Jake Sully, Anonymous and "WhatIsThePlan" - PsyOps?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Guardian said:
"1e) Anons Must Organize Professionally"

What? "Professional" means PAID


"This means that every single one of us must respect the boundaries between our personal lives as named human beings, and the monikers and masks we take take on as Anons when we take to the streets."

Translation = Please, PLEASSSEEE don't out me!

GEEZE! I've got this handy little booklet here entitled "How to Spot a Spy," which was put together back during the days of the "Global Movement for Justice and Eco-Peace," when COINTELPRO was running rampant and some of those groups learned the hard way. It was sent to me by a form member. Here is what it says, mainly, synopsized and skipping some repetitive stuff:

How To Spot a Spy


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 {or doesn't allow, in fact}.

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.


A slight breach in orthodoxy is sufficient to terrify authoritarian ideologues who see in it the collapse of the system of thought control that has been so effective in depoliticizing American Society. Noam Chomsky.
 
Guardian said:
NYCAnon said:
Also, what's up with this place calling everyone/everything psychopaths?

Not everyone, just about 5-6% of the population, but they do a tremendous amount of damage, especially when they control huge mega corps. A Psychopath is basically a person who completely lacks any empathy for his/her fellow man...and they're really not that hard to spot once you know what you're looking for.

The guy in charge of the BP disaster saying "I just want MY life back" is a very good example of a psychopathic personality. He clearly showed NO concern for the victims of the oil spill, all that mattered to him was how he was affected.

Also many people in any number of positions of power over the world. Once you witness the distruction they do, you'll understand a little more. It is a focus here, but not the 'main' focus of this place.

As for the oil spill, yep, that dude and the mess had me running for the hills after myself and my family started getting sick. That's their attitude. They have zero empathy. The rest of us have to keep a lookout for that 'personality' - Because not all of them are 'in power' they can be your neighbor, co-worker, brother, etc.
 
Laura said:
Chunky Mcfats said:
How do you know that the very idea of cointelpro infiltratation isn't a cointelpro ruse itself?

Well, that's an interesting thought. And in some cases, it might be the case. But we have 1) experienced it first hand in a number of contexts, not just this one, and 2) have researched it extensively.

There is also the possibility of hyperdimensional manipulation... but I prefer to find explanations in the real world even if there ARE cases where only a hyperdimensional control system could explain the events. Read the works of John Keel and Jacques Vallee for further insight on this last.

So, how?
 
Guardian said:
Chunky Mcfats said:
Laura said:
Read the works of John Keel and Jacques Vallee for further insight on this last.

So, how?

Well, you can get their books on Amazon, or check your local library if you're short of funds.

I think there are still book stores around too. Try google map if you get lost on the way.
 
Hi Chunky Mcfats,

One thing to understand about this forum is the requirement to do the Work. Many ideas are posted here, but with references. Understanding is up to the individual to learn and discern so they may be able to make a choice. When an individual comes here and spouts off without facts, then eyebrows are raised.
 
anart said:
Chunky Mcfats said:
Guardian said:
Chunky Mcfats said:
Laura said:
Read the works of John Keel and Jacques Vallee for further insight on this last.

So, how?

Well, you can get their books on Amazon, or check your local library if you're short of funds.

But, John Keel was in the US military, and Jacque Vallee worked for NASA.

...and?

How do you know they are trustworthy? Again, I'll wonder if they were paid to come up with these ideas, to divert people away from other places, or each other.
 
Chunky Mcfats said:
anart said:
Chunky Mcfats said:
Guardian said:
Chunky Mcfats said:
Laura said:
Read the works of John Keel and Jacques Vallee for further insight on this last.

So, how?

Well, you can get their books on Amazon, or check your local library if you're short of funds.

But, John Keel was in the US military, and Jacque Vallee worked for NASA.

...and?

How do you know they are trustworthy? Again, I'll wonder if they were paid to come up with these ideas, to divert people away from other places, or each other.

Well gee golly I guess you'll just have to read their work and then compare their findings with the available data then eh?

edit: If you spent half as much time reading and learning as you do trying to sow doubt and discord you may actually stop spinning your wheels... then again, maybe not.
 
Laura said:
Chunky Mcfats said:
How do you know that the very idea of cointelpro infiltratation isn't a cointelpro ruse itself?

Well, that's an interesting thought. And in some cases, it might be the case. But we have 1) experienced it first hand in a number of contexts, not just this one, and 2) have researched it extensively.

There is also the possibility of hyperdimensional manipulation... but I prefer to find explanations in the real world even if there ARE cases where only a hyperdimensional control system could explain the events. Read the works of John Keel and Jacques Vallee for further insight on this last.

But, John Keel was in the US military, and Jacque Vallee worked for NASA.

[...]

How do you know they are trustworthy? Again, I'll wonder if they were paid to come up with these ideas, to divert people away from other places, or each other.

so.... CMF, if you really want to find answers to your original question, how do you intend to resolve that dilemma?
 
Chunky Mcfats said:
How do you know they are trustworthy?

Well, only way is to check the data, compare with other data from other sources, crosscheck again, network/discuss with others who've also researched the field, and see how it all fits together. The point is not to trust anything or anyone, the point is to check the evidence presented and to draw one's own conclusions. In short, if you're sincerely interested, do your own research… that's what this forum is about. We don't spoonfeed people here :)
 
Adaryn said:
Chunky Mcfats said:
How do you know they are trustworthy?

Well, only way is to check the data, compare with other data from other sources, crosscheck again, network/discuss with others who've also researched the field, and see how it all fits together. The point is not to trust anything or anyone, the point is to check the evidence presented and to draw one's own conclusions. In short, if you're sincerely interested, do your own research… that's what this forum is about. We don't spoonfeed people here :)

Exactly. But just to let you know, we've already been through a whole lot of research and discussion and that's what informs our views. But, we invite anybody and everybody to join in the process because we learned that one person cannot do it all; it takes a team of sincere people who can go through thousands of books, documents, experiences, etc, condense them and report on them for discussion to even begin to get a real view of things.

One hint about Keel... his books were buried for a long time. That's a data point to consider. When a book is bought by a publisher, a limited number of copies are printed, and then the publisher refuses to print anymore and the author can't because the publisher owns it... well, that's sort of like trying to silence somebody, isn't it?

I once had a Hollywood producer contact me and wanted to buy my "life story." (I've got the archived emails for documentation.) I wrote back and asked if I would have any input and if that would prevent me from telling it myself. I was told "no", I would have no say in how it was told and "no" I wouldn't be able to write about it myself. Plus, they would not guarantee that they would even use it; they just wanted to buy it.

Figure that one out.

(I declined the rather attractive offer, by the way.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom