your opinion. Moving On....."

Do not forget WHY EXACTLY you are here, on this forum. You don't need everyone to believe you. You're just sharing.

Do you see how it is your very attachment to some form of outcome when you share info, that TPTB might use against you? If you have no expectation...then they are pretty much powerless. Its a great way to approach these topics, and if you use this technique, there is nothing to fear from these cretins who use this strategy.

great post and thread

many thanks for sharing

peace always
mike

Indigo
28th April 2010, 13:39
--and use their own energy against them. Psychological Tai-Chi.

Just wanted to say, I love that, psychological tai chi, brilliant :nod: :cool:

kinsuemei2
28th April 2010, 13:47
I am very aware of this happening...as I hope everyone else is. The best way to combat this sort of "cognitive attack" when you encounter it is to absolutely do not allow yourself to be attached to any outcome from what you post. Think about that for a moment.

If what you post elicits a angry or skeptical response from someone...address the issue directly and calmly once or twice. If they still insist on goading the argument...simply move on and no longer engage them. This is not easy to do, but it really works.

A great example of this occurring was from the old forum. People would post something and then take great offense when people on the forum didn't take it seriously or didn't believe them. The point is...... WHO CARES? Its not a trial...the other folks are not a jury.

You simply share for those who wish to hear. No more, no less. What's that? You think I'm full of nonsense? Hmmm. Thanks for sharing your opinion. Moving On....."

Do not forget WHY EXACTLY you are here, on this forum. You don't need everyone to believe you. You're just sharing.

Do you see how it is your very attachment to some form of outcome when you share info, that TPTB might use against you? If you have no expectation...then they are pretty much powerless. Its a great way to approach these topics, and if you use this technique, there is nothing to fear from these cretins who use this strategy.

its very good advice, and for some of us it takes a little while to learn that lesson, but as long as we do learn it.
Ben