[Rune]

Cryptome

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

Great piece. But it would have been MUCH better had the author given specific examples taken from real forums.

Pretty interesting but I don't think PO.com is subject to these kinds of techniques at all. I can't think of a single example in all my years of posting here where I actually suspected someone of being a Cointelpro agent even though the accusation has been flung around quite often.

[Pops]

Really?

I won't say I think anyone is necessarily a paid plant but I could easily give examples of each of the 6 techniques and a few posters who've done most or all, whether for profit or cointel purposes who knows?

You and your low energy thing I'd say easily fit the outward criteria of 1-3 which are basically about undermining the topic of the board. 'Sliding' - I like it.

I think many long time members could point to #5 #6 techniques that have done quite a bit of harm to the site over time. I just replied to a #3 and have in fact banned the past master at #1, #2 & #3 numerous times under numerous handles.

#3 "Dilution" at po.com is the thing I've ranted about since the beginning. I've become resigned to the fact we are social media.

As I think about it I could be seen as guilty of 4,5 & 6.

Anyway, thanks.

[Rune]

You and your low energy thing I'd say easily fit the outward criteria of 1-3 which are basically about undermining the topic of the board. 'Sliding' - I like it.

Well, I disagree with THAT completely.

LENR is an energy technology and a hot topic all over the world. The thread is in the Energy Technology forum where topics like that are posted according to the site's forum design!

My position has always been that as fossil fuel prices rise due to depletion or other reasons (or if they create untenable problems like pollution or global warming) innovation will soar. I said that years ago. That's my honest opinion.

However, the board's strong bias is AGAINST innovation as if it were some sort of Original Sin. But that is ridiculous because human beings are natural innovators. The board's bias, therefore, essentially asks humanity not to be human!

I suppose that you believe that it is right and good to ignore anything that goes against the general energy cataclysm forecast. But that's like playing a game of pretend, isn't it. That is merely succumbing to groupthink, which is anti-discussion. Is that what you would like PO.com to be? A site devoted to "Exploring Hydrocarbon Depletion" by NOT discussing it and all its ramifications?

I'm simply not allowing myself to be blinkered by any such strong bias against any possible solutions to the energy problems we face. The LENR story is fascinating to follow. Just ask Tom Whipple of The Peak Oil Crisis fame. He's got exactly the same opinion as I do.

At any rate, the article states firmly that NONE of the techniques it describes will work if people know about them already. So if I were a Cointelpro agent or if I were trying to play some sort of BS game just for kicks, I certainly wouldn't inform people about the techniques I was using to do it.

[Rod_Cloutier]

I can't think of a single example in all my years of posting here where I actually suspected someone of being a Cointelpro agent even though the accusation has been flung around quite often.

Airplane pilot for his steadfast denial that 9/11 was an inside job- he would be a candidate for this category.

Recently a CIA agent who was held without charge under the patriot act for more that 5 years is now speaking out about 9/11:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lnn-jn_cvLo

[Rune]

I can't think of a single example in all my years of posting here where I actually suspected someone of being a Cointelpro agent even though the accusation has been flung around quite often.

Airplane pilot for his steadfast denial that 9/11 was an inside job- he would be a candidate for this category.

Recently a CIA agent who was held without charge under the patriot act for more that 5 years is now speaking out about 9/11:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lnn-jn_cvLo

Well, I guess you have a point there. But AP couldn't think his way out of a paper bag. He was just so EASY to beat on the 911 issue. He was just a mule-headed fool about it. He couldn't sway anyone with his counter-arguments. They were silly. He just CHOSE to be ignorant and wanted everyone else to be as ignorant as he.

I suppose that I am assuming that a Cointelpro Agent would actually be intelligent about what they were doing.

Ignorance is not an admirable trait in ANY discussion. If everyone thinks alike and just backs each other up, you end up quite predictably with what James Howard Kunstler calls a "Clusterf*** Nation" - another word for Groupthink.

"Groupthinking", "Clusterf***ing"... these are terms which describe anti-discussion traits. Traits which corporations, government entities, research groups, etc. spend mightily on trying to avoid -- because clusterf***ing amounts to a lot of gangrenous idea stagnation and a general lack of insight into potential opportunities and effective strategies.

For example, CNN has seen its ratings lose so badly to Fox and MSNBC that its president has had to resign. If Harvard Business School were to analyze what went wrong at CNN, they would no doubt find that Groupthink was the culprit. It could only be that way because its competitors are thriving in the same business - so CNN can't blame the Internet or some other external threat to its business model. The problem HAS to be internal.

[Pops]

haha, I was giving you some crap. Lets not turn this into an excuse for ad hons.

[Cog]

Actually the most rational way of thinking is that 911 was NOT an inside job. The conspiracy kooks that haunt this board with their crop circles, UFO's, Truthers, Birthers, and assorted weirdness give PO a bad name.

[dinopello]

It's the quiet ones you have to watch out for

I won't mention any names, but those that relentlessly promote whatever it is that they promote, usually do more harm to their cause than further it.

[MD]

every post in every thread on this board can be dropped into one of those categories.

it's just paranoia... except when it's not.

[EnergyUnlimited]

Actually the most rational way of thinking is that 911 was NOT an inside job. The conspiracy kooks that haunt this board with their crop circles, UFO's, Truthers, Birthers, and assorted weirdness give PO a bad name.

Not inside job but very helpful for certain elements of establishment.
Perhaps attackers were not even aware that some pretty powerful elements of American establishment are doing all what they can for ploy to succeed.

The conversations were possibly like one below:

- Hi Dick, you know those morons want to attack some key buildings in New York?

- Hmm, that would be great.

- What do you mean?

- We could start a war and make some money.
Recently our order book looks crap.

- So what shell we do?

- Find out what is a date of planned attack.
I have heard, it might be 9/11 but please confirm it with our friend, Mr Laden.
Make sure our air force is grounded on that day and the dumbest officers are working at the airports where hijackers are going to board.
Send some boys on site and make sure that it will go big... we don't need those ugly towers there. We can build something better latter.
Ech, btw, advise some key personnel to take day off on that day.
You know, we may still need them.

- What to do once attack is over?

- Throw this passport into smouldering rabble.
Our boys have stopped this guy few days ago.
We have a reason to believe that he will be between hijackers.
But of course he did not commit anything yet, so I have ordered to release him.

- Yes my Lord.

[AirlinePilot]

Nothing like an ad hom to bring me back...

I believe that outside of a very small circle of those who cannot acknowledge facts, have difficulty understanding scientific methods, and those who just need to belong to some larger group of importance, my arguments stood for themselves.

While I acknowledge the OP's point, I highly doubt there was or is anyone here who is working in an organized or paid capacity to drive discussions. PO.com isnt big enough or important enough nor does it reach a large enough audience for TPTB to waste time and resources on. Its a bit narcissistic to think so.

Throughout ALL those 9/11 threads there were very few times, and I mean very few where my arguments were ever refuted. Most of the time, the whole thing ended in a bunch of name calling, and labeling. Thats not how arguments are won and I realized after a few years the futility of participating. I learned a lot in the process about how peoples minds work when blinded by belief. Most of what I saw was a sad product of our very inadequate public education system which no longer teaches any real science. It also falls down in the logic, reasoning, and problem solving departments. The same problems abound with the concept of PO, ELM and a host of other issues which surround our reason for existence here at PO.com.

Its interesting that my name would come up and with so much vehemence here in this thread. I'm Flattered! Part of my problem with Truthers was always the tenacity with which they could hold on to such huge leaps of logic and rejection of fact. At some point for me it was entertaining, but ultimately I got tired of pounding my head against the wall.

[SeaGypsy]

Me 2 for the opposite reason. Respect AP

[steam_cannon]

I've become resigned to the fact we are social media.

The surest way for this site to lose relevancy is to allow it to become overtaken by social media and you don't have to. That's what I think anyway.

[steps up on soapbox]
A small step to prevent that would be making this article sticky as would send a huge message about what's acceptable and what's not on this site. A bigger first step would be writing a content page about this article and creating digestible content pages for all our most important discussions. A huge step would be bringing a guy like Kunster on board, someone with vision and a desire to make the world a better place with the goal of organizing this chaos making it digestible and unhackable by social media black hats. As it stands, this site is mostly social media which is out of balance and dilutes its relevance.
[steps down from soapbox]

[Outcast_Searcher]

I believe that outside of a very small circle of those who cannot acknowledge facts, have difficulty understanding scientific methods, and those who just need to belong to some larger group of importance, my arguments stood for themselves.

For all but the paranoid believers of conspiracy theories, no matter how many objective facts and logical issues are presented -- the vast majority would, I believe, agree with you, AP.

I have a good friend who is generally pretty rational and prides himself on being rational. The exception is conspiracy theories -- almost ANY conspiracy theories -- it's like a disease.

The thing that just slays me is his fallback argument is: "I have studied the evidence and you have not".

Well, if "studying the evidence" is reading every conspiracy theory book and article on conspiracy theory X, especially the scores that agree with his paranoid leanings, then, yes, he has most certainly "studied" the evidence for a given conspiracy theory more than I have.

I, on the other hand, have a life and am willing to try to objectively consider the overall weight of the scientific evidence. For example, years ago he had me wondering about "The Kennedy Conspiracy" re "the magic bullet" until the "Mythbusters" show on conspiracy theories clearly showed how that shell type from Oswald's rifle model could travel several feet through a 4x4 wood post completely unscathed. Totally counterintuitive -- but data is data and so I promptly dismissed the conspiracy theory.

Don't worry about it. The true believers will ad-hom anyone who "dares" to stand up to them. Science is still science and data is still data.

[evilgenius]

See what happens when you change the subject only just a little, citing an example, and include a link. From there the forum goes somewhere else. Perhaps, since the redirect is not always (as in this case) uninteresting, a new kind of branch from these redirecting spots into a subforum might help? Why not simply give posters the chance to start a subforum from a point in the middle of a thread. Make it so that if one is warranted and hasn't been started a moderator can go in and make it so. An icon could appear in the relevant post letting readers know there is a subforum involved. They could click on that icon or seeing it go to a control page to view all subforums for that thread and select which ones to look at. This might eliminate so many instances where a thread disappears in flames or is hijacked by somebody with a certain point of view who feels the need to post so many times in a thread that entire pages are filled with nothing but their posts.