ATS as a Disinfo-Agents Tool (Understanding Disinfo)

This isn't another thread labeling ATS as a disifno site. Ideally, --place disinfo agency title here-- would prefer not to have nay connections to ATS, or any other forum for that matter. Ideally they'd prefer to allow ATS to function on it's own, and then simply frequent the forums (any place) to spread their disinfo and related subversive operations.

Perhaps they'd try to get some agents as moderators for the inside scoop, but realistically any real-deal agents would have access to the admin pages thanks to Google being a de facto government operation. It's best for their efforts to not give the appearence of there being agent staff members to set off red flags for site members (whatever happened to Agent Smith? :lol. If there were insider admins it'd be best for the staff to have no clue, and for the agents to not project the image of there being bias on behalf of the staff at the target forum. In short, it's a waste of time and resources for any would-be agents to even spend the work and dedication to even being offered staff status.

Next it's important to understand what disinformation is to begin with. Disinfo is intentional propagation of phoney material and information. This is not to be confused with misinformation, which is unintentional propagation of phoney materials, false "facts" and so on. Misinfo is what happens when we take disinfo uncritically, and then propagate it ourselves, thus contributing to the narfarious efforts of the agents.

It's the same concept that applies to propaganda in general: People say things like "there's no way they can control all those people in the media". Sure, but they don't even need to "control" or pay them off! Once a person has been indoctrinated (thru propaganda) with the ideology (for example political bias), they themselves become unwitting irrational walking propaganda parrot agents.

The next thing to understand is the higher purpose of "disinfo agents". It's not only to spread bogus information, it also involves subversion / diversion / misdirection and disruption in general. For further insights into this, and how not to function as an "enemy propagandist", see my deeper analysis of the decla ssified OSS (CIA) "Morale Operations" Subversion Manual .

In a forum like ATS, the disinfo agent would act in a few primary ways:
1] Red Herring / Ad Hominem subversive disruption of threads.
2] Staunchly supporting disinfo / misdirection theories and topics.
3] Spreading defeatism and pessimism in whatever cause is of concern to the disinfo agent's agenda.
And so on.

We all see this sort of activity not only here at ATS but also abroad. These sorts of indicators can be used in identifying potential agents, however one must be careful to not throw such accusations around as the people you might be questioning could simply be ones infected / indoctrinated with the behaviors and irrational biases as desired by the agents of disinfo (take political biases for example). The important lesson here is how not to think and behave like a disinfo agent.

A better understanding of propaganda itself is in oreder for those who really want to understand these concepts and how to avoid unwittingly functioning as tools of 'enemy agents'. The most basic yet important thing to understand about propaganda is that it's the science of persuasion and diversion. The whole point is to persuade you into diversionary paths. That basic definition even applies to 'civilian use propaganda' (advertising), but the dual aspect definition is especially critical in realms such as ideologies and crucial topics. The first goal would be to persuade the people into "compliance gaining", thru diversion of the basic understanding of the true nature of the issue itself. When that fails, the diversion aspect goes into overdrive.

The goal is to divert people from what I call "Actionable Consensus" issues. In any major ordeal there will always be a list of items that everyone could agree is wrong and diserve some level of "action". When this is the case, like with 9/11 for example, the goal is to propagate as many misdirecting false leads and theories as possible, to divert everyone away form the actionable consensus issues and into social divisions over this or that belief. When this is done effectively, everyone will be too busy wrapped up in the melodrama of bitter infighting and irrational bias and sensational theories to all agree on the core fundamental issues (which are oddly enough usually found right on the surface). The idea is to create big sensational objects of attention, which are highly debatable, to trick the movers into focusing on those items as the core issues when in fact they're highly debatable and there will never be consensus.

Don't let this happen to you...

I see all kinds of stuff, I don't personally see or believe ATS as being anything less than a purveyor of conspiracy theories and an honest take at finding the truth behind it all.

What I have come to understand is, ATS solicits views of all kinds to either expose or deny such things that are left alone by main-stream media and also never give into cover-ups by authorities or people seemingly attempting to shield truth.

Hat's tipped to ATS assuming the philosophy is true..

Dallas

Dig. This thread has several purposes / uses. For example:
-Teaching the fundamentals of disinfo theory.
-Dispelling the ATS is a disinfo operation jump-to-conclusions.
-Show people how to not function as unwitting tools of disinfo.
-Tell people how to spot potential disinfo agents.

No offense, but i consider those films you made to be "misinfo" (not disinfo, because i believe you are sincere in truth seeking). Why? Because you seem to be focused on how the military/elite will enslave us for all time using high technology etc..

Feel free to challenge them in the proper place:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I don't try to avoid weaknesses in my own works, I seek to understand them.

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
but realistically any real-deal agents would have access to the admin pages thanks to Google being a de facto government operation.

I'm confused as to why you think Google (or anyone) would be able to access our administrative pages.

It's my understanding that their crawlers are able to sniff past the backdoors and such in their quest to "gather all of the worlds information".

I'm not an internet security expert, but I've seen examples where people have casually found their ways into secure sections of websites thru Google searches by chance.

More directly, Google aside, it would seem that if some harcore government / establishment agents really wanted to keep tabs on any place they'd have a toolbox of methods to do it and get away with it.

I could be wrong. I'm sure you know more specifics than I in this area, and I'm open to get 'schooled' if I am.

Typically, administrative pages are discovered one of two ways...
1) Accidental public links (you'd be surprised)
2) Retaining default installation file names of admin pages

We don't have any public links to our "hidden" admin pages, and the file names were changed long ago.

Also, in the event such pages are discovered, each access is logged and compared against known IP's of site staff with the access privileges to use the pages.

If anyone were to access any aspect of the administrative pages who was not supposed to... I'd know about it as it happens.

Good stuff.

So now we're just down to sniffing out the staff members... j/p

People should realize there's no sense of controlling this place, as if they want to track people they're going to anyways from any forum as the NSA and Google track everything and everyone already as a norm. Them being built into the site was probably my biggest reason for stating it, in the context of if they were worried about tracking your motives.

They are very focused on blogs and forums and spend large amounts of money inserting opposing viewpoints, and the typical "conspiracy nut" bs. the theory is, that if some of the the "sheeple" happen on to the ATS boards for instance, they will find the popular controlled-media viewpoint they are comfortable with, and be able to file away this information as "uncomfortable" and "obviously" not true.

they cant openly control the internet, so as such, a good disinformationist strategy creates multiple viewpoints, points ridicule, and makes it difficult to discern the truth.

as long as they get their foot in the door, it makes it more difficult to create a movement of opposing thought.

and as an afterthought, focusing on sniffing out who is untrustable is somewhat pointless.

considering that major nationwide news channels have posted articles stating that the gov basically has a backroom on many of the hubs and telecommunications companies, you must immediately assume that anything transmitted through compromised corporate networks/backbones are being monitored.

therefore, if you dont want big brother to see what you are saying, you shouldnt be saying it at all. ultimately, posting your viewpoint is openly stating that you are ok with big brother disseminating your personality

There have been a few people on this board that I suspect of being disinfo agents. There's no point in naming names; people have to make up their own minds.

All one can do is try to watch for when people derail arguments, resort to ad hominem attacks, or import spurious "facts". Sobering reading in this regard is a book by David Yallop about Carlos The Jackal - unfortunately I forget the name of the book and don't have it with me. An appendix describes how a British disinfo agent was able to publish an influential "fact sheet" used by, among others, Margaret Thatcher, and was able to cite his own disinfo, in articles he had published in The Times, as a source. Now that's chutzpah.

And I have to say that what I've seen of the behaviour of some of the "no-planers" makes me think that they're either paid shills or useful idiots. There are all sorts of possibilities. First, the whole "no-plane" idea is a disinfo tool to render the whole "inside job" angle on 9/11 unbelievable. Second, it's actually correct but people are being chosen to promote it in such a way as to put off even the most open-minded of us.

I personally find the "no-plane" idea implausible because it's way over-complicated, and lean toward the idea that the planes were remotely piloted. We at least know for sure that that technology exists.