From pollution to politics, the era of
deception and duplicity has reached new heights and hijacked almost
every form of media in the world.
In the last frontiers for truth such as
the internet, disinformation operations are in full swing to
discredit and destroy any semblance of authentic and factual
information available to the public.
How many more lies will people
around the world accept as truth?
Some say a global awakening is
taking place, but at what cost?
Will it take the destruction of
most of the earth and its resources before people are
The escalating media and political
reports are so far fetched, cunning, and so beyond reality, it’s as
if each is trying to top the other with one sinister plot after the
To demonstrate the outright lies by
national governments and the media, let’s take three examples
from the last year alone, including,
Last year, the H1N1 scandal reached its pinnacle in the fall of 2009
when the world united on the internet with a consensus and practical
understanding of the World Health Organization’s orchestration to
deceive the masses.
From radio, internet, television,
newspapers, magazines, outdoor posters, signage and promotions, you
could not escape the flu hype campaigns so diligently pursued by all
the malicious agendas at play who only wanted one thing – to promote
dangerous H1N1 vaccine. After
hundreds of reports exposed the criminal activity by all levels of
government, we left the same people in power to do it all over
According to preliminary reports, another round of pandemic vaccine
campaigns are scheduled for the 2010/2011 season and they’re already
underway. However, there appears to be a recombination that has
changed the H1N1 lab created virus into a more lethal form and it is
not a hoax, but it may be yet another CDC lab experiment.
The CDC has recently issued a
Health Advisory in connection with two summer outbreaks of H3N2 in
Iowa. Other reports from Russia and India indicate that a real
epidemic may be upon us if the virus steadily recombines and
acquires new genetics. Even though a new strain may have
accidentally evolved in eggs, reassortment of H1N1-H5N1 has been
a legitimate concern for years.
The WHO first suggested the reassortment
of H1N1-H5N1 in 2004.
If this is really the case,
How will the public react after
all the lies from health agencies who have sworn to protect
Will they hype another vaccine
and if so, will the public even respond?
They’ve been approved all over the world and marketed as the next
greatest airport scanning technology. The U.S., U.K., Russia,
Australia, Europe and Canada have all installed airport body
scanners which have potentially devastating health effects.
Many of these scanners are reportedly using terahertz (THz) waves,
the radiation that fills the slot in the electromagnetic spectrum
between microwaves and infrared. Evidence suggests that although the
forces generated are tiny, resonant effects allow THz waves to unzip
double-stranded DNA, creating bubbles in the double strand that
could significantly interfere with processes such as gene expression
and DNA replication.
As the path toward rolling out wider use of whole-body scanners in
U.S. airports ran through the White House,
Obama expedited their deployment because the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Transportation
Security Administration (TSA) didn’t need legislation from
Congress to start using the devices at any of the 560 U.S. airports.
The White House ignored all the scientific evidence presented which
suggested negative health effects. Politicians and regulatory
agencies then covered up the bad publicity on naked body scanners
and focused on the presumed benefits under the guise of public
Privacy commissioners and airport authorities have also insisted
that there were no risks of images being stored or personal details
being revealed to security screeners. Now there’s new evidence to
show that the scanners can do just that.
According to a CNET report, another federal agency, the U.S.
Marshall’s service, admitted that it had actually stored over 30,000
images recorded by a full-body scanner used at a Florida courthouse.
A watchdog group called the Electronic Privacy Information Center
(EPIC) obtained over 100 of the images and states on its web site
“The images, which are routinely
captured by the federal agency, prove that body scanning devices
store and record images of individuals stripped naked.”
The group has filed a lawsuit to suspend
the deployment of body scanners at airports.
EPIC also discovered that the TSA actually specified to
manufacturers that the machines have the ability to send and store
images. The TSA says that these functions are only for testing and
training and insists on its web site that the airport body scanners
are delivered to airports with storage and recording functions
Again, the upper levels of the echelon are caught lying and
deceiving, yet they are still left to their own devices to further
manipulate and continue misrepresenting facts to the gullible
When news unfolded about the April 20, 2010 BP oil disaster, it went
from bad to worse. Instead of immediately mobilizing for action in
the face of a massive public health threat, the response was to
cover-up, deny and respond with ignorance. After all the public will
always believe them, or so they thought.
The Obama administration,
Interior Secretary Ken
U.S. Coast Guard commandant
admiral Thad Allen
energy and climate-change policy
adviser Carol Browner
BP and all their constituents,
…conspired to deliberately mislead the
public from the inception of the disaster to present day.
What’s worse is they all agreed to
further disseminate toxins in the Gulf by spraying 1.8 to 2 million
the neurotoxin Corexit which was
exposed by over a hundred scientists, toxicologists and other
experts who have unequivocally classified the irresponsible aerial
spraying of the chemical dispersant as a large-scale, uncontrolled
non-consensual human and environmental experiment is being conducted
in the Gulf region.
The media was grossly censoring the extent of the devastation in the
Gulf. The poisons – oil and Corexit – are destined to spread
globally, but honest reporting was and still is restricted, and many
independent investigators have been arrested. Read
30 Facts Evidencing that The Gulf Oil Crisis
On June 12, 2010, The Institute of Atmospheric Sciences and
Climate (ISAC) released “Risk
of Global Climate Change By BP Oil Spill“, a document
detailing how the BP spill may cause irreparable damage to the Gulf
Stream global climate thermoregulation activity. Read
Gulf Loop Current Destroyed.
According to Dr. Gianluigi Zangari, an Italian theoretical
physicist, and major complex and chaotic systems analyst at the
Frascati National Laboratories in Italy, the Loop Current in the
Gulf of Mexico has stalled as a consequence of the BP oil spill
Zagari notes that the effects of this
stall have also begun to spread to the Gulf Stream. This is because
the Loop Current is a crucial element of the Gulf Stream itself and
why it is commonly referred to as the “main engine” of the Stream.
The concern now, is whether or not natural processes can
re-establish the stalled Loop Current. If not, we could begin to see
global crop failures as early as 2011.
Zangari’s assessment is based on daily monitoring of real-time data
oceanographic satellite public data feeds called “Real-Time
Mesoscale Altimetry” from the Jason, Topex/Poseidon, Geosat,
Follow-On, ERS-2 and Envisat satellites.
These satellite feeds are captured and made publicly available by
NASA, NOAA and by the Colorado Center for Astrodynamics Research
(CCAR) at the University of Colorado at Boulder.
The CCAR is now being accused of scientific fraud and tampering of
data directly associated with the events surrounding the Loop
Current phenomenon and its current anomalies. Various reporters have
spear-headed the charge including radio personality Dr. Bill
who has featured Dr. Zangari on his radio show
The Nutrimedical Report where he detailed the events leading
up to the destruction of the Loop Current in the Gulf.
Dr. Zangari has stated that he will no longer use CCAR data due to
Professional Disinformation Operations
Well-funded and highly-organized disinformation operations are in
full-swing throughout the internet. From forums to comment boards
and even professional websites that have only one purpose:
Defame, distract, and destroy the truth.
However organized, the tactics are very predictable in a world
filled with lies and half-truths. This, sadly, includes
every day news media, one of the
worst offenders with respect to being a source of disinformation.
Disinformation campaigns are launched against those seeking to
uncover and expose the truth and/or the conspiracy. The H1N1 scandal
was a prime example of how hundreds of operations can be launched to
sway opinions on the facts. For every fact-based article on
the realities of the H1N1 vaccine,
there were both very primitive and sophisticated counters on message
boards, comment forums and hundreds of alternative and mainstream
Quackwatch.com and supporters such
skepticblog.com are examples of
websites who promote both synthetic and organic disinformation on
almost any topic that does not concur with mainstream thought.
There are specific tactics which disinfo artists tend to apply, as
H. Michael Sweeney has brilliantly detailed. Also included
with this material are eight common traits of the disinfo artist
which may also prove useful in identifying players and motives. The
more a particular party fits the traits and is guilty of following
the rules, the more likely they are a professional disinfo artist
with a vested motive.
People can be bought, threatened, or
blackmailed into providing disinformation, so even “good guys” can
be suspect in many cases.
A rational person participating as one interested in the truth will
evaluate that chain of evidence and conclude either that the links
are solid and conclusive, that one or more links are weak and need
further development before conclusion can be arrived at, or that one
or more links can be broken, usually invalidating (but not
necessarily so, if parallel links already exist or can be found, or
if a particular link was merely supportive, but not in itself key)
The game is played by raising issues
which either strengthen or weaken (preferably to the point of
breaking) these links. It is the job of a disinfo artist to
interfere with these evaluation… to at least make people think the
links are weak or broken when, in truth, they are not… or to
propose alternative solutions leading away from the truth.
Often, by simply impeding and slowing
down the process through disinformation tactics, a level of victory
is assured because apathy increases with time and rhetoric.
It would seem true in almost every instance, that if one cannot
break the chain of evidence for a given solution, revelation of
truth has won out. If the chain is broken either a new link must be
forged, or a whole new chain developed, or the solution is invalid
an a new one must be found… but truth still wins out. There is no
shame in being the creator or supporter of a failed solution, chain,
or link, if done with honesty in search of the truth. This is the
While it is understandable that a person
can become emotionally involved with a particular side of a given
issue, it is really unimportant who wins, as long as truth
But the disinfo artist will seek to
emotionalize and chastise any failure (real or false claims
thereof), and will seek by means of intimidation to prevent
discussion in general.
It is the disinfo artist and those who may pull their strings (those
who stand to suffer should the crime be solved) MUST seek to prevent
rational and complete examination of any chain of evidence which
would hang them. Since fact and truth seldom fall on their own, they
must be overcome with lies and deceit.
Those who are professional in the art of
lies and deceit, such as the intelligence community and the
professional criminal (often the same people or at least working
together), tend to apply fairly well defined and observable tools in
However, the public at large is not well
armed against such weapons, and is often easily led astray by these
time-proven tactics. Remarkably, not even media and law enforcement
have NOT BEEN TRAINED to deal with these issues.
For the most part, only the players
themselves understand the rules of the game.
Rules of Disinformation
Hear no evil, see no evil, speak
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.
Become incredulous and indignant
Avoid discussing key
issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used to
show the topic as being critical of some otherwise
sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the ‘How
dare you!’ gambit.
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
Associate opponent charges with
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.
Establish and rely upon
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.
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 loose interest more quickly without
having to address the actual issues.
Alice in Wonderland Logic
Avoid discussion of the
issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive
logic which forbears any actual material fact.
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.
Fit the facts to alternate
This requires creative
thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency
conclusions in place.
Vanish evidence and witnesses
If it does not exist, it
is not fact, and you won’t have to address the issue.
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
Emotionalize, Antagonize, and
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.’
Ignore facts presented, demand
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.
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
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 an 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
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
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.
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
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
Eight Traits of the
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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:
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.
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
In the NG example a) 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.
Remarkably, not even media and law
enforcement have NOT BEEN TRAINED to deal with these issues.
For the most part, only the players
themselves understand the rules of the game.