I've told this story so many times that my larynx hurts. I've dictated it so many times and then had to go back and correct the mistakes I'm working on carpal tunnel as well. Anyway as you can tell I'm at that point of the day where I felt I should share but what's the point? I work in an industry where I'm a painter of sets and such for corporate events and plays and things like that. So out of the blue they decided when you get day to use isisyanite-based primers and paints and we did it over the weekend and I was exposed for close to 16 hours with only a 3M gas mask with a regular filter in it. The sprayed product was called chassis saver. If you want to look up the MSDS you're going to have to type in chassis saver MSDS. It's got a whole smorgasbord of fun like methyl diisocyanate mixed with aluminum flake? That was shot out of an HVLP gun under pressure in a closed Warehouse because it was seemed outside so there was no ventilation for 2 days. I had ... okay let's just quit trying to give anybody to benefit it out here and say I had no protection whatsoever. Cuz if I'm going to mention the 3M mask but not the fact that I need a full body suit gloves full face mask with supplied oxygen and I'm supposed to leave all of my clothes at work including my shoes and not get it on my skin along with proper ventilation? Well none of that was done. First off because we weren't worried about the danger secondly none of that stuff is available to us at work and thirdly I wasn't even the one using the stuff. Didn't matter I still became concerned when the room was a silvery cloud of toxins so after a couple weeks when I realized I was asthmatic and having reactions every time I went to work? My GM had me apply for workers comp and sent me home for 4 days. Then I was asked to come back to work to help and the symptoms started again. It took me a while to figure out what was going on by doing some reading on OSHA and the CDC. Plus all the other articles and case studies. It all lined up it was obvious that I didn't kind of get exposed... I was immersed in it. That includes breathing it having it in my eyes eating after using it no ventilation and wearing the same clothes home along with getting some on my skin when I was helping him clean up afterwards. Poured it on the side of my abdomen because it was in a mixing cup. It felt really good. Anyway, as soon as this hit corporate everything went s*** house crazy. I continue to go to work for 4 weeks and see the doctor that they had sent me to and since I've been self-employed my whole life as a portrait artist? That's my college degree it's a BFA and fine arts. Probably kiss my oil painting career goodbye. So they got rid of the job I had and any other talents I could fall back on. Anyway yeah this is going to be kind of a sarcastic post so enjoy it. What doctor was I send to that was an expert on chemical exposure with isocyanates and occupational acquired asthma? What was the name of that place it's famous like the Mayo Clinic but instead it's everywhere and oh yeah Concentra. You know the place you go to and the doctor runs a stethoscope all over you and says he doesn't hear anything to indicate asthma even though it sounds like there's a kitten stuck in your throat? Then he tricks your blood pressure and says it's normal even though it's rising quickly? He asks you why you're there and nods his head and you can tell in his mind he's going "well that's like a total s*** show. If I do what the insurance adjusters are telling me to do I'm basically sending this guy back to work to die. So let me get on that" I would come in and he would look at me and say so what do you want to do today and I would say I don't know maybe doctor stuff like check me see if I have asthma I don't know what the tests are for us to cyanide exposure? You're the doctor what do you want to do? Oh you want to go okay well be sure and sign that box telling me to return to work because he can't find any injury or evidence of exposure. Thanks. Oh this week you want to do blood work. But you only want to test for the most extreme exposure the kind that would cause neurological damage and okay. So he sends off the blood test tells me it'll be a week. And remind you I'm going back to work every day and getting re-exposed to all the stuff that I'm now allergic to and it's damaging my lungs and I'm coughing so hard my lungs are starting to separate from the wall my back. It's funny it's hilarious you know but at least they're saving money. They get to watch it and hear it but you know... buck up cowboy. You shouldn't smoke. Yeah y'all managed to do more damage to my lungs in 18 hours than I did in 47 years of light smoking. Seriously five cigarettes a day maybe. No history of asthma no history of allergies other than penicillin. I always watched other people just go through miserable seasons I mean just I swollen shut it's not running down their face and I thought how lucky I am. So my job decided that wasn't fair and locked me in the building with a chemical that destroyed a town in India. And they only used it that one time and decided they didn't like the properties of it. Probably cuz it's not meant to be put on wood but that's what the chassis saver was for was to give it sort of a metallic quality so they can roll the what yeah that's right bed truck liner on it that was day two and early the next day. When everybody was at work. When we were applying this stuff they were only two people there me and my supervisor. So if you look at the time clock it tells you when and who was there. If you look at when this stuff was purchased and under what project the stuff was charged to? what client? While we were doing a huge project for caterpillar that they were having out in Las Vegas. Don't know why one of our designers figured that bed liner would be a good idea for some of the staging when you can achieve that with paint and clear coat. But that's what he wanted. So so much for avoiding it just because it's not necessary. In the state of Texas you can't sue your employer for personal injury unless you can prove gross negligence. I would say that kind of falls where we're at. Unfortunately the other thing in Texas is that there aren't many workers comp attorneys because in 1993 they passed some laws that made being a workers comp attorney a tricky thing and you can lose your license really easy. In other words it was a very business friendly law to get companies to move here. Especially when you couldn't get sued for you know sending someone on fire or destroying their lungs and life. So a lot of people can get a worker's comp attorney even if they're a crappy one. But most of them that claim to be workers comp attorneys? They're actually just want to hear your stories so they can see if there's a personal injury lawsuit in there due to gross negligence cuz that's the only way they're going to make any money in this state and if it's a chemical exposure? I've been told by several attorneys who had extreme sympathy for my situation that they couldn't even refer me to an attorney that would take my case hey there's no attorney that's going to touch a chemical exposure case in Texas because it's already tough enough. Well I've been put the ringer lied to followed by a private investigator in the whole time I've been on represented and doing all the paperwork myself which they throw at me everyday usually it's fake stuff or stuff with the wrong date or deadline on it they mess with any attempts I get to find another diagnosis when they know damn well what happened on what day and with what products and who was there and when you know there's just no disputing the fact of what happened and when it happened and that we weren't protected because they don't have that kind of stuff there for PPE. we don't use that stuff so why would we need supplied oxygen masks. If I'm spraying something with metal paint mixed with silo I put on a 3M mask and use it organic filter and keep an eye on when it's starting to wear out even then? I'm not going to get leukemia or brain cancer for another 30 years well after I'm not working for them anymore so they've got that going for them and as do I. And this happened back in February 25th and I was sent home immediately because they were extremely concerned but they be suddenly became unconcerned about 4 days later I guess cuz corporate got involved and told me to come back into work and I spent another four weeks getting worse and worse and worse having the weekends to try and recover but not completely so I would start off at a level of irritation and asthma that was already underway when I returned on Monday. This was fun. Because even though they can see it they would just blame it on my smoking which is hilarious because you know life and for that weekend I wasn't allergic to anything in that building for two and a half years and I'm one of two people in the paint department so it's not a huge crew I'd say there's about 30 people that work there and probably too many people in the front office getting paid too much just sitting air conditioning. I mean they do work but you know if they had the chance they'd probably urinate on your face. That's not fair. They would wait till you run conscious from toxic exposure to gases anyway. Or they would but the workers comp adjusters do that for them. I mean they pay them for a reason and it's not help the employee so? Why am I talking to them again without an attorney oh yeah see above. So yeah they're just having a good old time they're beating me like a pinata making me run around like an idiot and freaking me out with letters and false deadlines that after a while I began to realize it being seriously gas lit I stopped playing nice guy and started recording phone calls and screenshotting text messages to make sure they got saved and save me everything in files and whenever they screwed up and intentionally put the wrong deadline on a Federal form like a FL la form from the Department of Labor anything like that? I would call him about that and record the response. One of my favorites was well that was just a suggested date because you know if you got it done sooner then you would get the paperwork done sooner and everything you get done sooner and you know just faster. Well yeah I understand how that works Einstein thanks I understand the whole concept and time and speed Mass velocity whatever. I swear to God they treat me like Chaka from Land of the Lost. They're all like 30 years younger than me and about to lose their jobs to AI but hey it'll be funny to watch. Won't need all those people running CAD machines and designing stuff after a few years. But let them enjoy it while they can anyway back to my career being ruined so they've just been having a good old time calling me and then they sent out a private investigator to harass me and want to talk to me until finally I just exploded and said what is it exactly you want to talk to me about.? I've been advised by everybody I know who is an attorney who may not be working in workers comp but they are an attorney? That I should never ever meet with a private investigator especially one that's a third party. You know one that's hired and not actually from the company. Cuz then he's not bound by the laws of an attorney or a police officer or an investigator he can do what he wants. Especially since he wanted to just talk to me and fill in the details of what happened that day. You know what caused the accident. I asked him what kind of forum is this going to occur in he said we could meet anywhere you want we can meet at McDonald's but I'm sure you don't want people here in your private information and I told him I don't like McDonald's anyway so I don't know I guess maybe after I get done with this doctor and have a solid diagnosis of asthma and something to stand on I'll be ready to comment. But until then I'm not meeting with you without an attorney in the room and probably even after I'm not going to meet with you without attorney in the room. So now it's come to this thing where I do have a doctor that's helping that was accidentally in their Network because I guess it slipped to the radar that they had an actual doctor that would do spirometry and asthma testing. of course they're messing with her a lot. I get your phone calls I get weird texts everybody has assured me that I'm obviously being observed surveilled. I don't see anything but I don't care either because nothing to see. I'm not at work. Why would I have asthma at home? I'm sure there's some triggers out there but I haven't discovered yet but that'll be fun and something to do in my free time. Anyway they seem to be kind of stuck in this rut where they won't go forward or approve anything unless I meet with the private investigator. Finally I blew my stack and said that I have no obligation to me the private investigator I've made my statement they were two people in the room y'all know what happened y'all know what I'm saying was the result you're not allowing me to explore that so I would think the best way for y'all to fill in the gaps and figure out what happened and what the situation this is letting me go to a f****** doctor that treats me and actually trust me for the things that I claim I have. That way instead of treating me like I'm lying you can prove that I'm lying which won't happen because I'm not lying which is obviously what you know so what is it he wants to ask me about again oh yeah he wants me to fill in the details is he a doctor? No okay well how about you get a doctor to do it instead of somebody who follows people husbands and wives around looking for infidelity. So I still don't have an attorney and I called OSHA reported the exposure and all they did was call my workplace and say "hey, did you have an exposure there?" and they said "yeah, but we got rid of that stuff" and they said "okay great" slow clap into a face palm. Which you know, kind of blew my mind. Because I thought calling OSHA was starting a nuclear war. That they would be in there with clip boards and chemical detectors and wanting to know just what the hell happened here. Because they've been really hard on this chemical and they've been trying to educate the public but evidently calling and just asking if it happened and them saying "well we got rid of that stuff" . That's enough for them. never mind the fact it was an "exposure to isocyanates in the workplace that I was reporting" which is what they told me they were going to check on. I wasn't calling them to tell them that they had harmful materials in a building, so evidently the guy I'm dealing with doesn't understand exactly what the law is or what law I was trying to get them to acknowledge. Cuz that would help my case if there were questions posed by government officials and they had to tell the truth. Either way, if they reported the exposure?great. They followed the law and I would have that an admission that an exposure occurred .....or they didn't report it and it would look really bad and probably cost them some money. But to my dismay, OSHA is obviously a joke. At least here in Dallas. So it's been real fun, yeah it's been one disappointment after the other of people just saying "I know this is my job, but I'm sorry. looking at your situation I'm just not good enough talented or educated enough to take it on. I'm just one of those people takes the easy cases and if something looks difficult? Even if it's a matter of you possibly dying or living on the streets and your whole family getting kicked out and never having a proper diagnosis to have on your medical records to show other employers or people in the situations that you can't be in in the future? I'm going to go over here and handle this easy money case." I'm sure there are some attorneys out there that if they knew about me and my situation it'll be all over it because they like a challenge and realize that there's not much left to do. All the information that I have and phone recordings, some documentation of b******* that has accumulated over the past months. Because normally you know you'd call a lawyer at the beginning of the case and there wouldn't be anything there. But since they figured I was never going to get an attorney? It was just "hey let's whack the pinata guy" . If an attorney were to walk in at this point? We've got enough acts of malfeasance and fraud and deliberate dishonesty, misleading statements and instructions, recordings and plenty of Doom and gloom documents meant to make me quit give up or go away out of fear or exhaustion.....and all I have to do is just hand you this stack and explain to you what's going on and we could probably even find a case that had nothing to do with workers compensation and had more to do with fraud and gross negligence and just have fun doing that. I mean they've had their fun why not? I didn't go into this looking for a cash settlement I just wanted to be taken care of and as the law states it should be. But I'm really just kind of f****** done with the whole f****** thing because everyone I talk to everyone I talk to doesn't want to touch it. When you have workers comp insurance that doesn't have ANY (ZERO) doctors in their Network to handle workplace asthma? which is one of the most common workers comp claims it pretty much leads the pack with all the saw dust and gas fumes out there to breathe in. But no we didn't have any doctors that would treat that or even know how to treat that at all. in fact the ONE that I did find? had retired about 5 years ago. That was funny. it was always a interesting thing to find out that when you finally had an aha moment leading to a hopeful situation? That turned out it was actually just a straw man. Even dealing with the Texas agencies help with people who are going through workers compensation or having difficulties? It depends on how you get on the line there's nothing more extremely helpful to the point where they'll even call the adjuster to make them call you back and help you fill out your forms whereas there were others that are just generally irritated by the fact that you're even calling and don't know what you're talking about. Well believe it or not there are some people in this world that don't do workers comp for living and don't spend their whole time having to deal with it. Especially people that are self-employed portrait artists for most of their lives. I guess this long-winded rambling stream of consciousness is just what's going on in my head and I can tell you right now it ain't a lot of good things and nothing really positive to say about working for anybody under any circumstances and I wouldn't take anything that anybody said they were going to do for you as a fact. It's all good on paper and everything but when it comes down to it it's all about saving money and if it involves an injury that doesn't look good on their records they got to get rid of that and they really don't f****** care what happens to you. You could be dissolving with sulfuric acid on your body and they would tell you to get out of the Sun and quit smoking. And they just watch it happen until you were just a pile of just steaming you know white powder on the ground or whatever happens. Do I sound frustrated? Flippant "whatever. Didn't see that coming". So I guess if you're in Texas and you're an attorney that this work is compensation and you want your entire case handed to you and you can say that you want a chemical exposure case in Texas I've got it right here for you if not fine. If you're from out of state that's fine too if you'd like to file a lawsuit that they beat me with clowns I don't give a carrot to a donkey whether you do that or not. As long as we win the case and they suffer for their behavior. It's not all vengeance. I want but is owed to me by law. And I didn't get that instead I got financial destitution cuz they have not paid me a dime and I'm the runaround which is basically we won't honor your claim until you prove that you were injured on the job. Okay I can't do that unless I prove that I have asthma. So they send me to a doctor that doesn't treat me for asthma now he's my pcp. Finally I find somebody that can treat me what do they do they immediately start pulling the plug on everything saying that my time's up sorry this show's over quick turn off the lights but hold up a minute they were too slow and I was able to get in there and she's doing spirometry tests and everything but you know I know it's not going to be enough because that's why I need to do the super serious testing the kind that definitively says whether you have asthma or not and there's no doubt there's no doubt that these people can try and split hairs and make excuses. Then I get to try and type for the workplace which wouldn't be hard if I had an attorney because this in front of a judge and argue it this is the guy before this is the guy after he's got occupational asthma he worked here for two and a half years and then after that weekend where was the only two days out of the year that that chemical was present and being sprayed? After that he developed severe occupational asthma and an insensitivity to isocyanide due to acute exposure with absolutely no PPE or guidance instruction and now no help no financial help and the guys that I work with here in town that run the show don't talk to me anymore it's all corporate people that were states away and have no idea and don't care what the facts are they just want the positive outcome which is the one that benefits them. But we all know that. We wouldn't be in this form if we didn't know that. Ask for all of y'all that have had better luck congratulations. I am truly happy for you. I don't know where I'm going to be I know obviously you can tell where I am mentally right now and that if another person involved with the adjuster or my employers handed me a form fill out to get the thing that I need that ain't going to happen that they say would happen that won't? I'd wad it up and throw it back in their face without reading it and not worrying about what they say will happen if I don't fill it out. Because they know if I fill it out and sign it or if I don't fill it out and sign it? It wouldn't do a f****** thing. Unless it was an attorney wanting to get with me and get a retainer and all that stuff set up .....and get going. Because nothing.....everything else is just a f****** waste of time, gas and mental energy. It's just that's what it's designed to do... wear you down. You know the truth and you can't prove it and you start feeling like you're living in bad movie like invasion of the body snatchers or something. like I said, it's the ultimate definition of gaslighting. So if you're going through the same thing with workers comp? I feel your pain. I definitely have sympathies if your injuries are more severe or debilitating than mine and you're being treated like this, but something needs to be done about the system because I'm quite aware of what it is now. I've had plenty of time to sit down and parse out what happened and watch videos listen to other attorneys talk read articles on the chemical and how not only companies and workers comp are reacting to it, but also the manufacturers themselves. For instance the CEO that wiped out that city in India? he showed up one day for court in India and then claimed he had to return to the states to take care of some business and never went back. India tried to extradite him for several decades. But instead? he was able to retire with a nice fat paycheck Savage whatever you want to call it and live out the rest of his days in Florida. And I guess he slept well at night knowing what he did. Union carbide. Bought by now Dow? Pretty sure they have never done anything wrong..... I'll have to double check that but I'm pretty sure on they are on up and up right? If they have the good attorney defend the behavior. I mean chemical companies they don't f*** around.... do they? anyway. whatever. I'm not too jaded to where I don't want to accept help or nail these f***. Or just get what I deserve. So take my post as a bit of Comedy or just a rant..... some venting. Maybe you feel the same way. Maybe it helps, maybe it doesn't. Just don't let it scare you cuz your case might be totally different than mine. I have an invisible injury and that's a s** place to be. Just like growing up in Texas. Well I guess it's time to lay down on the couch and play video games. How much is something like that pay?
My apologies if the punctuation spelling of what I've written up there (or actually dictated) has weird words that are completely out of contact in there somewhere. I dictated this because I'm so f****** tired of typing and I'm really tired of going back over what I wrote and fixing the grammar and trying to make it not look insane? It's just fatigue and I just thought I should get this out there in the Reddit forum. I'm a member of some other groups, but you know... first time listener first time caller

Here is the video, audio, and transcript. Here is part of the episode summary:
Peter joined Tyler to discuss whether utilitarianism is only tractable at the margin, how Peter thinks about the meat-eater problem, why he might side with aliens over humans, at what margins he would police nature, the utilitarian approach to secularism and abortion, what he’s learned producing the Journal of Controversial Ideas, what he’d change about the current Effective Altruism movement, where Derek Parfit went wrong, to what extent we should respect the wishes of the dead, why professional philosophy is so boring, his advice on how to enjoy our lives, what he’ll be doing after retiring from teaching, and more.
Peter described it as “like aerobics for the brain.” Here is one excerpt:
COWEN: How much should we spend trying to _thwart_ predators?
SINGER: I think that’s difficult because, again, you would have to take into account the consequences of not having predators, and what are you going to do with a prey population? Are they going to overpopulate and maybe starve or destroy the environment for other sentient beings? So, it’s hard to say how much we should spend trying to thwart them.
I think there are questions about reducing the suffering of wild animals that are easier than that. That’s a question that maybe, at some stage, we’ll grapple with when we’ve reduced the amount of suffering we inflict on animals generally. It’s nowhere near the top of the list for how to reduce animal suffering.
COWEN: What do you think of the fairly common fear that if we mix the moralities of human beings and the moralities of nature, that the moralities of nature will win out? Nature is so large and numerous and populous and fierce. Human beings are relatively small in number and fragile. If the prevailing ethic becomes the ethic of nature, that the blending is itself dangerous, that human beings end up thinking, “Well, predation is just fine; it’s the way of nature.” Therefore, they do terrible things to each other.
SINGER: Is that what you meant by the moralities of nature? I wasn’t sure what the phrase meant. Do you mean the morality that we imply, that we attribute to nature?
COWEN: “Red in tooth and claw.” If we think that’s a matter that is our business, do we not end up with that morality? Trumping ours, we become subordinate to that morality. A lot of very nasty people in history have actually cited nature. “Well, nature works this way. I’m just doing that. It’s a part of nature. It’s more or less okay.” How do we avoid those series of moves?
SINGER: Right. It’s a bad argument, and we try and explain why it’s a bad argument, that we don’t want to follow nature. That the fact that nature does something is not something that we ought to imitate, but maybe, in fact, we ought to combat, and of course, we do combat nature in many ways. Maybe war between humans is part of nature, but nevertheless, we regret when wars break out. We try to have institutions to prevent wars breaking out. I think a lot of our activities are combating nature’s way of doing things rather than regarding it as a model to follow.
COWEN: But if humans are a part of nature flat out, and if our optimal policing of nature leaves 99.9999 percent of all predation in place — we just can’t stop most of it — is it then so irrational to conclude, “Well this predation must be okay. It’s the natural state of the world. Our optimal best outcome leaves 99.99999 percent of it in place.” How do we avoid that mindset?
Recommended. And the new edition (much revised) of Peter’s Animal Liberation is now out.
The post My excellent Conversation with Peter Singer appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.
[

Comments

](https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2023/06/my-excellent-conversation-with-peter-singer.html#comments) - Is there something that makes the Kelly criterion inapplicable ...by CF

Related Stories

• What should I ask Ada Palmer?
• My excellent Conversation with Seth Godin
• Ian Dunt on how Westminster works, or doesn’t
  
  

COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of a internet forum - Reposting

​
Reposting this, long read but relevant for the coming deluge of 💩
_______________________________________________________________________

1. COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of a internet forum
2. Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation
3. Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist
4. How to Spot a Spy (Cointelpro Agent)
5. Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression

_______________________________________________________________________
COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of a internet forum..
There are several techniques for the control and manipulation of a internet forum no matter what, or who is on it. We will go over each technique and demonstrate that only a minimal number of operatives can be used to eventually and effectively gain a control of a 'uncontrolled forum.'
Technique #1 - 'FORUM SLIDING'
If a very sensitive posting of a critical nature has been posted on a forum - it can be quickly removed from public view by 'forum sliding.' In this technique a number of unrelated posts are quietly prepositioned on the forum and allowed to 'age.' Each of these misdirectional forum postings can then be called upon at will to trigger a 'forum slide.' The second requirement is that several fake accounts exist, which can be called upon, to ensure that this technique is not exposed to the public. To trigger a 'forum slide' and 'flush' the critical post out of public view it is simply a matter of logging into each account both real and fake and then 'replying' to prepositined postings with a simple 1 or 2 line comment. This brings the unrelated postings to the top of the forum list, and the critical posting 'slides' down the front page, and quickly out of public view. Although it is difficult or impossible to censor the posting it is now lost in a sea of unrelated and unuseful postings. By this means it becomes effective to keep the readers of the forum reading unrelated and non-issue items.
Technique #2 - 'CONSENSUS CRACKING'
A second highly effective technique (which you can see in operation all the time at www.abovetopsecret.com) is 'consensus cracking.' To develop a consensus crack, the following technique is used. Under the guise of a fake account a posting is made which looks legitimate and is towards the truth is made - but the critical point is that it has a VERY WEAK PREMISE without substantive proof to back the posting. Once this is done then under alternative fake accounts a very strong position in your favour is slowly introduced over the life of the posting. It is IMPERATIVE that both sides are initially presented, so the uninformed reader cannot determine which side is the truth. As postings and replies are made the stronger 'evidence' or disinformation in your favour is slowly 'seeded in.' Thus the uninformed reader will most like develop the same position as you, and if their position is against you their opposition to your posting will be most likely dropped. However in some cases where the forum members are highly educated and can counter your disinformation with real facts and linked postings, you can then 'abort' the consensus cracking by initiating a 'forum slide.'
Technique #3 - 'TOPIC DILUTION'
Topic dilution is not only effective in forum sliding it is also very useful in keeping the forum readers on unrelated and non-productive issues. This is a critical and useful technique to cause a 'RESOURCE BURN.' By implementing continual and non-related postings that distract and disrupt (trolling ) the forum readers they are more effectively stopped from anything of any real productivity. If the intensity of gradual dilution is intense enough, the readers will effectively stop researching and simply slip into a 'gossip mode.' In this state they can be more easily misdirected away from facts towards uninformed conjecture and opinion. The less informed they are the more effective and easy it becomes to control the entire group in the direction that you would desire the group to go in. It must be stressed that a proper assessment of the psychological capabilities and levels of education is first determined of the group to determine at what level to 'drive in the wedge.' By being too far off topic too quickly it may trigger censorship by a forum moderator.
Technique #4 - 'INFORMATION COLLECTION'
Information collection is also a very effective method to determine the psychological level of the forum members, and to gather intelligence that can be used against them. In this technique in a light and positive environment a 'show you mine so me yours' posting is initiated. From the number of replies and the answers that are provided much statistical information can be gathered. An example is to post your 'favourite weapon' and then encourage other members of the forum to showcase what they have. In this matter it can be determined by reverse proration what percentage of the forum community owns a firearm, and or a illegal weapon. This same method can be used by posing as one of the form members and posting your favourite 'technique of operation.' From the replies various methods that the group utilizes can be studied and effective methods developed to stop them from their activities.
Technique #5 - 'ANGER TROLLING'
Statistically, there is always a percentage of the forum posters who are more inclined to violence. In order to determine who these individuals are, it is a requirement to present a image to the forum to deliberately incite a strong psychological reaction. From this the most violent in the group can be effectively singled out for reverse IP location and possibly local enforcement tracking. To accomplish this only requires posting a link to a video depicting a local police officer massively abusing his power against a very innocent individual. Statistically of the million or so police officers in America there is always one or two being caught abusing there powers and the taping of the activity can be then used for intelligence gathering purposes - without the requirement to 'stage' a fake abuse video. This method is extremely effective, and the more so the more abusive the video can be made to look. Sometimes it is useful to 'lead' the forum by replying to your own posting with your own statement of violent intent, and that you 'do not care what the authorities think!!' inflammation. By doing this and showing no fear it may be more effective in getting the more silent and self-disciplined violent intent members of the forum to slip and post their real intentions. This can be used later in a court of law during prosecution.
Technique #6 - 'GAINING FULL CONTROL'
It is important to also be harvesting and continually maneuvering for a forum moderator position. Once this position is obtained, the forum can then be effectively and quietly controlled by deleting unfavourable postings - and one can eventually steer the forum into complete failure and lack of interest by the general public. This is the 'ultimate victory' as the forum is no longer participated with by the general public and no longer useful in maintaining their freedoms. Depending on the level of control you can obtain, you can deliberately steer a forum into defeat by censoring postings, deleting memberships, flooding, and or accidentally taking the forum offline. By this method the forum can be quickly killed. However it is not always in the interest to kill a forum as it can be converted into a 'honey pot' gathering center to collect and misdirect newcomers and from this point be completely used for your control for your agenda purposes.
CONCLUSION
Remember these techniques are only effective if the forum participants DO NOT KNOW ABOUT THEM. Once they are aware of these techniques the operation can completely fail, and the forum can become uncontrolled. At this point other avenues must be considered such as initiating a false legal precidence to simply have the forum shut down and taken offline. This is not desirable as it then leaves the enforcement agencies unable to track the percentage of those in the population who always resist attempts for control against them. Many other techniques can be utilized and developed by the individual and as you develop further techniques of infiltration and control it is imperative to share then with HQ.
_______________________________________________________________________
Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation
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 which 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' from a 'bunch of kids on the Internet' 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 be 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 'minutia' 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 except with denials 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 - a kind of investment for the future should the matter not be so easily contained.) 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 then 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, and even publicly 'call for an end to the nonsense' because you have already 'done the right thing.' 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 lose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.
13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic which 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 with issues 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. Vanish 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, 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.
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 and unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed. 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.
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 destroying them financially, emotionally, or severely damaging their health.
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.
_______________________________________________________________________
Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist
1) Avoidance. They never actually discuss issues head-on or provide constructive input, generally avoiding citation of references or credentials. Rather, they merely imply this, that, and the other. Virtually everything about their presentation implies their authority and expert knowledge in the matter without any further justification for credibility.
2) Selectivity. They tend to pick and choose opponents carefully, either applying the hit-and-run approach against mere commentators supportive of opponents, or focusing heavier attacks on key opponents who are known to directly address issues. Should a commentator become argumentative with any success, the focus will shift to include the commentator as well.
3) Coincidental. They tend to surface suddenly and somewhat coincidentally with a new controversial topic with no clear prior record of participation in general discussions in the particular public arena involved. They likewise tend to vanish once the topic is no longer of general concern. They were likely directed or elected to be there for a reason, and vanish with the reason.
4) Teamwork. They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams. Of course, this can happen naturally in any public forum, but there will likely be an ongoing pattern of frequent exchanges of this sort where professionals are involved. Sometimes one of the players will infiltrate the opponent camp to become a source for straw man or other tactics designed to dilute opponent presentation strength.
5) Anti-conspiratorial. They almost always have disdain for 'conspiracy theorists' and, usually, for those who in any way believe JFK was not killed by LHO. Ask yourself why, if they hold such disdain for conspiracy theorists, do they focus on defending a single topic discussed in a NG focusing on conspiracies? One might think they would either be trying to make fools of everyone on every topic, or simply ignore the group they hold in such disdain.Or, one might more rightly conclude they have an ulterior motive for their actions in going out of their way to focus as they do.
6) Artificial Emotions. An odd kind of 'artificial' emotionalism and an unusually thick skin -- an ability to persevere and persist even in the face of overwhelming criticism and unacceptance. This likely stems from intelligence community training that, no matter how condemning the evidence, deny everything, and never become emotionally involved or reactive. The net result for a disinfo artist is that emotions can seem artificial.
Most people, if responding in anger, for instance, will express their animosity throughout their rebuttal. But disinfo types usually have trouble maintaining the 'image' and are hot and cold with respect to pretended emotions and their usually more calm or unemotional communications style. It's just a job, and they often seem unable to 'act their role in character' as well in a communications medium as they might be able in a real face-to-face conversation/confrontation. You might have outright rage and indignation one moment, ho-hum the next, and more anger later -- an emotional yo-yo.
With respect to being thick-skinned, no amount of criticism will deter them from doing their job, and they will generally continue their old disinfo patterns without any adjustments to criticisms of how obvious it is that they play that game -- where a more rational individual who truly cares what others think might seek to improve their communications style, substance, and so forth, or simply give up.
7) Inconsistent. There is also a tendency to make mistakes which betray their true self/motives. This may stem from not really knowing their topic, or it may be somewhat 'freudian', so to speak, in that perhaps they really root for the side of truth deep within.
I have noted that often, they will simply cite contradictory information which neutralizes itself and the author. For instance, one such player claimed to be a Navy pilot, but blamed his poor communicating skills (spelling, grammar, incoherent style) on having only a grade-school education. I'm not aware of too many Navy pilots who don't have a college degree. Another claimed no knowledge of a particular topic/situation but later claimed first-hand knowledge of it.
8) Time Constant. Recently discovered, with respect to News Groups, is the response time factor. There are three ways this can be seen to work, especially when the government or other empowered player is involved in a cover up operation:
a) ANY NG posting by a targeted proponent for truth can result in an IMMEDIATE response. The government and other empowered players can afford to pay people to sit there and watch for an opportunity to do some damage. SINCE DISINFO IN A NG ONLY WORKS IF THE READER SEES IT - FAST RESPONSE IS CALLED FOR, or the visitor may be swayed towards truth.
b) When dealing in more direct ways with a disinformationalist, such as email, DELAY IS CALLED FOR - there will usually be a minimum of a 48-72 hour delay. This allows a sit-down team discussion on response strategy for best effect, and even enough time to 'get permission' or instruction from a formal chain of command.
c) In the NG example 1) above, it will often ALSO be seen that bigger guns are drawn and fired after the same 48-72 hours delay - the team approach in play. This is especially true when the targeted truth seeker or their comments are considered more important with respect to potential to reveal truth. Thus, a serious truth sayer will be attacked twice for the same sin.
_______________________________________________________________________
How to Spot a Spy (Cointelpro Agent)
One way to neutralize a potential activist is to get them to be in a group that does all the wrong things. Why?
1) The message doesn't get out.
2) A lot of time is wasted
3) The activist is frustrated and discouraged
4) Nothing good is accomplished.
FBI and Police Informers and Infiltrators will infest any group and they have phoney activist organizations established.
Their purpose is to prevent any real movement for justice or eco-peace from developing in this country.
Agents come in small, medium or large. They can be of any ethnic background. They can be male or female.
The actual size of the group or movement being infiltrated is irrelevant. It is the potential the movement has for becoming large which brings on the spies and saboteurs.
This booklet lists tactics agents use to slow things down, foul things up, destroy the movement and keep tabs on activists.
It is the agent's job to keep the activist from quitting such a group, thus keeping him/her under control.
In some situations, to get control, the agent will tell the activist:

• "You're dividing the movement."

[Here, I have added the psychological reasons as to WHY this maneuver works to control people]
This invites guilty feelings. Many people can be controlled by guilt. The agents begin relationships with activists behind a well-developed mask of "dedication to the cause." Because of their often declared dedication, (and actions designed to prove this), when they criticize the activist, he or she - being truly dedicated to the movement - becomes convinced that somehow, any issues are THEIR fault. This is because a truly dedicated person tends to believe that everyone has a conscience and that nobody would dissimulate and lie like that "on purpose." It's amazing how far agents can go in manipulating an activist because the activist will constantly make excuses for the agent who regularly declares their dedication to the cause. Even if they do, occasionally, suspect the agent, they will pull the wool over their own eyes by rationalizing: "they did that unconsciously... they didn't really mean it... I can help them by being forgiving and accepting " and so on and so forth.
The agent will tell the activist:

• "You're a leader!"

This is designed to enhance the activist's self-esteem. His or her narcissistic admiration of his/her own activist/altruistic intentions increase as he or she identifies with and consciously admires the altruistic declarations of the agent which are deliberately set up to mirror those of the activist.
This is "malignant pseudoidentification." It is the process by which the agent consciously imitates or simulates a certain behavior to foster the activist's identification with him/her, thus increasing the activist's vulnerability to exploitation. The agent will simulate the more subtle self-concepts of the activist.
Activists and those who have altruistic self-concepts are most vulnerable to malignant pseudoidentification especially during work with the agent when the interaction includes matter relating to their competency, autonomy, or knowledge.
The goal of the agent is to increase the activist's general empathy for the agent through pseudo-identification with the activist's self-concepts.
The most common example of this is the agent who will compliment the activist for his competency or knowledge or value to the movement. On a more subtle level, the agent will simulate affects and mannerisms of the activist which promotes identification via mirroring and feelings of "twinship". It is not unheard of for activists, enamored by the perceived helpfulness and competence of a good agent, to find themselves considering ethical violations and perhaps, even illegal behavior, in the service of their agent/handler.
The activist's "felt quality of perfection" [self-concept] is enhanced, and a strong empathic bond is developed with the agent through his/her imitation and simulation of the victim's own narcissistic investments. [self-concepts] That is, if the activist knows, deep inside, their own dedication to the cause, they will project that onto the agent who is "mirroring" them.
The activist will be deluded into thinking that the agent shares this feeling of identification and bonding. In an activist/social movement setting, the adversarial roles that activists naturally play vis a vis the establishment/government, fosters ongoing processes of intrapsychic splitting so that "twinship alliances" between activist and agent may render whole sectors or reality testing unavailable to the activist. They literally "lose touch with reality."
Activists who deny their own narcissistic investments [do not have a good idea of their own self-concepts and that they ARE concepts] and consciously perceive themselves (accurately, as it were) to be "helpers" endowed with a special amount of altruism are exceedingly vulnerable to the affective (emotional) simulation of the accomplished agent.
Empathy is fostered in the activist through the expression of quite visible affects. The presentation of tearfulness, sadness, longing, fear, remorse, and guilt, may induce in the helper-oriented activist a strong sense of compassion, while unconsciously enhancing the activist's narcissistic investment in self as the embodiment of goodness.
The agent's expresssion of such simulated affects may be quite compelling to the observer and difficult to distinguish from deep emotion.
It can usually be identified by two events, however:
First, the activist who has analyzed his/her own narcissistic roots and is aware of his/her own potential for being "emotionally hooked," will be able to remain cool and unaffected by such emotional outpourings by the agent.
As a result of this unaffected, cool, attitude, the Second event will occur: The agent will recompensate much too quickly following such an affective expression leaving the activist with the impression that "the play has ended, the curtain has fallen," and the imposture, for the moment, has finished. The agent will then move quickly to another activist/victim.
The fact is, the movement doesn't need leaders, it needs MOVERS. "Follow the leader" is a waste of time.
A good agent will want to meet as often as possible. He or she will talk a lot and say little. One can expect an onslaught of long, unresolved discussions.
Some agents take on a pushy, arrogant, or defensive manner:
1) To disrupt the agenda
2) To side-track the discussion
3) To interrupt repeatedly
4) To feign ignorance
5) To make an unfounded accusation against a person.
Calling someone a racist, for example. This tactic is used to discredit a person in the eyes of all other group members.
Saboteurs
Some saboteurs pretend to be activists. She or he will ....
1) Write encyclopedic flyers (in the present day, websites)
2) Print flyers in English only.
3) Have demonstrations in places where no one cares.
4) Solicit funding from rich people instead of grass roots support
5) Display banners with too many words that are confusing.
6) Confuse issues.
7) Make the wrong demands.
8) Compromise the goal.
9) Have endless discussions that waste everyone's time. The agent may accompany the endless discussions with drinking, pot smoking or other amusement to slow down the activist's work.
Provocateurs
1) Want to establish "leaders" to set them up for a fall in order to stop the movement.
2) Suggest doing foolish, illegal things to get the activists in trouble.
3) Encourage militancy.
4) Want to taunt the authorities.
5) Attempt to make the activist compromise their values.
6) Attempt to instigate violence. Activisim ought to always be non-violent.
7) Attempt to provoke revolt among people who are ill-prepared to deal with the reaction of the authorities to such violence.
Informants
1) Want everyone to sign up and sing in and sign everything.
2) Ask a lot of questions (gathering data).
3) Want to know what events the activist is planning to attend.
4) Attempt to make the activist defend him or herself to identify his or her beliefs, goals, and level of committment.
Recruiting
Legitimate activists do not subject people to hours of persuasive dialog. Their actions, beliefs, and goals speak for themselves.
Groups that DO recruit are missionaries, military, and fake political parties or movements set up by agents.
Surveillance
ALWAYS assume that you are under surveillance.
At this point, if you are NOT under surveillance, you are not a very good activist!
Scare Tactics
They use them.
Such tactics include slander, defamation, threats, getting close to disaffected or minimally committed fellow activists to persuade them (via psychological tactics described above) to turn against the movement and give false testimony against their former compatriots. They will plant illegal substances on the activist and set up an arrest; they will plant false information and set up "exposure," they will send incriminating letters [emails] in the name of the activist; and more; they will do whatever society will allow.
This booklet in no way covers all the ways agents use to sabotage the lives of sincere an dedicated activists.
If an agent is "exposed," he or she will be transferred or replaced.
COINTELPRO is still in operation today under a different code name. It is no longer placed on paper where it can be discovered through the freedom of information act.
The FBI counterintelligence program's stated purpose: To expose, disrupt, misdirect, discredit, and otherwise neutralize individuals who the FBI categorize as opposed to the National Interests. "National Security" means the FBI's security from the people ever finding out the vicious things it does in violation of people's civil liberties.
_______________________________________________________________________
Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression
Strong, credible allegations of high-level criminal activity can bring down a government. When the government lacks an effective, fact-based defense, other techniques must be employed. The success of these techniques depends heavily upon a cooperative, compliant press and a mere token opposition party.
1. Dummy up. If it's not reported, if it's not news, it didn't happen.
2. Wax indignant. This is also known as the "How dare you?" gambit.
3. Characterize the charges as "rumors" or, better yet, "wild rumors." If, in spite of the news blackout, the public is still able to learn about the suspicious facts, it can only be through "rumors." (If they tend to believe the "rumors" it must be because they are simply "paranoid" or "hysterical.")
4. Knock down straw men. Deal only with the weakest aspects of the weakest charges. Even better, create your own straw men. Make up wild rumors (or plant false stories) and give them lead play when you appear to debunk all the charges, real and fanciful alike.
5. Call the skeptics names like "conspiracy theorist," "nutcase," "ranter," "kook," "crackpot," and, of course, "rumor monger." Be sure, too, to use heavily loaded verbs and adjectives when characterizing their charges and defending the "more reasonable" government and its defenders. You must then carefully avoid fair and open debate with any of the people you have thus maligned. For insurance, set up your own "skeptics" to shoot down.
6. Impugn motives. Attempt to marginalize the critics by suggesting strongly that they are not really interested in the truth but are simply pursuing a partisan political agenda or are out to make money (compared to over-compensated adherents to the government line who, presumably, are not).
7. Invoke authority. Here the controlled press and the sham opposition can be very useful.
8. Dismiss the charges as "old news."
9. Come half-clean. This is also known as "confession and avoidance" or "taking the limited hangout route." This way, you create the impression of candor and honesty while you admit only to relatively harmless, less-than-criminal "mistakes." This stratagem often requires the embrace of a fall-back position quite different from the one originally taken. With effective damage control, the fall-back position need only be peddled by stooge skeptics to carefully limited markets.
10. Characterize the crimes as impossibly complex and the truth as ultimately unknowable.
11. Reason backward, using the deductive method with a vengeance. With thoroughly rigorous deduction, troublesome evidence is irrelevant. E.g. We have a completely free press. If evidence exists that the Vince Foster "suicide" note was forged, they would have reported it. They haven't reported it so there is no such evidence. Another variation on this theme involves the likelihood of a conspiracy leaker and a press who would report the leak.
12. Require the skeptics to solve the crime completely. E.g. If Foster was murdered, who did it and why?
13. Change the subject. This technique includes creating and/or publicizing distractions.
14. Lightly report incriminating facts, and then make nothing of them. This is sometimes referred to as "bump and run" reporting.
15. Baldly and brazenly lie. A favorite way of doing this is to attribute the "facts" furnished the public to a plausible-sounding, but anonymous, source.
16. Expanding further on numbers 4 and 5, have your own stooges "expose" scandals and champion popular causes. Their job is to pre-empt real opponents and to play 99-yard football. A variation is to pay rich people for the job who will pretend to spend their own money.
17. Flood the Internet with agents. This is the answer to the question, "What could possibly motivate a person to spend hour upon hour on Internet news groups defending the government and/or the press and harassing genuine critics?" Don t the authorities have defenders enough in all the newspapers, magazines, radio, and television? One would think refusing to print critical letters and screening out serious callers or dumping them from radio talk shows would be control enough, but, obviously, it is not.

I decided that every day I am going to post about a case, ranking them from least favorite to favorite and giving my on the fly reasons so I probably will miss and forget things but thought it would be a fun idea. Also please remember this is just my opinion and I know we all have differing opinions but this is my opinion.
Alright I was finally able to get myself to continue on with my case rankings. Took a break and now will try to be consistent again.
32. The Rite of Turnabout
Overview: Alright what better way to get back into this then to talk about a case from SOJ. I will say that most cases from now on will have a lot more positives than negatives but are just outshined by others. The Rite of Turnabout is the third case of Spirit of Justice. The case takes place in the fictional country we were introduced to in 6-1 Khurain. Khurain has a burning hate for defense attorneys due to past crimes of former defense attorney Dhurke Sahdmadhi. He had been accused of killing his wife the queen at the time and was leading the rebel group the Defiant Dragons.
Mystery: While the Defiant Dragons attempted to end the regime of Garan and restore order in Khurain. Lady Keera was called to kill the rebels and people believed that she had returned from the dead to protect the people of Khurain from Dhurke and the rebels. The case begins and Phoenix Wright reunites with Maya Fey for the first time since Trials and Tribulations. Everything is exciting Maya's grown up it's great to see her and then...... she gets accused of another murder. Poor Maya can not catch a break in the AA games even when she returns after all this time she still is being accused of crimes. Maya is accused of killing high priest Tahrust Inmee. He was found dead in a stream of water right outside the Inner Sanctum. The case preceeds and we run into a guy who remembers nothing about himself except its actually a rebel who escaped from prison named Datz Arebal. The cross examination with him is a little tedious but also absolutely hilarious. Then we are told that Puhray Zehlot a monk had been killed and the murder weapon had prints that belonged to you guessed it Maya Fey. The case continues on with us figuring out that Tahrust and his wife were actually both rebels and that Behleeb Inmee. These pun names just get worse and worse. Anyways that they were both rebels and that Zehlot was actually some blood thirsty weirdo who was the real Lady Keera and had tried to kill Behleeb but she had killed him. Tahrust panicked and to protect the hideout and his wife killed himself so the blood in the stream would not be connected to the rebel hideout and Fey would be accused of both crimes.
Characters:
Phoenix Wright: I want to like Wright in DD and SOJ but there's something about playing as him after everything that happened in AJ and feeling like he should be so much smarter and competent then he is. He literally gets a guilty verdict at one point against Sad Monk. I do love getting to see Wright and Maya interact together again and it's just as fun as always.
Maya Fey: It's so good to finally see Maya again and she is the star of the case. Despite spending a lot of the case behind bars we get to see how much she's grown in seven years. She is way more mature while still keeping her fun and playful side. Her talk with Rayfa was one of the best scenes in all of SOJ and really highlighted how far Maya has come. And then 6-DLC ruins that but anyways.
Nahyuta Sahdmadhi: I don't know how many more times I will have to say this. But Nahyuta is the weak link and holds back every case bar 6-1 in SOJ because he is the only prosecutor in the whole series that I have actually hated. He has no good qualities and gets no development from 6-2 - 6-4. It's the same old thing with him and I'm going to end it there before I go on a long rant.
Rayfa: She is great in this case. While they didn't show much of her good qualities in 6-1 she is so much fun to hang out with in 6-3. And come on who doesn't enjoy being around a girl who calls Wright "Barbed Head". I'll talk about it more later down.
Tahrust Inmee: Well usually I don't talk about the victim but this case uses spirit channeling to allow us to talk to Tahrust who lies to protect his wife. He is fun to battle against but also I'm not sure how I feel about how he treats Maya's body specifically her leg.
Puhray Zehlot: Not much too say but this guy sounds like a bastard. Next.
Datz: I loved cross examining this idiot so much. He loses his memory after parachuting down to escape from prison. It's hilarious and is entertaining. Not much else to say great addition.
Behleeb: One of the drawbacks with this case is our lack of time interacting with the actual culprit which makes sense but I wish we got to know more about her and her character.
​
Problems: Alright thankfully these will continue to get shorter and shorter. As usual Nahyuta himself drags another case down and I still feel the need to complain about maybe the worst addition to any AA game. The gallery getting voice clips please never do that again AA. The divination seances in this case are really tedious and annoying to get through. If you got through these without a guide I would be shocked these things just made me angry because I could not figure out the answer without a guide. Wish it was a little more simple. I wish we got to know more about the actual culprit Behleeb. The case does drag in a couple spots in my opinion but it's not as bad as certain cases. Wish we got more of Maya and she didn't return just to be our client again. That really frustrated me I was hoping we would finally get to investigate a murder with her again but of course not she has to be your client for the third time. Bullshit.
Positives: Seeing a more mature Maya is amazing while she keeps her funny and joking edge to her. Wright and Rayfa's investigation segments are some of the absolute best in the second trilogy and I wish we got more of there dynamic. The case being a murdesuicide is something I wish AA had done again and I'm glad the game was finally smart enough to let us channel a victim and cross examine them. Tahrust and Behleeb have a very tragic story and it was pretty interesting. Also who doesn't love cross examining Datz. The murder itself is also pretty creative. Also the world building the game does for a fictional country and the detail they put into it is so impressive and makes this fake country feel more real. And then they have stuff like wanting to kill DA's that ruin that. Also who doesn't love the fact that Khurain has a knock off Steel Samurai the Plummed Punisher. The fact that it ties into the case is pretty funny.
Final Thoughts: I know it seems weird for a case with so much positives to be so low but I think this case also suffers because of qualities of the game that is SOJ. Some of the problems are problems with all of SOJ but unfortunately they also hurt this solid case. The case did drag a little bit in certain spots that brought it down but thats also a general problem with SOJ. The quality in these next 31 cases is very good and that's why this case is so low despite being a very solid case. Any thoughts, opinions, or questions about The Rite of Turnabout would be greatly appreciated. Hopefully my next post will be up in the next couple days.

I’m interviewing for an attorney role with a federal financial services related government agency. Have the requisite experience and feel like my resume matches up well with the role. However, I am not very experienced with the structured format of federal government job interviews. I am way more used to normal, conversational interviews that are typical when being considered for an attorney role.
Any advice in general on how to strategize and navigate these (somewhat awkward) structured interviews?

This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 79%. (I'm a bot)

A woman once branded "Australia's worst female serial killer" has been pardoned after new evidence suggested she did not kill her four infant children.
Kathleen Folbigg spent 20 years in prison after a jury found she killed sons Caleb and Patrick and daughters Sarah and Laura over a decade.
Ms Folbigg, who has always maintained her innocence, was jailed for 25 years in 2003 for the murders of three of the children, and the manslaughter of her first son, Caleb.
On Monday, New South Wales Attorney General Michael Daley said Mr Bathurst had concluded that there was reasonable doubt that Ms Folbigg was guilty.
"It has been a 20-year-long ordeal for her... I wish her peace," Mr Daley said, adding his thoughts were also with the children's father, Craig Folbigg.
"It is impossible to comprehend the injury that has been inflicted upon Kathleen Folbigg - the pain of losing her children [and] close to two decades locked away in maximum security prisons," said her lawyer, Rhanee Rego.

Summary Source FAQ Feedback Top keywords: Folbigg^#1 children^#2 case^#3 inquiry^#4 found^#5
Post found in /worldnews and /worldnews.
NOTICE: This thread is for discussing the submission topic. Please do not discuss the concept of the autotldr bot here.

I am not the original poster, this is a repost sub. I will only be posting the reader's question, you can view Allison's response at the link :)
Trigger warning: being a dick to someone with cancer
Mood spoiler: positive, slightly shocking
Original post [March 8, 2021]

I’m in a position that I’ve never been in before. In 2018, I took on a really exciting role with a new company building a team from the ground up. I hired a handful of people, and got to work setting up the new team and really helping to grow a new business. This was a first for me, it was a challenge, and I loved it!
At the beginning of 2019, I hired Bob. Bob had more than 15 years of experience in the industry. His last position read almost word for word what I was looking for. He knocked the interview out of the park! He had a great personality, talked about how much he loved digging into things, and generally sold himself in a beautiful manner. Everyone who interviewed him was so excited.
Bob started at 9:00 on a Monday and completely disappeared at 3:45 that afternoon. I was in a meeting, and when I got out of the meeting everyone was looking for him. When he returned to work on Tuesday, I reiterated that because we are support staff, we are expected to be on shift from 9 am to 5 pm Monday through Friday. Because we support people globally, I’ll actually work longer hours to support our overseas partners, and I pick up the weekend shifts because I’ve always hated managers who make their team work the weekends. Bob was unhappy that he could not leave the the office at 3:45 each day. He complained about the commute, and having to drive home in traffic. Unfortunately, we could make a no concessions and he agreed to work from 9-5. From that point on, he complained and moped around the office and people started talking to me and other staff members about how Bob constantly looked miserable. I spoke with him and I made as many concessions as I could, including letting him leave at 4:45 instead of 5. My boss also spoke with him, and during that meeting Bob said he loved the job!
Unfortunately in mid-2019, I got very sick. By September, I was forced to work from home 100% as I was going through multiple rounds of chemotherapy. Not once did I or my team miss a deadline. However, in mid-2020 when I finished up chemotherapy and moved on to radiation and surgery, my team had a long meeting with me without Bob: Apparently, as I was working from home, Bob had taken the opportunity to go back to leaving at 3:45 pm and disappearing throughout the course of the day, and it only became worse in early 2020 as we all went work-from-home. He was not responsive to emails, texts, or instant messages, and the staff was covering a large part of his work because they didn’t want to pile more on me while I was undergoing chemo.
In July 2020, with beating cancer on the horizon, I had a long conversation with Bob about what I had been told not only by my team but my other teams that interact with mine. Bob was defensive, he tried to gaslight me, he tried to blame his inability to work largely on the fact that I was not in the office to hold his hand (his words). This man with more than 15 years of experience in the industry had the audacity to tell me that he was an entry-level employee and that he required constant handholding, and that in no way shape or form had he ever indicated that he had experience with our work. I pulled his résumé with him, and we line by line went over what the job description was, what we had talked about in the job interview, what his training had been, and what his history was according to his résumé.
After a few weeks of him badmouthing me, badmouthing the team, disappearing throughout the course of the day, taking random time off because his kid was sick, because his wife was out of work and she was depressed, and because he had emergencies at home, we had another conversation with him, me, my boss, and HR. We laid out the job description and his assignments, and we were very understanding about the sick kid, the depressed wife, the issues at home … let’s face it, 2020 was a dumpster fire. My own husband was out of work, my 17-year-old was doing her senior year in high school from home, it was a mess, we all acknowledge it and we made every effort to support our staff during the year from hell.
Over the next few weeks, Bob continued his downward spiral. Everything was a fight, every assignment wasn’t in his wheelhouse, everything that we needed to be done for the group he couldn’t do. It was just an absolute mess.
We spoke with legal, HR, individual attorneys, and at the end of the discussions we decided that we had no choice but to terminate him. However we wanted to give him one last chance to be the person we interviewed. So we put him on a six-week performance improvement plan. We outlined every piece of work that he needed to do. We outlined timelines, who he could go to for help, what he could do if he was running behind and needed assistance.
At the end of the six weeks, we reviewed all of our weekly meetings and the every-other-day meetings we had started during the improvement plan, and he blamed us. It was HR’s fault for hiring him when he clearly couldn’t do the job, it was my fault for getting sick (because I eat meat and sugar and according to him both cause cancer!), it was my boss’s fault for taking two weeks off when his wife gave birth. He just kept piling on the excuses.
At the end of the meeting, we ended up letting him go.
It’s the first time I’ve ever had to let anybody go. And honestly I think I’m more upset than he was! I feel like somehow I failed. I failed in interviewing him. I failed in not catching the fact that he wasn’t working, that he wasn’t pulling his weight in the department. I just feel like such a failure. How do I move on from this? I need to replace him, and all I keep thinking is I’m going to hire badly again.
Rationally I know that I didn’t do such a horrendous job. I hired six people for a new department, five of whom are still there. And yet that inkling in the back of my brain, I still feel like a failure. Is there an easy way to move on?

Update (second response at the link) [December 15, 2021]

I absolutely took your advice and the advice of lots of the commenters. I was able to find a great new hire for the role and he’s fitting in with the team fantastically and has taken to the work like a fish in water. The team and I talk openly and freely about our workloads and how we’re working with or getting along with other members of our team.
About 2-weeks after Bob’s dismissal from the company, we found out that he’d been working for all of 2020 with one of our competitors and working on their deliverables at the same time he was working on ours.
Thank you so much for providing a sounding board for us when we need a third party perspective.

In the comments of the update, someone said OOP should confer with legal cousel about Bob working for their competitor. This was OOP's response, though they haven't elaborated further since:

Oh we did! What we do is proprietary and we have access to all financial and customer data so this ended up with legal as soon as we found out about it.

Hello! I understand that a chapter 7 bankruptcy is in the public records permanently, but how long does will it show up on a general background check that a company/job would run? I’m not talking about a credit check, just a general standard background check companies run on candidates, which my attorney did tell me the bankruptcy will most likely show up on from here on out should I decide to file, due to bankruptcies being a public record.
Would the chapter 7 bankruptcy show up forever on a background check or would it stop showing up on the background checks after a certain amount of years? (Again, I am NOT referring to a credit check which I knows stays for 10 years.)

The attorney mentioned this is for the whole shebang (revocable joint living trust, a general assignment of assets, a pour-over Will, a durable power of attorney, an Advance Health Care Directive, a HIPAA Authorization, a Nomination of Conservators, a Certification of Trust, a Nomination of Guardians, and deeds transferring real estate to the joint living trust).
I was quoted $6.5k flat fee + costs (recording fees, copies, etc.).
I have a house, life insurance and some brokerage assets.
Is this in the ballpark to create a trust?

This is not soliciting legal advice. I'm looking for advice on how to choose a good personal injury attorney for a matter against a large hotel chain out of state. I haven't been impressed by the couple I've talked to. They usually take forever to call me back, then call saying it's "Mike M" with no last name or firm, or just generally seem uninterested.
Any advice on selecting a good firm? I'm working at a large firm in NYC that doesn't seem to have relevant contacts.
Bonus points for any outright recs for Richmond, VA.

Hey everyone, I'm Jake and I'm 19 yrs old and from the east coast. I'm looking for people to add to my recently created server (currently sitting at 9 members). All I require is you to be from NA, SA, or Europe due to timezones, are 18+ (do not lie for everyone's sake), aren't going to consistently instigate issues, are mindful of others and are gonna be somewhat active (at least once a week) through vc, posts, or text chat. Ideally I'm looking for people to game, talk sports and other stuff, and have watch parties for dumb/cringe videos or movies/shows/events (that I don't mind if you commentate over because most people are too serious about that and I find it more engaging that way anyway). I'm saving up for a new PC so I'm slightly limited as to what I can play but for now I can play any party game through remote play together (Jackbox, Gang Beasts, Stick Fight, Pummel Party, etc), survival games (Grounded, Valheim, Modded MC) and general co-op (Gunfire Reborn, MythForce, Rounds, etc). Minecraft is on indefinite hold as modders update to 1.20 and the modding malicious malware issue is resolved. I'm looking to do a goofy voiced playthrough of the Ace Attorney games in the mean time and if you've never played or seen them that's honestly a bonus. Regardless, I can sorta play heftier stuff like GTA online or horror games (Demonologist, Phasmophobia, Forewarned, Outlast Trials, etc) but it's a bit challenging. If you're genuinely interested hmu with a short intro and a name to refer to you as to know you read all this and I'll add you and hopefully we can start getting acquainted. Hope you guys have a good one and cheers.

Reposting this, long read but relevant for the coming attacks
_______________________________________________________________________

1. COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of a internet forum
2. Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation
3. Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist
4. How to Spot a Spy (Cointelpro Agent)
5. Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression

_______________________________________________________________________
COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of a internet forum..
There are several techniques for the control and manipulation of a internet forum no matter what, or who is on it. We will go over each technique and demonstrate that only a minimal number of operatives can be used to eventually and effectively gain a control of a 'uncontrolled forum.'
Technique #1 - 'FORUM SLIDING'
If a very sensitive posting of a critical nature has been posted on a forum - it can be quickly removed from public view by 'forum sliding.' In this technique a number of unrelated posts are quietly prepositioned on the forum and allowed to 'age.' Each of these misdirectional forum postings can then be called upon at will to trigger a 'forum slide.' The second requirement is that several fake accounts exist, which can be called upon, to ensure that this technique is not exposed to the public. To trigger a 'forum slide' and 'flush' the critical post out of public view it is simply a matter of logging into each account both real and fake and then 'replying' to prepositined postings with a simple 1 or 2 line comment. This brings the unrelated postings to the top of the forum list, and the critical posting 'slides' down the front page, and quickly out of public view. Although it is difficult or impossible to censor the posting it is now lost in a sea of unrelated and unuseful postings. By this means it becomes effective to keep the readers of the forum reading unrelated and non-issue items.
Technique #2 - 'CONSENSUS CRACKING'
A second highly effective technique (which you can see in operation all the time at www.abovetopsecret.com) is 'consensus cracking.' To develop a consensus crack, the following technique is used. Under the guise of a fake account a posting is made which looks legitimate and is towards the truth is made - but the critical point is that it has a VERY WEAK PREMISE without substantive proof to back the posting. Once this is done then under alternative fake accounts a very strong position in your favour is slowly introduced over the life of the posting. It is IMPERATIVE that both sides are initially presented, so the uninformed reader cannot determine which side is the truth. As postings and replies are made the stronger 'evidence' or disinformation in your favour is slowly 'seeded in.' Thus the uninformed reader will most like develop the same position as you, and if their position is against you their opposition to your posting will be most likely dropped. However in some cases where the forum members are highly educated and can counter your disinformation with real facts and linked postings, you can then 'abort' the consensus cracking by initiating a 'forum slide.'
Technique #3 - 'TOPIC DILUTION'
Topic dilution is not only effective in forum sliding it is also very useful in keeping the forum readers on unrelated and non-productive issues. This is a critical and useful technique to cause a 'RESOURCE BURN.' By implementing continual and non-related postings that distract and disrupt (trolling ) the forum readers they are more effectively stopped from anything of any real productivity. If the intensity of gradual dilution is intense enough, the readers will effectively stop researching and simply slip into a 'gossip mode.' In this state they can be more easily misdirected away from facts towards uninformed conjecture and opinion. The less informed they are the more effective and easy it becomes to control the entire group in the direction that you would desire the group to go in. It must be stressed that a proper assessment of the psychological capabilities and levels of education is first determined of the group to determine at what level to 'drive in the wedge.' By being too far off topic too quickly it may trigger censorship by a forum moderator.
Technique #4 - 'INFORMATION COLLECTION'
Information collection is also a very effective method to determine the psychological level of the forum members, and to gather intelligence that can be used against them. In this technique in a light and positive environment a 'show you mine so me yours' posting is initiated. From the number of replies and the answers that are provided much statistical information can be gathered. An example is to post your 'favourite weapon' and then encourage other members of the forum to showcase what they have. In this matter it can be determined by reverse proration what percentage of the forum community owns a firearm, and or a illegal weapon. This same method can be used by posing as one of the form members and posting your favourite 'technique of operation.' From the replies various methods that the group utilizes can be studied and effective methods developed to stop them from their activities.
Technique #5 - 'ANGER TROLLING'
Statistically, there is always a percentage of the forum posters who are more inclined to violence. In order to determine who these individuals are, it is a requirement to present a image to the forum to deliberately incite a strong psychological reaction. From this the most violent in the group can be effectively singled out for reverse IP location and possibly local enforcement tracking. To accomplish this only requires posting a link to a video depicting a local police officer massively abusing his power against a very innocent individual. Statistically of the million or so police officers in America there is always one or two being caught abusing there powers and the taping of the activity can be then used for intelligence gathering purposes - without the requirement to 'stage' a fake abuse video. This method is extremely effective, and the more so the more abusive the video can be made to look. Sometimes it is useful to 'lead' the forum by replying to your own posting with your own statement of violent intent, and that you 'do not care what the authorities think!!' inflammation. By doing this and showing no fear it may be more effective in getting the more silent and self-disciplined violent intent members of the forum to slip and post their real intentions. This can be used later in a court of law during prosecution.
Technique #6 - 'GAINING FULL CONTROL'
It is important to also be harvesting and continually maneuvering for a forum moderator position. Once this position is obtained, the forum can then be effectively and quietly controlled by deleting unfavourable postings - and one can eventually steer the forum into complete failure and lack of interest by the general public. This is the 'ultimate victory' as the forum is no longer participated with by the general public and no longer useful in maintaining their freedoms. Depending on the level of control you can obtain, you can deliberately steer a forum into defeat by censoring postings, deleting memberships, flooding, and or accidentally taking the forum offline. By this method the forum can be quickly killed. However it is not always in the interest to kill a forum as it can be converted into a 'honey pot' gathering center to collect and misdirect newcomers and from this point be completely used for your control for your agenda purposes.
CONCLUSION
Remember these techniques are only effective if the forum participants DO NOT KNOW ABOUT THEM. Once they are aware of these techniques the operation can completely fail, and the forum can become uncontrolled. At this point other avenues must be considered such as initiating a false legal precidence to simply have the forum shut down and taken offline. This is not desirable as it then leaves the enforcement agencies unable to track the percentage of those in the population who always resist attempts for control against them. Many other techniques can be utilized and developed by the individual and as you develop further techniques of infiltration and control it is imperative to share then with HQ.
_______________________________________________________________________
Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation
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 which 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' from a 'bunch of kids on the Internet' 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 be 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 'minutia' 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 except with denials 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 - a kind of investment for the future should the matter not be so easily contained.) 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 then 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, and even publicly 'call for an end to the nonsense' because you have already 'done the right thing.' 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 lose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.
13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic which 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 with issues 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. Vanish 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, 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.
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 and unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed. 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.
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 destroying them financially, emotionally, or severely damaging their health.
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.
_______________________________________________________________________
Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist
1) Avoidance. They never actually discuss issues head-on or provide constructive input, generally avoiding citation of references or credentials. Rather, they merely imply this, that, and the other. Virtually everything about their presentation implies their authority and expert knowledge in the matter without any further justification for credibility.
2) Selectivity. They tend to pick and choose opponents carefully, either applying the hit-and-run approach against mere commentators supportive of opponents, or focusing heavier attacks on key opponents who are known to directly address issues. Should a commentator become argumentative with any success, the focus will shift to include the commentator as well.
3) Coincidental. They tend to surface suddenly and somewhat coincidentally with a new controversial topic with no clear prior record of participation in general discussions in the particular public arena involved. They likewise tend to vanish once the topic is no longer of general concern. They were likely directed or elected to be there for a reason, and vanish with the reason.
4) Teamwork. They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams. Of course, this can happen naturally in any public forum, but there will likely be an ongoing pattern of frequent exchanges of this sort where professionals are involved. Sometimes one of the players will infiltrate the opponent camp to become a source for straw man or other tactics designed to dilute opponent presentation strength.
5) Anti-conspiratorial. They almost always have disdain for 'conspiracy theorists' and, usually, for those who in any way believe JFK was not killed by LHO. Ask yourself why, if they hold such disdain for conspiracy theorists, do they focus on defending a single topic discussed in a NG focusing on conspiracies? One might think they would either be trying to make fools of everyone on every topic, or simply ignore the group they hold in such disdain.Or, one might more rightly conclude they have an ulterior motive for their actions in going out of their way to focus as they do.
6) Artificial Emotions. An odd kind of 'artificial' emotionalism and an unusually thick skin -- an ability to persevere and persist even in the face of overwhelming criticism and unacceptance. This likely stems from intelligence community training that, no matter how condemning the evidence, deny everything, and never become emotionally involved or reactive. The net result for a disinfo artist is that emotions can seem artificial.
Most people, if responding in anger, for instance, will express their animosity throughout their rebuttal. But disinfo types usually have trouble maintaining the 'image' and are hot and cold with respect to pretended emotions and their usually more calm or unemotional communications style. It's just a job, and they often seem unable to 'act their role in character' as well in a communications medium as they might be able in a real face-to-face conversation/confrontation. You might have outright rage and indignation one moment, ho-hum the next, and more anger later -- an emotional yo-yo.
With respect to being thick-skinned, no amount of criticism will deter them from doing their job, and they will generally continue their old disinfo patterns without any adjustments to criticisms of how obvious it is that they play that game -- where a more rational individual who truly cares what others think might seek to improve their communications style, substance, and so forth, or simply give up.
7) Inconsistent. There is also a tendency to make mistakes which betray their true self/motives. This may stem from not really knowing their topic, or it may be somewhat 'freudian', so to speak, in that perhaps they really root for the side of truth deep within.
I have noted that often, they will simply cite contradictory information which neutralizes itself and the author. For instance, one such player claimed to be a Navy pilot, but blamed his poor communicating skills (spelling, grammar, incoherent style) on having only a grade-school education. I'm not aware of too many Navy pilots who don't have a college degree. Another claimed no knowledge of a particular topic/situation but later claimed first-hand knowledge of it.
8) Time Constant. Recently discovered, with respect to News Groups, is the response time factor. There are three ways this can be seen to work, especially when the government or other empowered player is involved in a cover up operation:
a) ANY NG posting by a targeted proponent for truth can result in an IMMEDIATE response. The government and other empowered players can afford to pay people to sit there and watch for an opportunity to do some damage. SINCE DISINFO IN A NG ONLY WORKS IF THE READER SEES IT - FAST RESPONSE IS CALLED FOR, or the visitor may be swayed towards truth.
b) When dealing in more direct ways with a disinformationalist, such as email, DELAY IS CALLED FOR - there will usually be a minimum of a 48-72 hour delay. This allows a sit-down team discussion on response strategy for best effect, and even enough time to 'get permission' or instruction from a formal chain of command.
c) In the NG example 1) above, it will often ALSO be seen that bigger guns are drawn and fired after the same 48-72 hours delay - the team approach in play. This is especially true when the targeted truth seeker or their comments are considered more important with respect to potential to reveal truth. Thus, a serious truth sayer will be attacked twice for the same sin.
_______________________________________________________________________
How to Spot a Spy (Cointelpro Agent)
One way to neutralize a potential activist is to get them to be in a group that does all the wrong things. Why?
1) The message doesn't get out.
2) A lot of time is wasted
3) The activist is frustrated and discouraged
4) Nothing good is accomplished.
FBI and Police Informers and Infiltrators will infest any group and they have phoney activist organizations established.
Their purpose is to prevent any real movement for justice or eco-peace from developing in this country.
Agents come in small, medium or large. They can be of any ethnic background. They can be male or female.
The actual size of the group or movement being infiltrated is irrelevant. It is the potential the movement has for becoming large which brings on the spies and saboteurs.
This booklet lists tactics agents use to slow things down, foul things up, destroy the movement and keep tabs on activists.
It is the agent's job to keep the activist from quitting such a group, thus keeping him/her under control.
In some situations, to get control, the agent will tell the activist:

• "You're dividing the movement."

[Here, I have added the psychological reasons as to WHY this maneuver works to control people]
This invites guilty feelings. Many people can be controlled by guilt. The agents begin relationships with activists behind a well-developed mask of "dedication to the cause." Because of their often declared dedication, (and actions designed to prove this), when they criticize the activist, he or she - being truly dedicated to the movement - becomes convinced that somehow, any issues are THEIR fault. This is because a truly dedicated person tends to believe that everyone has a conscience and that nobody would dissimulate and lie like that "on purpose." It's amazing how far agents can go in manipulating an activist because the activist will constantly make excuses for the agent who regularly declares their dedication to the cause. Even if they do, occasionally, suspect the agent, they will pull the wool over their own eyes by rationalizing: "they did that unconsciously... they didn't really mean it... I can help them by being forgiving and accepting " and so on and so forth.
The agent will tell the activist:

• "You're a leader!"

This is designed to enhance the activist's self-esteem. His or her narcissistic admiration of his/her own activist/altruistic intentions increase as he or she identifies with and consciously admires the altruistic declarations of the agent which are deliberately set up to mirror those of the activist.
This is "malignant pseudoidentification." It is the process by which the agent consciously imitates or simulates a certain behavior to foster the activist's identification with him/her, thus increasing the activist's vulnerability to exploitation. The agent will simulate the more subtle self-concepts of the activist.
Activists and those who have altruistic self-concepts are most vulnerable to malignant pseudoidentification especially during work with the agent when the interaction includes matter relating to their competency, autonomy, or knowledge.
The goal of the agent is to increase the activist's general empathy for the agent through pseudo-identification with the activist's self-concepts.
The most common example of this is the agent who will compliment the activist for his competency or knowledge or value to the movement. On a more subtle level, the agent will simulate affects and mannerisms of the activist which promotes identification via mirroring and feelings of "twinship". It is not unheard of for activists, enamored by the perceived helpfulness and competence of a good agent, to find themselves considering ethical violations and perhaps, even illegal behavior, in the service of their agent/handler.
The activist's "felt quality of perfection" [self-concept] is enhanced, and a strong empathic bond is developed with the agent through his/her imitation and simulation of the victim's own narcissistic investments. [self-concepts] That is, if the activist knows, deep inside, their own dedication to the cause, they will project that onto the agent who is "mirroring" them.
The activist will be deluded into thinking that the agent shares this feeling of identification and bonding. In an activist/social movement setting, the adversarial roles that activists naturally play vis a vis the establishment/government, fosters ongoing processes of intrapsychic splitting so that "twinship alliances" between activist and agent may render whole sectors or reality testing unavailable to the activist. They literally "lose touch with reality."
Activists who deny their own narcissistic investments [do not have a good idea of their own self-concepts and that they ARE concepts] and consciously perceive themselves (accurately, as it were) to be "helpers" endowed with a special amount of altruism are exceedingly vulnerable to the affective (emotional) simulation of the accomplished agent.
Empathy is fostered in the activist through the expression of quite visible affects. The presentation of tearfulness, sadness, longing, fear, remorse, and guilt, may induce in the helper-oriented activist a strong sense of compassion, while unconsciously enhancing the activist's narcissistic investment in self as the embodiment of goodness.
The agent's expresssion of such simulated affects may be quite compelling to the observer and difficult to distinguish from deep emotion.
It can usually be identified by two events, however:
First, the activist who has analyzed his/her own narcissistic roots and is aware of his/her own potential for being "emotionally hooked," will be able to remain cool and unaffected by such emotional outpourings by the agent.
As a result of this unaffected, cool, attitude, the Second event will occur: The agent will recompensate much too quickly following such an affective expression leaving the activist with the impression that "the play has ended, the curtain has fallen," and the imposture, for the moment, has finished. The agent will then move quickly to another activist/victim.
The fact is, the movement doesn't need leaders, it needs MOVERS. "Follow the leader" is a waste of time.
A good agent will want to meet as often as possible. He or she will talk a lot and say little. One can expect an onslaught of long, unresolved discussions.
Some agents take on a pushy, arrogant, or defensive manner:
1) To disrupt the agenda
2) To side-track the discussion
3) To interrupt repeatedly
4) To feign ignorance
5) To make an unfounded accusation against a person.
Calling someone a racist, for example. This tactic is used to discredit a person in the eyes of all other group members.
Saboteurs
Some saboteurs pretend to be activists. She or he will ....
1) Write encyclopedic flyers (in the present day, websites)
2) Print flyers in English only.
3) Have demonstrations in places where no one cares.
4) Solicit funding from rich people instead of grass roots support
5) Display banners with too many words that are confusing.
6) Confuse issues.
7) Make the wrong demands.
8) Compromise the goal.
9) Have endless discussions that waste everyone's time. The agent may accompany the endless discussions with drinking, pot smoking or other amusement to slow down the activist's work.
Provocateurs
1) Want to establish "leaders" to set them up for a fall in order to stop the movement.
2) Suggest doing foolish, illegal things to get the activists in trouble.
3) Encourage militancy.
4) Want to taunt the authorities.
5) Attempt to make the activist compromise their values.
6) Attempt to instigate violence. Activisim ought to always be non-violent.
7) Attempt to provoke revolt among people who are ill-prepared to deal with the reaction of the authorities to such violence.
Informants
1) Want everyone to sign up and sing in and sign everything.
2) Ask a lot of questions (gathering data).
3) Want to know what events the activist is planning to attend.
4) Attempt to make the activist defend him or herself to identify his or her beliefs, goals, and level of committment.
Recruiting
Legitimate activists do not subject people to hours of persuasive dialog. Their actions, beliefs, and goals speak for themselves.
Groups that DO recruit are missionaries, military, and fake political parties or movements set up by agents.
Surveillance
ALWAYS assume that you are under surveillance.
At this point, if you are NOT under surveillance, you are not a very good activist!
Scare Tactics
They use them.
Such tactics include slander, defamation, threats, getting close to disaffected or minimally committed fellow activists to persuade them (via psychological tactics described above) to turn against the movement and give false testimony against their former compatriots. They will plant illegal substances on the activist and set up an arrest; they will plant false information and set up "exposure," they will send incriminating letters [emails] in the name of the activist; and more; they will do whatever society will allow.
This booklet in no way covers all the ways agents use to sabotage the lives of sincere an dedicated activists.
If an agent is "exposed," he or she will be transferred or replaced.
COINTELPRO is still in operation today under a different code name. It is no longer placed on paper where it can be discovered through the freedom of information act.
The FBI counterintelligence program's stated purpose: To expose, disrupt, misdirect, discredit, and otherwise neutralize individuals who the FBI categorize as opposed to the National Interests. "National Security" means the FBI's security from the people ever finding out the vicious things it does in violation of people's civil liberties.
_______________________________________________________________________
Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression
Strong, credible allegations of high-level criminal activity can bring down a government. When the government lacks an effective, fact-based defense, other techniques must be employed. The success of these techniques depends heavily upon a cooperative, compliant press and a mere token opposition party.
1. Dummy up. If it's not reported, if it's not news, it didn't happen.
2. Wax indignant. This is also known as the "How dare you?" gambit.
3. Characterize the charges as "rumors" or, better yet, "wild rumors." If, in spite of the news blackout, the public is still able to learn about the suspicious facts, it can only be through "rumors." (If they tend to believe the "rumors" it must be because they are simply "paranoid" or "hysterical.")
4. Knock down straw men. Deal only with the weakest aspects of the weakest charges. Even better, create your own straw men. Make up wild rumors (or plant false stories) and give them lead play when you appear to debunk all the charges, real and fanciful alike.
5. Call the skeptics names like "conspiracy theorist," "nutcase," "ranter," "kook," "crackpot," and, of course, "rumor monger." Be sure, too, to use heavily loaded verbs and adjectives when characterizing their charges and defending the "more reasonable" government and its defenders. You must then carefully avoid fair and open debate with any of the people you have thus maligned. For insurance, set up your own "skeptics" to shoot down.
6. Impugn motives. Attempt to marginalize the critics by suggesting strongly that they are not really interested in the truth but are simply pursuing a partisan political agenda or are out to make money (compared to over-compensated adherents to the government line who, presumably, are not).
7. Invoke authority. Here the controlled press and the sham opposition can be very useful.
8. Dismiss the charges as "old news."
9. Come half-clean. This is also known as "confession and avoidance" or "taking the limited hangout route." This way, you create the impression of candor and honesty while you admit only to relatively harmless, less-than-criminal "mistakes." This stratagem often requires the embrace of a fall-back position quite different from the one originally taken. With effective damage control, the fall-back position need only be peddled by stooge skeptics to carefully limited markets.
10. Characterize the crimes as impossibly complex and the truth as ultimately unknowable.
11. Reason backward, using the deductive method with a vengeance. With thoroughly rigorous deduction, troublesome evidence is irrelevant. E.g. We have a completely free press. If evidence exists that the Vince Foster "suicide" note was forged, they would have reported it. They haven't reported it so there is no such evidence. Another variation on this theme involves the likelihood of a conspiracy leaker and a press who would report the leak.
12. Require the skeptics to solve the crime completely. E.g. If Foster was murdered, who did it and why?
13. Change the subject. This technique includes creating and/or publicizing distractions.
14. Lightly report incriminating facts, and then make nothing of them. This is sometimes referred to as "bump and run" reporting.
15. Baldly and brazenly lie. A favorite way of doing this is to attribute the "facts" furnished the public to a plausible-sounding, but anonymous, source.
16. Expanding further on numbers 4 and 5, have your own stooges "expose" scandals and champion popular causes. Their job is to pre-empt real opponents and to play 99-yard football. A variation is to pay rich people for the job who will pretend to spend their own money.
17. Flood the Internet with agents. This is the answer to the question, "What could possibly motivate a person to spend hour upon hour on Internet news groups defending the government and/or the press and harassing genuine critics?" Don t the authorities have defenders enough in all the newspapers, magazines, radio, and television? One would think refusing to print critical letters and screening out serious callers or dumping them from radio talk shows would be control enough, but, obviously, it is not.

Since NYSRPA v. Bruen, Hawaii has run a 'Bruen response bill.' SB1230 was recently signed by the governor, adding new restrictions to the few in Hawaii who actually do have CCWs. FPC is seeking individuals with carry permits who may be willing to participate in challenging this.
Description from the HI leg page:https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=SB&billnumber=1230&year=2023

Prohibits firearms in certain locations and premises. Requires possession and disclosure of a license to carry. Prohibits leaving an unsecured firearm in a vehicle unattended. Prohibits consuming or being under the influence of alcohol, an intoxicating liquor, or a controlled substance when carrying a firearm. Prohibits carrying or possessing firearms on certain private property without express authorization. Requires annual reports from the department of the attorney general on carry licenses. Amends the requirements for, and revocation of, firearms permits and licenses. Amends the disqualification of persons from owning, possessing, or controlling a firearm. Expands the qualified immunity for health care providers who provide information on firearms applicants to include physician assistants and advanced practice registered nurses. (CD1)

https://preview.redd.it/6qhzyzpy6o4b1.jpg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b802a5e29b80f9862de72e2aa4f2ef48d3d7ad35