Sunday, March 16, 2014

Threats, Taunts, and Harassing Emails From Robert Duncan

by Anthony Forwood


The following are email messages were received from Robert Duncan between Feb. 15, 2014 and Feb. 25, 2014. His contact with me was unexpected, since I hadn’t been giving any attention to him for quite a while. However, these emails came soon after I posted a few articles about Freedom From Covert Harassment and Surveillance (FFCHS), where I warned about it being an NSA front organization that preys on TIs and encourages them to believe certain falsehoods about the technology that’s used to target people. Robert Duncan is closely affiliated with that organization, and creates much of that false information, using false credentials to portray himself as someone with inside knowledge who knows what he’s talking about.

The following messages that I received from him reveal his true character. In order to keep this blog as short as possible, I’ve only included the date of posting and the message content. I didn’t encourage him to continually email me, and only responded to a few of these, but you will see how obsessed he became with harassing and taunting me by paying attention to the dates. The full email messages with headers included can be made available to anyone who doubts that these were actually from him.

* * *

Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2014 21:22:25 -0700

Answer your door so you can be served.


* * *

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2014 02:31:02 +0000

Anthony Forward is a dumb jerk who claimed to be an artist and now suddenly understands quantum physics. He is a hater and please ignore his words. He has been stalking me and threatening me for over a year now. I will eventually sue those in the US for slander but he hides in Canada.


* * *

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2014 16:37:15 -0700

I am curious about trolls. How do you live with yourself?

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/climate_desk/2014/02/internet_troll_personality_study_machiavellianism_narcissism_psychopathy.html


* * *

On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 4:35 PM, Robert Duncan
<cyclotronheating@gmail.com>wrote:

> Are you are real psychic?
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 4:32 PM, anthony forwood <forwood@live.ca> wrote:
>
>> I can hardly wait. But I have a feeling it will be a long one.... you
>> fake.
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2014 21:22:25 -0700
>> Subject: I finally decided to sue you for libel
>> From: cyclotronheating@gmail.com
>> To: forwood@live.ca
>>
>> Answer your door so you can be served.
>>


* * *

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2014 16:43:28 -0700

You don't seem to have much money. The question is whether it is worth it to sue across country boundaries. When did you become obsessed with me? Don't you have a caretaker or life partner? I read some of your works and I don't exactly understand what you talk about.


* * *

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2014 16:44:47 -0700

Are you upset with my science of mind control? Have you actually read any of my books? You seem to have an intense hatred of me. Don't you hate other people too?


* * *

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2014 16:45:41 -0700

You claim you are an artist. Can I view any of your work online? Do you sell your pieces?


* * *

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2014 16:47:33 -0700

You sound quite unstable in your perception of the world. It obviously worries me that I am the focus of your obsession.


* * *

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2014 17:02:52 -0700

Can't answer my questions about you? Are you afraid of being put under the microscope? What do you think about the psychological profile of a troll?


* * *

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2014 17:04:43 -0700

You can spread lies about me if that is the best use of your time in your life while you could be creating beauty in this world rather than spreading hate.


* * *

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2014 17:05:55 -0700

How many close friends would you say you have? I know, you don't want to answer so that we can get to the root of your issues. Where did you first hear about me?


* * *

Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 12:19:02 -0800

I've calmed down. I see you removed my posts on your blog. I'm fine with that. You have not accomplished anything in your life and take it out on others. You want fame by association apparently. I don't want to be involved in your issues. I wish you well in your endeavors. But aren't your lame politicians the ones you want. You should focus your efforts to change the world for the better elsewhere. I am not running for politics. All you can accomplish is to make me not want to help your kind. I assume you are a TI, but you don't share any information about your suffering with me. How can I give you a road plan to get out of your suffering?


* * *

On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 12:12 PM, anthony forwood <forwood@live.ca> wrote:

> I don't have an obsession with, you, Robbie. You're just getting full of
> yourself because I happen to refer to you and your publications as the
> typical sort of disinfo agent that's out there. I posted some things about
> you that I experienced with you, and now you come around whininbg about it
> rather than dealing with it like a man.
>
> What don't you understand about what I write?
>
> Let's take this to a public forum.... Are you man enough to do that? I
> want everybody to see what's said by you and by me.
>
> ------------------------------
> Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2014 16:43:28 -0700
> Subject: Re: I finally decided to sue you for libel
>
> From: cyclotronheating@gmail.com
> To: forwood@live.ca
>
> You don't seem to have much money. The question is whether it is worth it
> to sue across country boundaries. When did you become obsessed with me?
> Don't you have a caretaker or life partner? I read some of your works and I
> don't exactly understand what you talk about.
>


* * *

Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 12:33:09 -0800

I'm confused. I believe in the freedom of speech as long as you aren't a troll. Attacking what I say in my books is excellent and that is the kind of discussion I can participate in. Attacking me and my family is wrong. Can you make this distinction? If you ask me kindly to read your works and give you feedback, I might. Can you not be aggressive and think I'm trying to harm you? Point me to what you have written and ask my feedback. I will take time out of my busy schedule because I can tell you are angry and frustrated.


* * *

Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 21:45:57 -0700

Without knowing your background as a TI this is just a witch hunt. Tell me your experiences and what YOU believe is true so I at least have something tangle to grasp onto about WHO you are and WHY you deserve a public forum.


* * *

On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 9:43 PM, anthony forwood <forwood@live.ca> wrote:

> Never mind my personal situation. Let's debate your claims in public. I've
> set up a blog just for the occasion...
>
> http://anthonyforwoodvsrobertduncan.blogspot.ca/2014/02/introduction.html
>
> I expect you to show some maturity and not resort to the sort of avoidance
> tactics that you've proven yourself to use in the past. I only seek to get
> answers to the truth regarding the techno9logy that so many believe
> exists, and since you claim to have worked on it personally and claim to
> know so much about it, and since you've made yourself quite popular in the
> TI community, I think you deserve my attention more than anyone else
> making such claims. Are you man enough to back yourself up?
>


* * *

Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 21:51:20 -0700

I notice you say I claimed to have invented the technology. Are you watching too much TV? I was set up by Jesse Venture. Thanks for asking. Paranoia will destroya.


* * *

Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 21:58:27 -0700

Out of curiosity how many scientists do you think it took to screw in this light bulb?


* * *

Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 22:01:59 -0700

I'm sorry Anthony but you sounds like you might not be very grounded and just want a public spectacle without anyone knowing about you.


* * *

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 17:48:21 -0700

Hey stalker, do you want to do a skype with me? But I need you to answer how you feel about trolls from this scientific article first? Is it good and psychologically healthy or bad and you need some changes in your life? Some people call you Nana Faye from your internet stalking life.

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/climate_desk/2014/02/internet_troll_personality_study_machiavellianism_narcissism_psychopathy.html

Just comment: good/bad/or ugly.

Then I will skype with you.


* * *

Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2014 15:06:59 -0700

Strange, you are afraid to be seen or known in your personal life. We can have a skype call with listeners and viewers. It will be a way to change the world by people listening to your story. I assume that is what you want.

On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 2:16 PM, anthony forwood <forwood@live.ca> wrote:

> Look, I will only discuss anything with you in public, so that silly false
> claims like this one you're making can be seen by others. That's the only
> FAIR way to deal with this. You obviously don't know how to read, or you're
> attempting to use perp tactics to spin things. Everything you say here in
> email is moot.
>
> I gave you a link to a blog that's been set up for us to talk. If that's
> not satisfactory for whatever reason, then YOU set something up. No skype,
> no audio or video of any type. But it MUST be available for others to see
> on a recognized public site. NOT facebook.
>
> Anthony
>


* * *

Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2014 15:15:55 -0700

I will try to make the time to read A Primer on V2K vs. Mind-Reading Technology. I will give you some feedback.


* * *

Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2014 15:50:05 -0700

I love your comment that I'm the spin master. You must be a criminal politician to be as good as you are. I think you said I live next to a rock quarry and trailer park community. I live next to a beautiful park, a river to raft and go fishing, and a ski mountain.


* * *

Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2014 15:56:33 -0700

I just started reading your primer. It says you claim you are not a TI. Why do you care so much? I skimmed through the old technology claims. How am I suppose to comment on something so old and boring?


* * *

Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2014 15:57:26 -0700

Give me some original research and I will pay attention.


* * *

Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2014 23:59:52 +0000

Mick, his troll name Anthony Forward, won't let me post anymore to defend myself. These blogs are just witch hunts.


* * *

Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 00:03:27 +0000

People 50 years behind current technology kept in secret simply can't figure out how this trick is done. Any sufficiently advanced technology appears like magic to a lesser civilization. Mick is an idiot.


* * *

Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 01:55:32 +0000

Beware, Anthony is a troll.


* * *

Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2014 18:59:27 -0700

Just read some more blog postings from you. Holy crap you are the best troll ever. You should run for politics, but you are too lame to change the world or offer any real science or solutions.


* * *

Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2014 19:00:01 -0700

Get a job you slob! Quit sucking off your parents and the tax payers.


* * *

Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2014 19:01:00 -0700

You are not disabled, you are truly mentally ill. Leave TIs alone!


* * *

Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2014 19:05:06 -0700

If I were to guess you have Asperger's disease combined with sadism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asperger_syndrome

Please coward go on radio to tell your story.


* * *

Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2014 19:53:23 -0700

Holy crap you are creepy. I've been reading your posts all over the internet. You need to be locked up. You are obviously on the verge of being a serial killer. What did your mother do to you?


* * *

Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2014 19:54:07 -0700

Anthony Forwood
#52 936 Granville St.
Vancouver, BC
Canada V6Z-iL2

Shitty part of town.


* * *

Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 04:33:18 +0000

Mick, his troll name Anthony Forward, won't let me post anymore to defend myself. These blogs are just witch hunts.


* * *

Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 22:01:29 -0700

Why do you have so much time on your hands? Don't you work? How about a forum where I have control of what gets publicized?


* * *

Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 22:12:04 -0700

Why are you playing dumb? You spin by selective publishing, never talking about the details of mind control, and hiding your background. Your approach to human interaction is passive aggressive to understate it. Talk about the physics with the language of math.


* * *

Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 18:07:50 -0700

Passive agressive. Have you sought psychological help? Here is what people are saying about you.

http://zcomm.org/znetarticle/how-covert-agents-infiltrate-the-internet/

On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 6:02 PM, anthony forwood <forwood@live.ca> wrote:

> This is the exact sort of perp harassment shit that weaker people than me
> would be hurt by. YOU ARE THE TROLL, sending dozens of these petty and
> ignorant emails to me. You think you're safe in private doing this, huh?
>
> Okay, jerkoff...
>
> ------------------------------
> Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2014 19:01:00 -0700
>
> Subject: Re: I finally decided to sue you for libel
> From: cyclotronheating@gmail.com
> To: forwood@live.ca
>
> You are not disabled, you are truly mentally ill. Leave TIs alone!
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 7:00 PM, Robert Duncan <cyclotronheating@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
> Get a job you slob! Quit sucking off your parents and the tax payers.
>


* * *

Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 18:10:29 -0700

I just got off work, something you should do. You obviously have a devious mindset. I am curious how your mind works.

* * *

Posted by at 3 comments:

Saturday, March 15, 2014

Disinformation Tactics: The Methods Used To Keep You In The Dark

By Giordano Bruno
Neithercorp Press - 02/04/2010


There was a time, not too long ago (relatively speaking), that governments and the groups of elites that controlled them did not find it necessary to conscript themselves into wars of disinformation. Propaganda was relatively straightforward. The lies were much simpler. The control of information flow was easily directed. In fact, during the early Middle-Ages in most European countries commoners were not even allowed to own a Bible, nor was the Bible allowed to be interpreted from Latin to another language, let alone any other tome that might breed “dangerous ideas”. This was due in large part to the established feudal system and its hierarchy of royals and clergy. Rules were enforced with the threat of property confiscation and execution for anyone who strayed from the rigid socio-political structure. Those who had theological, metaphysical, or scientific information outside of the conventional and scripted collective world view were tortured and slaughtered. The elites kept the information to themselves, and removed its remnants from mainstream recognition, sometimes for centuries before it was rediscovered.
With the advent of anti-feudalism, and most importantly the success of the American Revolution, elites were no longer able to dominate information with the edge of a blade or the barrel of a gun. The establishment of Democracies (and Democratic Republics), with their philosophy of open government and rule by the people, compelled Aristocratic minorities to plot more subtle ways of obstructing the truth and thereby maintaining their hold over the world without exposing themselves to retribution from the masses. Thus, the complex art of disinformation was born. The technique, the “magic” of the lie, was refined and perfected. The mechanics of the human mind and the human soul became an endless obsession for the elites.
The goal was malicious, but socially radical; instead of expending the impossible energy needed to dictate the very form and existence of the truth, they would allow it to drift, obscured in a fog of contrived data. They would wrap the truth in a “Gordian Knot” of misdirections and fabrications so elaborate that they felt certain the majority of people would surrender, giving up long before they ever finished unraveling the deceit. The goal was not to destroy the truth, but to hide it in plain sight.
In modern times, and with carefully engineered methods, this goal has for the most part been accomplished. However, these methods also have inherent weaknesses. Lies are fragile. They require constant attentiveness to keep them alive. The exposure of a single truth can rip through an ocean of lies, evaporating it instantly. In this article, we will examine the methods used to fertilize and promote the growth of disinformation, as well as how to identify the roots of disinformation and effectively cut them, starving out the entire system of fallacies once and for all.
Media Disinformation Methods
The mainstream media, once tasked with the job of investigating government corruption and keeping elitists in line, has now become nothing more than a PR firm for corrupt officials and their Globalist handlers. The days of the legitimate “investigative reporter” are long gone, and journalism itself has deteriorated into a rancid pool of so called “TV Editorialists” who treat their own baseless opinions as supported fact.
The elitist co-opting of news has been going on in one form or another since the invention of the printing press, however, the first methods of media disinformation truly came to fruition under the supervision of newspaper magnate William Randolph Hearst, who believed the truth was “subjective” and open to his personal interpretation. Hearst’s legacy of lies and sensationalism lives on in the Hearst published magazine ‘Popular Mechanics’, who accuse the growing 9/11 Truth Movement of outrageous “conspiracy theory” while at the same time consistently publishing articles about UFO sightings and secret government flying saucer programs.
popularmechanics-hearst-911-med.jpg
As we will show, this strange juxtaposition of mixed signals and hypocritical accusations is characteristic of all purveyors of disinformation.
Some of the main tactics used by the mainstream media to mislead the masses are as follows:
Lie Big, Retract Quietly
Mainstream media sources (especially newspapers) are notorious for reporting flagrantly dishonest and unsupported news stories on the front page, then quietly retracting those stories on the very back page when they are caught. In this case, the point is to railroad the lie into the collective consciousness. Once the lie is finally exposed, it is already too late, and a large portion of the population will not notice or care when the truth comes out. A good example of this would be the collusion of the MSM with the Bush administration to convince the American public after 9/11 that Iraq had WMDs, even though no concrete evidence existed to prove it. George W. Bush’s eventual admission that there had never been any WMDs in Iraq (except chemical weapons which the U.S. actually sold to Saddam under the Reagan / Bush administration) was lightly reported or glazed over by most mainstream news sources. The core reason behind a war that has now killed over a million people was proven to be completely fraudulent, yet I still run into people today who believe that Iraq had nukes…
Unconfirmed Or Controlled Sources As Fact
Cable news venues often cite information from “unnamed” sources, government sources that have an obvious bias or agenda, or “expert” sources without providing an alternative “expert” view. The information provided by these sources is usually backed by nothing more than blind faith. A recent example of this would be the Osama Bin Laden audio tapes which supposedly reveal that the Christmas “Underwear Bomber” was indeed Al-Qaeda:

The media treats the audio tape as undeniable fact in numerous stories, then at the same time prints a side story which shows that the White House cannot confirm that the tape is even real:

If the White House cannot confirm the authenticity of the tape, then why did the media report on its contents as if it had been confirmed?
Calculated Omission
Otherwise known as “cherry picking” data. One simple piece of information or root item of truth can derail an entire disinfo news story, so instead of trying to gloss over it, they simply pretend as if it doesn’t exist. When the fact is omitted, the lie can appear entirely rational. This tactic is also used extensively when disinformation agents and crooked journalists engage in open debate.
Distraction, and the Manufacture of Relevance
Sometimes the truth wells up into the public awareness regardless of what the media does to bury it. When this occurs their only recourse is to attempt to change the public’s focus and thereby distract them from the truth they were so close to grasping. The media accomplishes this by “over-reporting” on a subject that has nothing to do with the more important issues at hand. Ironically, the media can take an unimportant story, and by reporting on it ad nauseum, cause many Americans to assume that because the media won’t shut-up about it, it must be important! An example of this would be the recent push for an audit of the Federal Reserve which was gaining major public support, as well as political support. Instead of reporting on this incredible and unprecedented movement for transparency in the Fed, the MSM spent two months or more reporting non-stop on the death of Michael Jackson, a pop idol who had not released a decent record since “Thriller,” practically deifying the man who only months earlier was being lambasted by the same MSM for having “wandering hands” when children were about.
Dishonest Debate Tactics
Sometimes, men who actually are concerned with the average American’s pursuit of honesty and legitimate fact-driven information break through and appear on T.V. However, rarely are they allowed to share their views or insights without having to fight through a wall of carefully crafted deceit and propaganda. Because the media knows they will lose credibility if they do not allow guests with opposing viewpoints every once in a while, they set up and choreograph specialized T.V. debates in highly restrictive environments which put the guest on the defensive, and make it difficult for them to clearly convey their ideas or facts.
TV pundits are often trained in what are commonly called “Alinsky Tactics.” Saul Alinsky was a moral relativist, and champion of the lie as a tool for the “greater good;” essentially, a modern day Machiavelli. His “Rules for Radicals” were supposedly meant for grassroots activists who opposed the establishment, and emphasized the use of any means necessary to defeat one’s political opposition. But is it truly possible to defeat an establishment built on lies, by use of even more elaborate lies, and by sacrificing one’s ethics?
Today, Alinsky’s rules are used more often by the establishment than by its opposition. These tactics have been adopted by governments and disinformation specialists across the world, but they are most visible in TV debate. While Alinsky sermonized about the need for confrontation in society, his debate tactics are actually designed to circumvent real and honest confrontation of opposing ideas with slippery tricks and diversions. Alinsky’s tactics, and their modern usage, can be summarized as follows:
1) Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.
We see this tactic in many forms. For example, projecting your own movement as mainstream, and your opponent’s as fringe. Convincing your opponent that his fight is a futile one. Your opposition may act differently, or even hesitate to act at all, based on their perception of your power.
2) Never go outside the experience of your people, and whenever possible, go outside of the experience of the enemy.
Don’t get drawn into a debate about a subject you do not know as well as or better than your opposition. If possible, draw them into such a situation instead. Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty in your opposition. This is commonly used against unwitting interviewees on cable news shows whose positions are set up to be skewered. The target is blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address. In television and radio, this also serves to waste broadcast time to prevent the target from expressing his own positions.
3) Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.
The objective is to target the opponent’s credibility and reputation by accusations of hypocrisy. If the tactician can catch his opponent in even the smallest misstep, it creates an opening for further attacks.
4) Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.
“Ron Paul is a crackpot.” “Dennis Kucinich is short and weird.” “9-11 twoofers wear tinfoil hats.” Ridicule is almost impossible to counter. It’s irrational. It infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage. It also works as a pressure point to force the enemy into concessions.
5) A good tactic is one that your people enjoy.
The popularization of the term “Teabaggers” is a classic example, it caught on by itself because people seem to think it’s clever, and enjoy saying it. Keeping your talking points simple and fun keeps your side motivated, and helps your tactics spread autonomously, without instruction or encouragement.
6) A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.
See rule number 7. Don’t become old news. If you keep your tactics fresh, its easier to keep your people active. Not all disinformation agents are paid. The “useful idiots” have to be motivated by other means. Mainstream disinformation often changes gear from one method to the next and then back again.
7) Keep the pressure on with different tactics and actions, and utilize all events of the period for your purpose.
Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. Never give the target a chance to rest, regroup, recover or re-strategize. Take advantage of current events and twist their implications to support your position. Never let a good crisis go to waste.
8) The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.
This goes hand in hand with Rule #1. Perception is reality. Allow your opposition to expend all of its energy in expectation of an insurmountable scenario. The dire possibilities can easily poison the mind and result in demoralization.
9) The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition.
The objective of this pressure is to force the opposition to react and make the mistakes that are necessary for the ultimate success of the campaign.
10) If you push a negative hard and deep enough, it will break through into its counterside.
As grassroots activism tools, Alinsky tactics have historically been used (for example, by labor movements) to force the opposition to react with violence against activists, which leads to popular sympathy for the activists’ cause. Today, false (or co-opted) grassroots movements use this technique in debate as well as in planned street actions. The idea is to provoke (or stage) ruthless attacks against ones’ self, so as to be perceived as the underdog, or the victim. Today, this technique is commonly used to create the illusion that a certain movement is “counterculture” or “anti-establishment.”
11) The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.
Never let the enemy score points because you’re caught without a solution to the problem. Today, this is often used offensively against legitimate activists, such as the opponents of the Federal Reserve. Complain that your opponent is merely “pointing out the problems.” Demand that they offer a solution.
12) Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.
Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. The targets supporters will expose themselves. Go after individual people, not organizations or institutions. People hurt faster than institutions.
The next time you view an MSM debate, watch the pundits carefully, you will likely see many if not all of the strategies above used on some unsuspecting individual attempting to tell the truth.
Internet Disinformation Methods
Because the MSM’s bag of tricks has been so exhausted over such a long period of time, many bitter and enraged consumers of information are now turning to alternative news sources, most of which exist on the collective commons we call the internet. At first, it appears, the government and elitists ignored the web as a kind of novelty, or just another mechanism they could exploit in spreading disinformation. As we all now well know, they dropped the ball, and the internet has become the most powerful tool for truth history has ever seen.
That being said, they are now expending incredible resources in order to catch up to their mistake, utilizing every trick in their arsenal to beat web users back into submission. While the anonymity of the internet allows for a certain immunity against many of Saul Alinsky’s manipulative tactics, it also allows governments to attack those trying to spread the truth covertly. In the world of web news, we call these people “disinfo trolls.” Trolls are now being openly employed by governments in countries like the U.S. and Israel specifically to scour the internet for alternative news sites and disrupt their ability to share information.



Internet trolls, also known as “paid posters” or “paid bloggers,” are increasingly being employed by private corporations as well, often for marketing purposes. In fact, it is a rapidly growing industry.
Trolls use a wide variety of strategies, some of which are unique to the internet, here are just a few:
1) Make outrageous comments designed to distract or frustrate: An Alinsky tactic used to make people emotional, although less effective because of the impersonal nature of the web.
2) Pose as a supporter of the truth, then make comments that discredit the movement: We have seen this even on our own forums — trolls pose as supporters of the Liberty Movement, then post long, incoherent diatribes so as to appear either racist or insane. Here is a live example of this tactic in use on Yahoo! Answers.
The key to this tactic is to make references to common Liberty Movement arguments while at the same time babbling nonsense, so as to make those otherwise valid arguments seem ludicrous by association.
In extreme cases, these “Trojan Horse Trolls” have been known to make posts which incite violence — a technique obviously intended to solidify the false assertions of the notorious MIAC report and other ADL/SPLC publications which purport that constitutionalists should be feared as potential domestic terrorists.
3) Dominate Discussions: Trolls often interject themselves into productive web discussions in order to throw them off course and frustrate the people involved.
4) Prewritten Responses: Many trolls are supplied with a list or database with pre-planned talking points designed as generalized and deceptive responses to honest arguments. 9/11 “debunker” trolls are notorious for this.
5) False Association: This works hand in hand with item #2, by invoking the stereotypes established by the “Trojan Horse Troll.”
For example: calling those against the Federal Reserve “conspiracy theorists” or “lunatics”. Deliberately associating anti-globalist movements with big foot or alien enthusiasts, because of the inherent negative connotations. Using false associations to provoke biases and dissuade people from examining the evidence objectively.
6) False Moderation: Pretending to be the “voice of reason” in an argument with obvious and defined sides in an attempt to move people away from what is clearly true into a “grey area” where the truth becomes “relative.”
7) Straw Man Arguments: A very common technique. The troll will accuse his opposition of subscribing to a certain point of view, even if he does not, and then attacks that point of view. Or, the troll will put words in the mouth of his opposition, and then rebut those specific words. For example: “9/11 truthers say that no planes hit the WTC towers, and that it was all just computer animation. What are they, crazy?”
Sometimes, these strategies are used by average people with serious personality issues. However, if you see someone using these tactics often, or using many of them at the same time, you may be dealing with a paid internet troll.
Government Disinformation Methods
Governments, and the globalists who back them, have immense assets — an almost endless fiat money printing press — and control over most legal and academic institutions. With these advantages, disinformation can be executed on a massive scale. Here are just a handful of the most prominent tactics used by government agencies and private think tanks to guide public opinion, and establish the appearance of consensus:
1) Control The Experts: Most Americans are taught from kindergarten to ignore their instincts for the truth and defer to the “professional class” for all their answers. The problem is that much of the professional class is indoctrinated throughout their college years, many of them molded to support the status quo. Any experts that go against the grain are ostracized by their peers.
2) Control The Data: By controlling the source data of any investigation, be it legal or scientific, the government has the ability to engineer any truth they wish, that is, as long as the people do not care enough to ask for the source data. Two major examples of controlled and hidden source data include; the NIST investigation of the suspicious 9/11 WTC collapses, in which NIST engineers, hired by the government, have kept all source data from their computer models secret, while claiming that the computer models prove the collapses were “natural”. Also, the recent exposure of the CRU Climate Labs and their manipulation of source data in order to fool the public into believing that Global Warming is real, and accepting a world-wide carbon tax. The CRU has refused to release the source data from its experiments for years, and now we know why.
3) Skew The Statistics: This tactic is extremely evident in the Labor Department’s evaluations on unemployment, using such tricks as incorporating ambiguous birth / death ratios into their calculation in order to make it appear as though there are less unemployed people than there really are, or leaving out certain subsections of the population, like those who are unemployed and no longer seeking benefits.
3) Guilt By False Association: Governments faced with an effective opponent will always attempt to demonize that person or group in the eyes of the public. This is often done by associating them with a group or idea that the public already hates. Example: During the last election, they tried to associate Ron Paul supporters with racist groups (and more recently, certain Fox News anchors) in order to deter moderate Democrats from taking an honest look at Congressman Paul’s policies.
4) Manufacture Good News: This falls in with the skewing of statistics, and it also relies heavily on Media cooperation. The economic “Green Shoots” concept is a good example of the combination of government and corporate media interests in order to create an atmosphere of false optimism based on dubious foundations.
5) Controlled Opposition: Men in positions of power have known for centuries the importance of controlled opposition. If a movement rises in opposition to one’s authority, one must usurp that movement’s leadership. If no such movement exists to infiltrate, the establishment will often create a toothless one, in order to fill that social need, and neutralize individuals who might have otherwise taken action themselves.
During the 1960’s and 70’s, the FBI began a secretive program called COINTELPRO. Along with illegal spying on American citizens who were against the Vietnam conflict or in support of the civil rights movement, they also used agents and media sources to pose as supporters of the movement, then purposely created conflict and division, or took control of the direction of the movement altogether. This same tactic has been attempted with the modern Liberty Movement on several levels, but has so far been ineffective in stopping our growth.
The NRA is another good example of controlled opposition, as many gun owners are satisfied that paying their annual NRA dues is tantamount to actively resisting anti-gun legislation; when in fact, the NRA is directly responsible for many of the compromises which result in lost ground on 2nd amendment issues. In this way, gun owners are not only rendered inactive, but actually manipulated into funding the demise of their own cause.
6) False Paradigms: Human beings have a tendency to categorize and label other people and ideas. It is, for better or worse, a fundamental part of how we understand the complexities of the world. This component of human nature, like most any other, can be abused as a powerful tool for social manipulation. By framing a polarized debate according to artificial boundaries, and establishing the two poles of that debate, social engineers can eliminate the perceived possibility of a third alternative. The mainstream media apparatus is the key weapon to this end. The endless creation of dichotomies, and the neat arrangement of ideologies along left/right lines, offers average people a very simple (though hopelessly inaccurate) way of thinking about politics. It forces them to choose a side, usually based solely on emotional or cultural reasons, and often lures them into supporting positions they would otherwise disagree with. It fosters an environment in which beating the other team is more important than ensuring the integrity of your own. Perhaps most importantly, it allows the social engineer to determine what is “fair game” for debate, and what is not.
Alinsky himself wrote: “One acts decisively only in the conviction that all the angels are on one side and all the devils on the other.”
One merely needs to observe a heated debate between a Democrat and a Republican to see how deeply this belief has been ingrained on both sides, and how destructive it is to true intellectual discourse.
Stopping Disinformation
truth.jpg
The best way to disarm disinformation agents is to know their methods inside and out. This gives us the ability to point out exactly what they are doing in detail the moment they try to do it. Immediately exposing a disinformation tactic as it is being used is highly destructive to the person utilizing it. It makes them look foolish, dishonest, and weak for even making the attempt. Internet trolls most especially do not know how to handle their methods being deconstructed right in front of their eyes, and usually fold and run from debate when it occurs.
The truth, is precious. It is sad that there are so many in our society that have lost respect for it; people who have traded in their conscience and their soul for temporary financial comfort while sacrificing the stability and balance of the rest of the country in the process. The human psyche breathes on the air of truth, without it, humanity cannot survive. Without it, the species will collapse in on itself, starving from lack of intellectual and emotional sustenance. Disinformation does not only threaten our insight into the workings of our world; it makes us vulnerable to fear, misunderstanding, and doubt, all things that lead to destruction. It can lead good people to commit terrible atrocities against others, or even against themselves. Without a concerted and organized effort to diffuse mass-produced lies, the future will look bleak indeed.
NOTE: It has come to our attention that a couple of websites have posted this article without citing Neithercorp.us as the source. This is unfortunate, because we operate under ‘Copyleft’ principles, meaning, we encourage other websites to use our articles as long as they link to us as the originators. While getting the information to the public is essential, on principle, we think it dishonest to take credit for other people’s hard work. We hope that this problem will be corrected in the future.
Special thanks to AgentOgden for helping with the arduous task of compiling the numerous disinfo-tactics being used today.
For further reading on Alinsky debate tactics, some of which goes a bit beyond the scope of this article, please see this piece on the “Alinsky Method” variation of the Delphi Technique, as well as this summary of Alinsky’s “Rules for the Ethics of Means and Ends” which is highly pertinent to the subject of moral relativism.
Posted by at No comments:

Getting Involved With FFCHS is Dangerous

by Anthony Forwood

 
I've noticed that those people who get involved with FFCHS* will aggressively defend that organization against anyone who dares to question its integrity. This is very similar to how cult members react to anyone who questions their group or beliefs.

By all appearances, FFCHS is a cult. It should be noted that the creation of cults was an integral part of MKULTRA, and they have since been used as a method for recruiting and maintaining control over their mind-control victims.

A number of times, I've posted information on my blog that questions FFCHS's practices and warning other TIs about getting involved with them. Each time, soon after I do, I start getting a wave of people I don't know contacting me out of the blue, for reasons seemingly unrelated to these blog posts. These people usually start out by asking for help regarding their targeting or praising me for my past research, but this quickly changes and they start trying to convince me of some of the crazier things that are claimed about the technologies that are used to target people.

I'm very aware that their initial approach (seeking my help or offering praise) is merely intended to soften me up, which is precisely how cult groups operate when seeking to get close to somebody they want to target.

When I start asking these people questions to get more details that would clarify why they believe what they do, or when I offer other more rational explanations for their experiences, they always become extremely offended that I've shown any possible doubt about what they believe. With many of these people, I later discover that they're members of FFCHS or they otherwise pay a lot of attention to the claims of FFCHS spokespeople or affiliates like Derrick Robinson, Robert Duncan, Jesse Beltran, John Hall, Ken Wilbourne Jr., Magnus Olsson, etc. Many of these people who contact me also reveal signs of mental imbalance or an inability to think logically.

The inability to discuss anything outside of their own beliefs is another symptom of cult membership. So is the absolute loyalty to the group and its leaders.

I believe that FFCHS specifically seeks out those people who are the most susceptible to believing the crazier claims about what the technology can do, because these people are the easiest to lead into mind-control and targeting activities. I believe that these people are recruited by FFCHS and turned against TIs like myself who attempt to expose the disinformation that FFCHS and its associates promote as part of a larger psyop against the population. At the same time, these recruits are used to lure TIs into the trap that FFCHS has laid for them.

Even just going to the FFCHS website can be dangerous.

About a month ago, I went to their website to leave a comment asking Derrick Robinson some pointed questions about his organization's purpose and practices. As soon as I went to post the message, the computer terminal I was using produced an error message and I was stalled from being able to do anything. At the exact same time, while I struggled with the computer to get rid of the error message (it wouldn't close), a sudden wave of dizziness came over me, followed by a strange taste on my tongue, and then I quickly began to feel very strange, unlike anything I've never felt before. I hurriedly shut down the computer and got away from it, at which point I immediately started to feel better again. It occurred to me as soon as this all happened that I had been hit with some sort of electronic weaponry.

I know that a computer monitor can be made to radiate ELF waves to cause various different physiological symptoms (see US patent #6,506,148 - "Nervous system manipulation by electromagnetic fields from monitors"). These effects can be delivered over the internet and are entirely software-based, requiring no special hardware other than the computer itself.

I also know that FFCHS is fully aware of who I am and that I'm attempting to expose them, and that they have been targeting me online (through their network of recruited members) in an attempt to stop me.

If you have ever had any bad experiences with FFCHS or any of its known members, please contact me (forwood@live.ca). Your name and any information you provide will be kept in strict confidence. My intentions are to compile and use this information for further investigation and exposure of this government front group.

* The organization's name has since been changed to People Against Covert Torture & Surveillance International (PACTS International). 

Posted by at 3 comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)